Return to Transcripts main page

Paula Zahn Now

Schwarzenegger Apologizes For Alleged Sexual Misconduct; Rush Limbaugh Takes a Hit; Kobe Bryant's Accuser Doesn't Have To Appear At Preliminary Hearing

Aired October 02, 2003 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Arnold Schwarzenegger apologizes.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R), CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: I am deeply sorry about that. And I apologize.

ZAHN: Allegations of sexual misconduct revealed just five days before the California recall. Will it make a difference to voters?

As Washington gears up for the investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA operative, we turn to a former CIA chief about how damaging that leak could be?

And the fall of Rush Limbaugh, first accused of racism, now facing drug allegations. Will this silence his conservative voice?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Good evening. Welcome. Thanks so much for joining us tonight.

Also ahead: The judge in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case rules on whether his accuser will have to testify at next week's preliminary hearing. We'll have the ruling and find out what it might mean for Bryant's defense.

And the report on the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, none found yet. The inspectors wants up to nine more months to keep searching.

Also, Oscar winner Halle Berry in the spotlight today. We'll tell you why.

Here are some of the other headlines you need to know right now.

A Pakistani military spokesman says Pakistani forces killed eight suspected al Qaeda members and captured 18 others today. The spokesman says it happened during clashes among's Pakistan border with Afghanistan. It's the largest raid yet by Pakistani forces in the tribal area.

A federal judge has barred prosecutors from seeking the death against terror suspect Zacarias Moussaoui. The judge also ruled that prosecutors will not be able to use evidence linking Moussaoui to the planning of the 9/11 attacks. The ruling follow the government's refusal to let Moussaoui talk with al Qaeda prisoners he says could prove he is innocent.

And a CDC task force says it has found no proof that the nation's gun control laws do anything to reduce gun violence. However, the CDC says the report does not suggest that gun laws don't work. It only says that more study is needed.

Now on to Arnold Schwarzenegger and "The Los Angeles Times" report that he groped and degraded over six women over the course of three decades, coming out just five days before the California recall.

Earlier today, his campaign spokesman said Schwarzenegger had not engaged in improper conduct towards women. Then Schwarzenegger himself took the stage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHWARZENEGGER: Yes, that I have behaved badly sometimes. Yes, it is true that I was on rowdy movie sets and I have done things that were not right which I thought then was playful. But now I recognize that I have offended people. And to those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, I am deeply sorry about that and I apologize, because this is not what I'm trying to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: The Schwarzenegger campaign "In Focus" tonight.

I'm joined now by a roundtable of experts. Doyle McManus is a reporter for "The "Los Angeles Times." Karen Breslau is San Francisco bureau chief for "Newsweek." Donny Deutsch is chairman and CEO of advertising firm the Deutsch, Incorporated. And Joe Klein is columnist for "TIME" magazine, as well one of our regular contributors.

Welcome to you all.

Karen, I'd love to start with you this evening. You were there when Arnold Schwarzenegger made his speech in San Diego today. You've got to help me with something. I've looked at the transcript six times. I watched it live. On one hand, he was saying some of what was in these reports was untrue. And on the other hand, he said, where there's smoke, there's fire. How did you interpret it?

KAREN BRESLAU, "NEWSWEEK": Well, I think they're trying to have it both ways.

Until today, they were saying these allegations are false and baseless. And then today, I think the -- particularly with the "Times" story, there was just a critical mass that they could no longer ignore or deny. And so they came out with this very carefully and craftily worded statement that, "For those who were offended, I apologize," essentially trying to pass off what had been described in "The Times" as abusive behavior as sort of -- as something that a prankster would do.

And that's how they're trying to play this: this was on rowdy movie sets and, gee, if anybody took is it the wrong way, I'm sorry.

ZAHN: Doyle, the Schwarzenegger campaign knew this was coming. This was a story your paper worked on for some seven weeks.

When "The L.A. Times" made its first contact with the campaign about these allegations, what kind of a reaction did you get?

DOYLE MCMANUS, "THE LOS ANGELES TIMES": Well, the initial contact was on Tuesday evening.

It was about 36 hours before the story ran in the paper. So they were given a lot of time to react. They didn't seem surprised. There had been a lot of rumors around in California. Of course, when three investigative reporters -- my colleagues in Los Angeles did the work, not me. When three investigative reporters are looking for something, it kicks up a little dirt.

But their initial formal reaction the night before the story ran was to say it simply wasn't true. I don't think that's the same thing Arnold Schwarzenegger said today.

ZAHN: So was it a smart strategy on the campaign's part today to, as Karen just said, try to have it both ways?

DONNY DEUTSCH, CHAIRMAN & CEO, DEUTSCH, INC.: I think it was actually brilliant.

We're shocked, amazed, a guy who spent 30 years in the movie business, who made his living in a loincloth, big buff guy, sex symbol, whatever, groped or whatever some women. I think he's just this kind of -- this prankster thing, this thing. It's sad, but it's probably the only way to play this thing. And I actually think it becomes kind of a nonevent. I think we've become a little bit numb to this stuff. And, basically, what you have got here is a movie star who's running for office. Surprise, surprise, you have these hijinks. Come on.

ZAHN: So, the payoff from the P.R. point of view is, he apologized? Is that what you're basically saying?

DEUTSCH: I think what he said is, he apologized. And he basically said, yes, you know, that stuff probably happened. Hey, look, I was on a movie set. I was rolling around.

And this is nothing more than a symptom of, we have somebody running for office that should they be running office? It's just surprise, surprise. A guy who was Conan the Barbarian may have groped a woman on a movie set. Wow. That's a shocker.

ZAHN: People shouldn't expect that of folks potentially running for public office, should they, Joe?

JOE KLEIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Is this a great country or what? (LAUGHTER)

ZAHN: How does it play with voters?

KLEIN: The question is, how does it play with women voters? And Schwarzenegger wasn't doing too well with women voters before this. The question is whether women in California take the appropriate measure when a guy does something as obnoxious as what he is alleged to have done.

ZAHN: Hang on, though.

KLEIN: And that is, slap him in the face.

ZAHN: All right, an appropriate measure, though. These women made it very clear in this "L.A. Times" article that they probably would never work another day in Hollywood if they had gone public with their names in this article.

KLEIN: Well, three of them did -- or four of them. But all the stories are very much the same. Arnold kind of comes up happily with a smile and then he puts his hand in a very inappropriate place, both top and bottom.

And there's a word for that. That is -- what is the word for that?

(CROSSTALK)

KLEIN: Harassment. It's also assault, is another word for that.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: And it took two men to come up with both of those characterizations.

DEUTSCH: I mean, you're running a company, you give half your company away.

KLEIN: You're a woman. How do you feel about this?

ZAHN: I get to ask the questions. I don't have to answer them here.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: No. listen, I've talked with a bunch of women in California. And they were very offended by this, but not surprised, because everybody has read at least three of these allegations very specifically before.

So, Karen, get me off the hook here, so it's the female voters you talk with and not this female reporter's reaction. What did they tell you today after his apology and after acknowledging maybe his behavior has not been all that respectable over the years? BRESLAU: What the campaign has banking on from the beginning is that voters discount this information, both because we live in post- Clinton America and also because Arnold is from Hollywood. And they seem to apply a different set of standards, that they know he's a colorful, brash, occasionally abrasive character, and that they expect this sort of thing.

At some of these rallies today, one in particular in Orange County, the warm-up speaker, who was a conservative talk radio host, started with the crowd. He said, do we read "The L.A. Times"? Everybody said no, with enormous pride. So the Arnold voters who I've been talking to today basically said, who cares? It's a lie. This is the Davis official organ.

They are passing this off as political tricks. And I thought that was also very crafty what the Schwarzenegger campaign did. They couched this in terms of, this is political dirty tricks. And they started this morning. And with this quasi-apology, I think Schwarzenegger has cleverly immunized himself against further claims, because all he has to do is say, look, I said, if anybody was offended, I'm sorry, which is a far cry from, I did these things or allegation A is true and allegation B is half-true.

Politically it's clever. And they are banking on it, as you said, that women voters who are offended by this were not in Arnold's column anyway.

ZAHN: Doyle, I'm going to give you 20 seconds to sum up what you think the long-term impact of this will be. And by that, by recall time next Tuesday.

MCMANUS: This recall, Paula, has been so volatile. The voters' behavior has been so difficult to predict. I don't think we know what it is. I think Karen is right. This is not going to shake Arnold's core voters.

We don't know who the swing voters are. Will this bring more 18- to-25-year-old men out to the polls because they admire this behavior? Could be. Will it strip away some women who might have been attracted to Arnold? We don't know.

ZAHN: It is a wonderful country, when you think that potentially could be the demo you're going after that would be impressed by...

KLEIN: Politicians have been wondering for years, how do you activate the youth vote? Is this it? I just don't think so. I hope not.

ZAHN: Just a ten-second recap on where Mr. Schwarzenegger finds himself tonight.

KLEIN: Well, this is an election we don't know which way it's going. We don't know whether the polls are accurate. We don't know who is going to turn out to vote. So I don't know.

ZAHN: Donny Deutsche, your 10 seconds of advice for how Mr. Schwarzenegger should close out this campaign going into Tuesday's vote?

DEUTSCH: He's got to hide. But I actually think the voters go in, when they pull that curtain, I think he's a lot more suspect. And I think this just adds to it.

ZAHN: Doyle McManus, Washington bureau chief of "The Los Angeles Times," Karen Breslau, Donny Deutsch, Joe Klein, thank you for all of your perspectives this evening.

On to more developments in the CIA leak investigation. Just how high up was the operative in the intelligence community?

Rush Limbaugh in freefall: out of his job at ESPN and allegations of drug abuse stemming from a police investigation.

And Halle Berry back in the spotlight, but not for the reason she wants. We'll explain.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: The investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA operative broadened today to include executive agencies beyond the White House. And the fight over who should lead the inquiry got even nastier. We're going to get to that I'm a moment.

But first, how highly placed was the CIA operative? And what does a leak like this really mean to national security? Joining me now from Washington is a man who knows all about the nation's secrets, former CIA director R. James Woolsey.

Always good to see you, Mr. Woolsey. Thanks for dropping by this evening.

JAMES WOOLSEY, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Paula, good to be with you.

ZAHN: First of all, let's talk about the term that has been frequently used today to describe this operative, Valerie Plame, NOC. What is the significance of that acronym?

WOOLSEY: Well, what NOC means is nonofficial cover. And most major intelligence agencies have two kinds of officers who serve abroad, officers who worked under official cover. That is, they pretend to be employees of some other part of the U.S. government, other than the CIA.

And then, if they are caught trying to recruit spies, they're declared persona non grata, because they have diplomatic passports and simply sent back. A far more dangerous job is to be a nonofficial cover officer, in which case, if one is caught trying to recruit spies or anything else and it's in violation of the laws of the country in which you're located, you can be imprisoned.

Years ago, Colonel Rudolph Abel, a Soviet nonofficial cover officer, or illegal, as the Soviets called him, was caught in New York and was traded for Gary Powers, when he was shot down in a U-2. But Abel was an example of a NOC. ZAHN: So, if it ends up being true that Valerie Plame is in fact a NOC, does this raise your significant and your concerns over her name being leaked?

WOOLSEY: Well, for her or anyone else -- and I have no particular knowledge of her at all -- but, for any officer, there are two things.

First of all, if they are in the clandestine service, whether under official cover or nonofficial not, it's very difficult for them to serve abroad again, because their activities would be monitored, obviously. But more directly relevant, in a way, is their past activities. If you're named and you were under official or nonofficial cover abroad, people will go back in the country where you served and look at whom you met with.

And those people might be brought under suspicion for being spies and dealt with harshly, in some countries, even killed. So it's a serious matter to disclose the name or the identity or the affiliation of either an official or a nonofficial cover officer, whether it's the United States or any other country.

ZAHN: So can you go even further tonight and offer us even maybe a deeper perspective on how much this compromises the CIA?

WOOLSEY: Well, I don't know the facts.

I don't know whether this woman was official cover or nonofficial cover, a real CIA employee, or what. All I know literally, like Will Rogers, on this is what I read in the papers. But whether she or anybody else was an official or a nonofficial cover officer, this is a serious matter. It was quite proper for the CIA to refer it over as a crimes report to the Justice Department. It's quite proper for the Justice Department to investigate it.

And if they can find who leaked the information, if it was true and it was done knowingly, which is required in the statute, and she served abroad within the last five years, which is also required in the statute, then the personal ought to be prosecuted and punished.

ZAHN: And, sir, finally tonight, I need a quick answer to this one. Historically, has there been a problem with the White House leaking information like this about CIA agents?

WOOLSEY: Normally, no, not like this.

The 1982 statute that was passed when the renegade CIA agent Philip Agee and others started leaking the names of officers. And one or two were killed. Normally, this new statute has acted as a deterrent. And I don't recall cases within the last number of years where CIA officers of any kind have been exposed this way.

ZAHN: Thanks so much for helping us better understand this tonight. R. James Woolsey...

(CROSSTALK) WOOLSEY: Good to be with you.

ZAHN: Thanks for your time.

And joining us now is our contributor and "TIME" magazine columnist Joe Klein.

First off, you heard a little about -- we should be welcoming you back, because people saw you at the top of the hour.

You heard a little bit what Mr. Woolsey said about not knowing for sure whether she was a NOC or not, Valerie Plame. What does your reporting tell you?

KLEIN: Well, what you're hearing is -- and what's been reported in "The New York Times" today is that she was a NOC.

And let me tell just you how serious this is. Aldridge Ames, the very famous American spy, is doing a life sentence right now for exposing NOCs. Now, the question is whether the people in the White House who allegedly exposed this operative knew that she was a NOC. That is going to be the focus of this investigation, because, if they did know, that makes this unbelievably serious.

ZAHN: I found it interesting your phraseology just now. You said people in the White House.

There are a number of reports this evening saying that there is one person being looked as the potential leaker. And that's Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby? Can you confirm that?

KLEIN: Right.

Well, yes, Libby is one of the names that you hear most prominently around town. Libby and Karl Rove have been the names that have been out there. And I don't know if they are or not. But here's why people put it together with Libby. Libby is to Dick Cheney as Paul Wolfowitz is to Donald Rumsfeld. He is a very prominent neoconservative, who has -- I've heard and everybody knows -- been very upset with the CIA's performance leading up to Iraq.

And so, therefore, people are putting two and two together and getting 36. But his name is the one that's been around.

ZAHN: Did you get any better sense today on where this investigation is going? We heard a little bit yesterday about some of the details you reported about White House staffers being told they got to make darn sure their phone records are available to investigators, that their computers logs are available to investigators. Anything new on that front?

KLEIN: Well, I understand that the Justice Department has gone over to the CIA and informed them that a lot of those people are going to be subject to questioning as well, which means that an awful lot of people in Washington are having to hire lawyers tonight, which is really unfortunate, because there are very few names that are out there in play.

And the irony of this is that, right now, there are a bunch of journalists in Washington, at least six of them, who are protecting some very prominent people in the Bush White House.

ZAHN: It's a very odd position for a reporter to be in, isn't it?

KLEIN: Well, it's also, given the antipathy that the Bush White House has had for the press, it's particularly ironic. But it's the honor of journalists that is keeping this investigation in play.

And, at this point, with four or five names out there, I just can't imagine why the president of the United States doesn't call these people in and say, "Did you do it?" and get an answer and end it right here and now. This is very serious business. The president has in his power to end it.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: And you know for a fact the president hasn't done that?

KLEIN: I don't know for a fact that he hasn't done that. But if he had done that and if it's true that these names are out there, this would be over.

ZAHN: Final thought on just how this White House spin machine is going to operate in the days to come? You've got about 10 seconds or so.

KLEIN: Well, they seem to be spinning their wheels right now. This is the most serious problem that they've faced in terms of the integrity of the administration.

ZAHN: Thanks for dropping by twice this evening, a twofer from Joe Klein.

KLEIN: My pleasure.

One of the biggest battles about the leak is who should lead the investigation. A new poll from ABC News and "The Washington Post" finds seven out of 10 Americans want a special counsel in charge, not the administration's own Justice Department. And that includes a majority who identify themselves as Republicans.

Well, what does all this mean? Well, we asked our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin to explain "In Plain English."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Who do we have investigating the White House right now? The Justice Department. The attorney general has the last word.

So who do the Democrats want to investigate the White House? The Democrats want the attorney general to turn the case over to a special counsel, who would be independent of the Justice Department. Then the special counsel would determine whether anyone would be prosecuted.

What's the difference? With the Justice Department, the attorney general, John Ashcroft, a member of the president's Cabinet, a close political ally of the president, he's in charge. With a special counsel, it's that independent person who decides who will be investigated and whether anyone will be prosecuted.

Finally, what's the difference between a special counsel and an independent counsel? In the '80s and '90s, there was a law that said, if the attorney general had a conflict of interest, a panel of three judges would appoint a prosecutor who was known as an independent counsel. But that law expired in 1999. So today, the decision about whether to appoint an outside prosecutor is totally up to the discretion of the attorney general.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Jeffrey Toobin doing his thing "In Plain English" for us tonight. Thanks, Jeff.

The new report on the search for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, it may give both the Bush administration's critics and its defenders some new ammunition.

And key rulings today in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Welcome back.

Now we turn to the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The Bush administration's top hunter tells Congress he hasn't found any yet. However, David Kay also says his team has found plenty of evidence of intent. Republican Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas chairs the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and heard Mr. Kay's testimony today. He joins us from Capitol Hill. And in Watertown, Massachusetts, is Charles Duelfer. He is the former deputy chairman of the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq.

Good to see both of you. Welcome.

SEN. PAT ROBERTS (R), KANSAS: Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Paula.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, I'm going to start with you this evening.

Is it your belief, based on the testimony today, that no weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq?

ROBERTS: No, I don't think so.

I can't answer that question. Dr. Kay said he didn't know either. He's going to report back to us in about three months to both committees. And he was asked, in terms of the time period, what's it going to take to finally close the chapter on the WMD issue? He said six to nine months. We are finding that Saddam's program of concealment and denial and deception had a lot more strength than to it than we first imagined.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, for the Americans who are very cynical about the reasons why the United States went to war in Iraq, when you hear Mr. Kay ask, additionally, for millions of dollars, how do you justify that expense, if they believe this is sort of good money chasing bad?

ROBERTS: Well, no, I don't think that's a wasteful expenditure. It's a lot of money.

But, No. 1, we have to close the chapter to find out exactly what his program was about. We are learning that, but we haven't found the specific weapons. It doesn't mean that they won't be found. I'm disappointed. I'm frustrated. I think most people on the Intelligence Committee, Armed Services Committee, Foreign Relations Committee, or, for that matter, any average American, would have expected we would have found the WMD right now. That is not the case. But I do think we have to close this chapter in behalf of our national security.

ZAHN: Mr. Duelfer what avenues are left to explore for weapons of mass destruction?

CHARLES DUELFER, FORMER UNSCOM OFFICIAL: Well, there's a lot of documents which Mr. Kay has to go through. Remember, the documents were found in various locations by soldiers who didn't know what they were looking at. They were all brought to various warehouses. They have to be sorted through.

There's a lot of individuals as well who have been to be interviewed. And, remember, this is a program that had hundreds and even thousands of scientists and engineers. So they've got to put together all this.

And one more very important thing they have to do is find out what the system was for deceiving the U.N. inspectors. One of the key things of Mr. Kay's report was that there were a lot of things which were going on which the U.N. inspectors were unaware of. So what was the mechanism that Iraq followed to deceive the U.N.? And who was helping them?

ZAHN: Mr. Duelfer, do you think mistakes were made, additionally, in the process that might have hindered these teams to eventually finding these weapons of mass destruction?

DUELFER: Well, from what I understand, I think they got off on the wrong foot. They began a process of looking for specific sites. And Iraq is a large country. It's 444,000 square kilometers.

And I think a more successful strategy, and one which I believe Dr. Kay is following now, is to follow people and to understand where they're working, and to get them to lead them to the laboratories and to the various locations where ongoing research activity would be found.

(CROSSTALK) DUELFER: One of the mistakes they made was, they assumed that they would find large stocks of weapons ready to go, and these would be in bunkers. But they haven't found that. And they may not exist.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, finally tonight, I know you said it's hard to tell at this hour whether weapons of mass destruction will be found or not. If there are none found, does that suggest to you that the intelligence that led to this war was flawed?

ROBERTS: Well, that's a possibility in terms of the credibility of the intelligence, and that's exactly why the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is conducting a review. We are about -- what? -- 85 percent done. We'll have more to say about that once we collect all the information. Then we will have a public hearing and we'll make that report public.

Just let me say that I do agree with the doctor and his assessment. The document exploitation and the people exploitation is very important. And one other thing that Dr. Kay said that makes a lot of sense, if we can capture or kill Saddam Hussein and take that palpable fear that the Iraqis have, it will lead to more cooperation and certainly better answers.

ZAHN: Well, thank you for sharing more of that testimony with us this evening. Senator Pat Roberts, and Mr. Duefler, thank for you your insights as well.

ROBERTS: OK. Thank you, Paula.

Celebrities with problems. Find out why Rush Limbaugh's troubles may be worse anyone thought.

And new heartbreak for Oscar-winning actress Halle Berry.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Here are the headlines you need to know at this hour.

A NATO spokesman says two Canadian peacekeepers were killed, three others wounded when one of their vehicles hit a mine today in the Afghan capital of Kabul. Officials are investigating whether the blast was the result of hostile action.

Prosecutors have dropped kidnapping charges against the Utah parents who went into hiding rather than allow their 12-year-old son to have chemotherapy. Instead, the couple agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in a deal will it keep them out of jail and their record will be wiped clear if they stay out of trouble for the next year.

And in a small town in Georgia, an army sergeant on leave from South Korea has hit the jackpot. Terrell Moore has claimed the $150 million prize in the Megamillions lottery. He was visiting his family during his 30-day leave when he brought the winning ticket at a convenience store.

Rush Limbaugh's week went from bad to worse today. His name has surfaced in a drug investigation in Florida. According to law enforcement sources, he allegedly bought large amounts of prescription painkillers illegally. This after he quit under pressure as host of ESPN's Sunday NFL countdown for his racially charged remarks.

"Miami Herald" reporter Glenn Garvin joins us tonight from Miami.

Good of you to join us. Welcome, sir.

GLENN GARVIN "MIAMI HERALD": Hi.

ZAHN: How bad do things look like for Rush Limbaugh tonight as far as this investigation is concerned?

GARVIN: Well, the allegations by the housekeeper are certainly very serious. Of course, they -- right now they're just that, allegations, nothing more.

This all stems from the drug investigation of a pharmacy in Lakeworth, Florida, in May. Lakeworth is a little bit north of here. The people who own the pharmacy, who are in jail right now on drug charges, are accused of distributing 500,000 painkilling pills, prescription painkilling pills to drug dealers around South Florida, and what the police are looking at -- what the law enforcement authorities are looking at in Pal Beach County, is whether some of those pills found their way to Rush Limbaugh.

ZAHN: And investigators found out about Mr. Limbaugh's alleged linkage to this plot through a maid who had worked for him. What -- what is she alleging?

GARVIN: She says that she supplied Limbaugh with these painkillers for about four years, from 1998 to 2002. This is in the wake, I guess, of his surgery for his deafness, which was pretty highly publicized at the time. And he suffered pain as a result of that, and she says became addicted to the painkillers.

She says she gave him truly massive quantities. In one seven-week period, 4,000 pills, she says.

ZAHN: Well, how reliable is she as a source, as far as law enforcement is concerned?

GARVIN: They're certainly looking at it seriously. She has -- she has given them tape recordings of two of her meetings with Rush Limbaugh where she, they say, covertly wired herself. She's also given them what she says are e-mails between her and Limbaugh discussing these transactions. So I imagine they're trying to determine the authenticity of that evidence as we speak.

ZAHN: The investigation could go on for some time. Glenn Garvin, thank you for sharing the latest info with us tonight. Appreciate it.

Now allegations about Rush Limbaugh and a drug problem were a very hot topic today, both in private and on the air.

Joining us from Washington is conservative radio talk show host Armstrong Williams.

Armstrong, welcome back.

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi, Paula.

ZAHN: First of all, do you believe these allegations that Rush Limbaugh is somehow linked to this drug investigation?

WILLIAMS: Nope. You know, I don't know, it's kind of shocking, the story is developing. You just have to wait for the facts to surface and then make your judgments.

Obviously he said he's unaware that he's under investigation and that he will do all in his power to cooperate with authorities.

ZAHN: And, in fact, why don't I read that part of the statement he made today, so people have a fuller understanding of that.

Here is what Mr. Limbaugh said, almost exactly what Armstrong just chronicled for us: "I am unaware of any investigation by any authority involving me. No government representative has contacted me directly or indirectly. If my assistance is required, I will, of course, cooperate fully."

It is interesting to note, there is no denial there of drug abuse. Does that strike you at all when you listened to a statement?

ZAHN: You know -- and you and I both have known people who have had excruciating pain in their lives, and to the point where sometimes they feel they would be better off if they were not living. And sometimes, you know, when you're in desperate situations, and you seek desperate measures to ease the pain.

And -- and no, he did not deny it. But that doesn't mean he affirmed it either. He said he would cooperate. No one has contacted him. And I find it astounding that someone who worked for him in his home would make these allegations. Certainly you can't not just dismiss that source if it's someone that he had in his trust who was in his home.

So, you know, it's quite bizarre. The issues -- you know, when you're a public figure and you have no idea who you can trust, and it's very difficult. People think -- you know, people want to celebrate those that are in the limelight. But, you know, there's a huge price you pay. And you know, we all have been in those storms at one point or another in our careers, and I've got to tell you, it's not pretty.

ZAHN: Do you expect Mr. Limbaugh to get much empathy from his followers?

WILLIAMS: Oh, listen, you know, no matter what people may say about Rush Limbaugh and what they may accuse him you of, the reason why people have such disdain for Limbaugh is, you know, there's a resentment against achievement. Rush Limbaugh is an icon. He's on over 300 radio stations in this country. Over 20 million people listen to him. People have even go far to say he may have tipped the scale in the 2000 presidential race and in the 2002 midterm elections.

The man has had a phenomenal influence on radio and talk show hosts in this country, and, you know, as much as you criticize him, you got to give the man credit. The only reason why he's so controversial with his remarks on ESPN -- because he's a conservative and people want to do all they can to malign conservatives in this country, whether you like it or not. Liberals don't fare very well on the talk show circuit and conservatives do very well.

And I don't think it's just an issue of Rush Limbaugh and ESPN, even though I think his remarks were very insensitive. I wish he had not used race -- make Donovan McNabb's race in his remarks, but I think his point -- his broader point was well-taken, is that given the history of black sport figures in this country, whether it's quarterbacking in football, whether it's tennis and the Williams sisters or golf and Tiger Woods, because of our history where blacks were shut out for so long in those sports, America goes out of its way to celebrate those that are successful.

And they're not successful because they're black, they're successful because they, like the Williams sisters' parents, they put in the hours, they put in the discipline and they made the sacrifice to prepare their children for the world of tennis. And so the problem here with Mr. Limbaugh, is that anything he says where he uses the issue of race and he's being a conservative will be controversial.

ZAHN: You have about five seconds left, because we have a commercial break we have to get here.

WILLIAMS: If he had been blessed with the hue of my skin, he would have probably been given a raise for putting a little bit of kick back in ESPN. He certainly would not have had to resign.

ZAHN: One man's opinion. Thank you for sharing it with us tonight.

More on the Rush Limbaugh investigation in just a moment. We'll hear from Al Franken, whose attitude about Limbaugh is a bit more critical.

And then tomorrow, my conversation with Senator Edwards, another Democratic candidates for president, and his wife Elizabeth. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Rush Limbaugh isn't known for going easy on his opponents. Al Franken isn't a shrinking violet, either. He joined me from Kansas City to talk about his reaction to Rush Limbaugh's double dose of trouble. I asked him if he was surprised by the allegations about Limbaugh and drug abuse.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AL FRANKEN, AUTHOR/HUMORIST: I was surprised.

ZAHN: Why?

FRANKEN: Well, I just don't think of him as someone who's involved in a drug ring. I wasn't surprised by the racist comments he made on Sunday night. That's sort of par for the course. You know, in my book Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot, I cite an example where he said that, late at night when you're watching television and they put up a picture of a criminal, it's surprising how often he looks like Jesse Jackson. So I wasn't surprised by the comments about McNabb. I was surprised about how long it took for ABC to fire him.

ZAHN: I'd like to share with you now, Al, something Rush Limbaugh told his listeners in 2001, when he announced he had some hearing problems. He said, "You would not believe the medications that are flowing through me in an attempt to reverse this. I'm popping pills. I'm shooting up stuff. I've never done stuff like this before."

If there is a drug problem, do you think it possibly could have stemmed from the medication he took during this very difficult time of his life?

FRANKEN: I'm sure it could have. What's sad is is that, you know, a public figure like himself, who's gone on record as being slightly holier than thou is afraid to go to a 12-step program like narcotics anonymous, and afraid that someone from the program will out him to a "National Enquirer" or something like that for money.

So I think that, especially these right-wing celebrities, these virtue guys. Bill Bennett, I don't know if he was a gambling addict or not. Usually when you lose $8 million or something like that, it might mean you have a problem. It's very hard than to go to gamblers anonymous.

But I think, actually, the statements that Rush made about black quarterbacks, he may have said it because he was high at the time. He may -- you know, I'm a Minnesota Vikings fan and Daunte Culpepper is our quarterback, he's great, he's a great quarterback and it's probably because he has that extra bone in his foot that I understand the blacks have, that bone can make him jump higher and run faster.

Isn't that what Al Campanis said? Or was it Jimmy the Greek? And I guess, Rush thinks the blood goes from the bone, from their head so that's how they have trouble calling plays and stuff and remembering the whole playbook and stuff.

ZAHN: In the past 48 hours, have any of these ailments (ph) slowed down the Rush Limbaugh empire?

FRANKEN: I don't think the -- the ESPN thing said you can't take him anywhere. He can't succeed in the mainstream media because of who he is. Someone's thought process -- he was supposed to represent every fan, because he doesn't know all that much about football, but it turned out he represented every racist fan. And I suppose there's a place for that, but within his own radio empire, I don't think this affects him at all. The drug addict stuff might. Right-wing listeners, conservative listeners tend to be anti-drug ring. ZAHN: And you can say that with 100-degree certainty this evening, with so many facts out --

FRANKEN: They tend to be. They tend to be anti-drug ring, right-wing listeners.

ZAHN: All right. Al, we're going to have to leave it there this evening. Thank you for dropping by.

FRANKEN: Okay. Paula. Thank you.

ZAHN: Good luck with the book.

FRANKEN: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: I was referring to the new book, we should also for perspective acknowledge that Mr. Franken has made a lot of money out of criticizing Rush Limbaugh.

Important rulings in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. Our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin joins us to explain what today's developments mean.

And lessons from a very public breakup. Oscar winner Halle Berry says she and her husband are splitting up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: The woman accusing Kobe Bryant of sexual assault will not have to attend his preliminary hearing next week. That is one of several rulings made today by a Colorado judge. Our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin is here with details. So what else did the judge say?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: The judge said the woman does not have to attend the hearing. They can't introduce any of her medical records, and he said he might close the whole hearing to the public, because the material is so incendiary that it could jeopardizes his chance for a fair trial.

ZAHN: Do any of these rulings surprise you?

TOOBIN: Not really, because this is a very limited purpose for this hearing. The hearing is, does the government have probable cause to bring him to trial. The government almost always wins those hearings, they'll win this one, and anything besides the basic testimony of a detective and the videotape of the woman's own statement to the police, that's all this hearing is going to be, and the defense has no real right to call its own witnesses in this hearing, so they're not get much chance to do anything.

ZAHN: So the defense team shouldn't be scrambling, this was something that was expected?

TOOBIN: Right. And remember, this woman is certainly going to testify at the trial and they will have more leeway to introduce the records of her psychiatric problems if this case goes in front of a jury. As I expect it will

ZAHN: Are there any other tea leaves that you could read for us this morning?

TOOBIN: Well, I think the judge's real discomfort with the graphic nature of the evidence and the possibility of a bias in the jury pool suggests that he really may close some of this hearing to the public next Thursday, which means I'm going out there to Colorado, perhaps a long way, to see nothing, because remember, it's already no cameras in the courtroom, and the question is whether there will even be human beings allowed in the courtroom.

ZAHN: So, how does that affect anything? We were counting you to have seat five in the courtroom, but besides that.

TOOBIN: What it affects is we don't know anything about the evidence in this case. For all the discussion in this case, we don't know whether she was injured, what exactly she claimed he did. Those are the things that we expect to learn when the hearing takes place on Thursday, but if he closes the hearing, we will still not know much of anything about what really the evidence is here.

ZAHN: I have a feeling you'll be traveling one way or the other.

TOOBIN: I think I'm going.

ZAHN: I just have this feeling.

TOOBIN: The suits will make me go, yes, indeed.

ZAHN: Jeffrey Toobin, thanks.

It has been true for generations, being a celebrity couple is not easy. The latest case in point, Oscar winner Halle Berry and her husband. We're going to take a look at what went wrong with them with Pat O'Brien.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Oscar winning actress Halle Berry and singer Eric Benet have separated after less than 3 years of marriage. A statement from Berry reads, "Eric and I have had marital problems for some time now and have tried to work things out together. However, at this point, I feel we need time apart to reevaluate our union." "Access Hollywood" co-anchor Pat O'Brien joins us from L.A. to talk about this.

Always good to see you Pat, welcome.

PAT O'BRIEN, CO-ANCHOR "ACCESS HOLLYWOOD": Hello, Paula. Nice to see you.

ZAHN: Well, our pleasure.

When you look at the statistics with half of all marriages in America ending out of divorce, I can't imagine that the Hollywood community is too surprised by this news. What is the buzz?

O'BRIEN: This couple has been very volatile from the beginning. They had problems almost from the beginning, because after Eric and Halle got married, there were reports that he was cheating on her. Terrible tabloid reports and then he submitted himself to sex addiction rehabilitation. So, from the beginning this thing has been snake bit. It's very sad, because, you know, it's very tough to have a very public relationship like this, first of all to live it in public and then have it blow up in public has to be very tough and I know this for Halle and Eric.

ZAHN: Well, your show, got one of the few exclusive interviews that was done with this couple, and this was done months ago, but in this interview, we get to hear both Halle Berry and her husband talk about their marriage. Let's listen to it together.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC BENET, SINGER: You know, the truth is, yes, Halle and I are going through a personal crisis. And I have made some terrible mistakes. But the truth is, I love my wife I am so in love with my wife, and we are committed to each other. Our marriage, our love, and we are united. We're trying to make our way through this. The best way that we know how.

HALLE BERRY, ACTRESS: I just love him, and marriage is about sticking together through tough times, and we're sticking together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: I know a lot of people listening to that are going to be cynical saying, wait, they had everything, they're rich, they're beautiful, they can go anywhere in the world. But clearly there was tremendous pressure on this couple from the get-go.

O'BRIEN: Maybe that's the problem, because, you know, here's a guy, Eric, who has to live with arguably one of the most beautiful women in the world, Oscar winner, great success, and every man kind of wants her. Every man is lusting after her and saying in public, I love Halle Berry. On our show tonight, we had a story about all these guys saying, Halle Berry is so beautiful, I love her. So it's got to be tough on the husband to go through that, but clearly there were problems there, and, you know, clearly this thing ended in tragedy for them.

ZAHN: Pat, just about 30 seconds to answer this. Just reaction to the Rush Limbaugh fallout and how it is that none of his co- broadcasters that evening saw fit to react to the statement?

O'BRIEN: I think Rush may still be deaf. What he was trying to say is Donovan McNabb was not having a great year and everybody knows that. If he had stopped at that -- by the way, Donovan brought this team to two NFC championships games. But they should have questioned him there, they're smarter than that. If you look at the body language of everybody, they were very uneasy at that. Any time you bring race into a football story, especially the black quarterback story, that story ended Rush, 15 years ago. So, it shouldn't have even been brought up that way. But he was trying to say that Donovan was having a bad year and even Donovan would say that.

ZAHN: We always love talking to Pat O'Brien. He's equally conversant in entertainment news as well as sports news. Good to see you, Pat. Continued good luck with your show.

O'BRIEN: We'll always have Albereville (ph).

ZAHN: Nobody has any idea what you're talking about. Because we've run out of time, we'll have to explain it tomorrow.

Pat O'Brien, again of "Access Hollywood" thanks.

And we thank you all for being with us tonight. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next with "Crossing Over's" John Edward.

END

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Rush Limbaugh Takes a Hit; Kobe Bryant's Accuser Doesn't Have To Appear At Preliminary Hearing>


Aired October 2, 2003 - 20:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Arnold Schwarzenegger apologizes.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R), CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATE: I am deeply sorry about that. And I apologize.

ZAHN: Allegations of sexual misconduct revealed just five days before the California recall. Will it make a difference to voters?

As Washington gears up for the investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA operative, we turn to a former CIA chief about how damaging that leak could be?

And the fall of Rush Limbaugh, first accused of racism, now facing drug allegations. Will this silence his conservative voice?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Good evening. Welcome. Thanks so much for joining us tonight.

Also ahead: The judge in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case rules on whether his accuser will have to testify at next week's preliminary hearing. We'll have the ruling and find out what it might mean for Bryant's defense.

And the report on the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, none found yet. The inspectors wants up to nine more months to keep searching.

Also, Oscar winner Halle Berry in the spotlight today. We'll tell you why.

Here are some of the other headlines you need to know right now.

A Pakistani military spokesman says Pakistani forces killed eight suspected al Qaeda members and captured 18 others today. The spokesman says it happened during clashes among's Pakistan border with Afghanistan. It's the largest raid yet by Pakistani forces in the tribal area.

A federal judge has barred prosecutors from seeking the death against terror suspect Zacarias Moussaoui. The judge also ruled that prosecutors will not be able to use evidence linking Moussaoui to the planning of the 9/11 attacks. The ruling follow the government's refusal to let Moussaoui talk with al Qaeda prisoners he says could prove he is innocent.

And a CDC task force says it has found no proof that the nation's gun control laws do anything to reduce gun violence. However, the CDC says the report does not suggest that gun laws don't work. It only says that more study is needed.

Now on to Arnold Schwarzenegger and "The Los Angeles Times" report that he groped and degraded over six women over the course of three decades, coming out just five days before the California recall.

Earlier today, his campaign spokesman said Schwarzenegger had not engaged in improper conduct towards women. Then Schwarzenegger himself took the stage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHWARZENEGGER: Yes, that I have behaved badly sometimes. Yes, it is true that I was on rowdy movie sets and I have done things that were not right which I thought then was playful. But now I recognize that I have offended people. And to those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, I am deeply sorry about that and I apologize, because this is not what I'm trying to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: The Schwarzenegger campaign "In Focus" tonight.

I'm joined now by a roundtable of experts. Doyle McManus is a reporter for "The "Los Angeles Times." Karen Breslau is San Francisco bureau chief for "Newsweek." Donny Deutsch is chairman and CEO of advertising firm the Deutsch, Incorporated. And Joe Klein is columnist for "TIME" magazine, as well one of our regular contributors.

Welcome to you all.

Karen, I'd love to start with you this evening. You were there when Arnold Schwarzenegger made his speech in San Diego today. You've got to help me with something. I've looked at the transcript six times. I watched it live. On one hand, he was saying some of what was in these reports was untrue. And on the other hand, he said, where there's smoke, there's fire. How did you interpret it?

KAREN BRESLAU, "NEWSWEEK": Well, I think they're trying to have it both ways.

Until today, they were saying these allegations are false and baseless. And then today, I think the -- particularly with the "Times" story, there was just a critical mass that they could no longer ignore or deny. And so they came out with this very carefully and craftily worded statement that, "For those who were offended, I apologize," essentially trying to pass off what had been described in "The Times" as abusive behavior as sort of -- as something that a prankster would do.

And that's how they're trying to play this: this was on rowdy movie sets and, gee, if anybody took is it the wrong way, I'm sorry.

ZAHN: Doyle, the Schwarzenegger campaign knew this was coming. This was a story your paper worked on for some seven weeks.

When "The L.A. Times" made its first contact with the campaign about these allegations, what kind of a reaction did you get?

DOYLE MCMANUS, "THE LOS ANGELES TIMES": Well, the initial contact was on Tuesday evening.

It was about 36 hours before the story ran in the paper. So they were given a lot of time to react. They didn't seem surprised. There had been a lot of rumors around in California. Of course, when three investigative reporters -- my colleagues in Los Angeles did the work, not me. When three investigative reporters are looking for something, it kicks up a little dirt.

But their initial formal reaction the night before the story ran was to say it simply wasn't true. I don't think that's the same thing Arnold Schwarzenegger said today.

ZAHN: So was it a smart strategy on the campaign's part today to, as Karen just said, try to have it both ways?

DONNY DEUTSCH, CHAIRMAN & CEO, DEUTSCH, INC.: I think it was actually brilliant.

We're shocked, amazed, a guy who spent 30 years in the movie business, who made his living in a loincloth, big buff guy, sex symbol, whatever, groped or whatever some women. I think he's just this kind of -- this prankster thing, this thing. It's sad, but it's probably the only way to play this thing. And I actually think it becomes kind of a nonevent. I think we've become a little bit numb to this stuff. And, basically, what you have got here is a movie star who's running for office. Surprise, surprise, you have these hijinks. Come on.

ZAHN: So, the payoff from the P.R. point of view is, he apologized? Is that what you're basically saying?

DEUTSCH: I think what he said is, he apologized. And he basically said, yes, you know, that stuff probably happened. Hey, look, I was on a movie set. I was rolling around.

And this is nothing more than a symptom of, we have somebody running for office that should they be running office? It's just surprise, surprise. A guy who was Conan the Barbarian may have groped a woman on a movie set. Wow. That's a shocker.

ZAHN: People shouldn't expect that of folks potentially running for public office, should they, Joe?

JOE KLEIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Is this a great country or what? (LAUGHTER)

ZAHN: How does it play with voters?

KLEIN: The question is, how does it play with women voters? And Schwarzenegger wasn't doing too well with women voters before this. The question is whether women in California take the appropriate measure when a guy does something as obnoxious as what he is alleged to have done.

ZAHN: Hang on, though.

KLEIN: And that is, slap him in the face.

ZAHN: All right, an appropriate measure, though. These women made it very clear in this "L.A. Times" article that they probably would never work another day in Hollywood if they had gone public with their names in this article.

KLEIN: Well, three of them did -- or four of them. But all the stories are very much the same. Arnold kind of comes up happily with a smile and then he puts his hand in a very inappropriate place, both top and bottom.

And there's a word for that. That is -- what is the word for that?

(CROSSTALK)

KLEIN: Harassment. It's also assault, is another word for that.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: And it took two men to come up with both of those characterizations.

DEUTSCH: I mean, you're running a company, you give half your company away.

KLEIN: You're a woman. How do you feel about this?

ZAHN: I get to ask the questions. I don't have to answer them here.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: No. listen, I've talked with a bunch of women in California. And they were very offended by this, but not surprised, because everybody has read at least three of these allegations very specifically before.

So, Karen, get me off the hook here, so it's the female voters you talk with and not this female reporter's reaction. What did they tell you today after his apology and after acknowledging maybe his behavior has not been all that respectable over the years? BRESLAU: What the campaign has banking on from the beginning is that voters discount this information, both because we live in post- Clinton America and also because Arnold is from Hollywood. And they seem to apply a different set of standards, that they know he's a colorful, brash, occasionally abrasive character, and that they expect this sort of thing.

At some of these rallies today, one in particular in Orange County, the warm-up speaker, who was a conservative talk radio host, started with the crowd. He said, do we read "The L.A. Times"? Everybody said no, with enormous pride. So the Arnold voters who I've been talking to today basically said, who cares? It's a lie. This is the Davis official organ.

They are passing this off as political tricks. And I thought that was also very crafty what the Schwarzenegger campaign did. They couched this in terms of, this is political dirty tricks. And they started this morning. And with this quasi-apology, I think Schwarzenegger has cleverly immunized himself against further claims, because all he has to do is say, look, I said, if anybody was offended, I'm sorry, which is a far cry from, I did these things or allegation A is true and allegation B is half-true.

Politically it's clever. And they are banking on it, as you said, that women voters who are offended by this were not in Arnold's column anyway.

ZAHN: Doyle, I'm going to give you 20 seconds to sum up what you think the long-term impact of this will be. And by that, by recall time next Tuesday.

MCMANUS: This recall, Paula, has been so volatile. The voters' behavior has been so difficult to predict. I don't think we know what it is. I think Karen is right. This is not going to shake Arnold's core voters.

We don't know who the swing voters are. Will this bring more 18- to-25-year-old men out to the polls because they admire this behavior? Could be. Will it strip away some women who might have been attracted to Arnold? We don't know.

ZAHN: It is a wonderful country, when you think that potentially could be the demo you're going after that would be impressed by...

KLEIN: Politicians have been wondering for years, how do you activate the youth vote? Is this it? I just don't think so. I hope not.

ZAHN: Just a ten-second recap on where Mr. Schwarzenegger finds himself tonight.

KLEIN: Well, this is an election we don't know which way it's going. We don't know whether the polls are accurate. We don't know who is going to turn out to vote. So I don't know.

ZAHN: Donny Deutsche, your 10 seconds of advice for how Mr. Schwarzenegger should close out this campaign going into Tuesday's vote?

DEUTSCH: He's got to hide. But I actually think the voters go in, when they pull that curtain, I think he's a lot more suspect. And I think this just adds to it.

ZAHN: Doyle McManus, Washington bureau chief of "The Los Angeles Times," Karen Breslau, Donny Deutsch, Joe Klein, thank you for all of your perspectives this evening.

On to more developments in the CIA leak investigation. Just how high up was the operative in the intelligence community?

Rush Limbaugh in freefall: out of his job at ESPN and allegations of drug abuse stemming from a police investigation.

And Halle Berry back in the spotlight, but not for the reason she wants. We'll explain.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: The investigation into who leaked the name of a CIA operative broadened today to include executive agencies beyond the White House. And the fight over who should lead the inquiry got even nastier. We're going to get to that I'm a moment.

But first, how highly placed was the CIA operative? And what does a leak like this really mean to national security? Joining me now from Washington is a man who knows all about the nation's secrets, former CIA director R. James Woolsey.

Always good to see you, Mr. Woolsey. Thanks for dropping by this evening.

JAMES WOOLSEY, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Paula, good to be with you.

ZAHN: First of all, let's talk about the term that has been frequently used today to describe this operative, Valerie Plame, NOC. What is the significance of that acronym?

WOOLSEY: Well, what NOC means is nonofficial cover. And most major intelligence agencies have two kinds of officers who serve abroad, officers who worked under official cover. That is, they pretend to be employees of some other part of the U.S. government, other than the CIA.

And then, if they are caught trying to recruit spies, they're declared persona non grata, because they have diplomatic passports and simply sent back. A far more dangerous job is to be a nonofficial cover officer, in which case, if one is caught trying to recruit spies or anything else and it's in violation of the laws of the country in which you're located, you can be imprisoned.

Years ago, Colonel Rudolph Abel, a Soviet nonofficial cover officer, or illegal, as the Soviets called him, was caught in New York and was traded for Gary Powers, when he was shot down in a U-2. But Abel was an example of a NOC. ZAHN: So, if it ends up being true that Valerie Plame is in fact a NOC, does this raise your significant and your concerns over her name being leaked?

WOOLSEY: Well, for her or anyone else -- and I have no particular knowledge of her at all -- but, for any officer, there are two things.

First of all, if they are in the clandestine service, whether under official cover or nonofficial not, it's very difficult for them to serve abroad again, because their activities would be monitored, obviously. But more directly relevant, in a way, is their past activities. If you're named and you were under official or nonofficial cover abroad, people will go back in the country where you served and look at whom you met with.

And those people might be brought under suspicion for being spies and dealt with harshly, in some countries, even killed. So it's a serious matter to disclose the name or the identity or the affiliation of either an official or a nonofficial cover officer, whether it's the United States or any other country.

ZAHN: So can you go even further tonight and offer us even maybe a deeper perspective on how much this compromises the CIA?

WOOLSEY: Well, I don't know the facts.

I don't know whether this woman was official cover or nonofficial cover, a real CIA employee, or what. All I know literally, like Will Rogers, on this is what I read in the papers. But whether she or anybody else was an official or a nonofficial cover officer, this is a serious matter. It was quite proper for the CIA to refer it over as a crimes report to the Justice Department. It's quite proper for the Justice Department to investigate it.

And if they can find who leaked the information, if it was true and it was done knowingly, which is required in the statute, and she served abroad within the last five years, which is also required in the statute, then the personal ought to be prosecuted and punished.

ZAHN: And, sir, finally tonight, I need a quick answer to this one. Historically, has there been a problem with the White House leaking information like this about CIA agents?

WOOLSEY: Normally, no, not like this.

The 1982 statute that was passed when the renegade CIA agent Philip Agee and others started leaking the names of officers. And one or two were killed. Normally, this new statute has acted as a deterrent. And I don't recall cases within the last number of years where CIA officers of any kind have been exposed this way.

ZAHN: Thanks so much for helping us better understand this tonight. R. James Woolsey...

(CROSSTALK) WOOLSEY: Good to be with you.

ZAHN: Thanks for your time.

And joining us now is our contributor and "TIME" magazine columnist Joe Klein.

First off, you heard a little about -- we should be welcoming you back, because people saw you at the top of the hour.

You heard a little bit what Mr. Woolsey said about not knowing for sure whether she was a NOC or not, Valerie Plame. What does your reporting tell you?

KLEIN: Well, what you're hearing is -- and what's been reported in "The New York Times" today is that she was a NOC.

And let me tell just you how serious this is. Aldridge Ames, the very famous American spy, is doing a life sentence right now for exposing NOCs. Now, the question is whether the people in the White House who allegedly exposed this operative knew that she was a NOC. That is going to be the focus of this investigation, because, if they did know, that makes this unbelievably serious.

ZAHN: I found it interesting your phraseology just now. You said people in the White House.

There are a number of reports this evening saying that there is one person being looked as the potential leaker. And that's Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Scooter Libby? Can you confirm that?

KLEIN: Right.

Well, yes, Libby is one of the names that you hear most prominently around town. Libby and Karl Rove have been the names that have been out there. And I don't know if they are or not. But here's why people put it together with Libby. Libby is to Dick Cheney as Paul Wolfowitz is to Donald Rumsfeld. He is a very prominent neoconservative, who has -- I've heard and everybody knows -- been very upset with the CIA's performance leading up to Iraq.

And so, therefore, people are putting two and two together and getting 36. But his name is the one that's been around.

ZAHN: Did you get any better sense today on where this investigation is going? We heard a little bit yesterday about some of the details you reported about White House staffers being told they got to make darn sure their phone records are available to investigators, that their computers logs are available to investigators. Anything new on that front?

KLEIN: Well, I understand that the Justice Department has gone over to the CIA and informed them that a lot of those people are going to be subject to questioning as well, which means that an awful lot of people in Washington are having to hire lawyers tonight, which is really unfortunate, because there are very few names that are out there in play.

And the irony of this is that, right now, there are a bunch of journalists in Washington, at least six of them, who are protecting some very prominent people in the Bush White House.

ZAHN: It's a very odd position for a reporter to be in, isn't it?

KLEIN: Well, it's also, given the antipathy that the Bush White House has had for the press, it's particularly ironic. But it's the honor of journalists that is keeping this investigation in play.

And, at this point, with four or five names out there, I just can't imagine why the president of the United States doesn't call these people in and say, "Did you do it?" and get an answer and end it right here and now. This is very serious business. The president has in his power to end it.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: And you know for a fact the president hasn't done that?

KLEIN: I don't know for a fact that he hasn't done that. But if he had done that and if it's true that these names are out there, this would be over.

ZAHN: Final thought on just how this White House spin machine is going to operate in the days to come? You've got about 10 seconds or so.

KLEIN: Well, they seem to be spinning their wheels right now. This is the most serious problem that they've faced in terms of the integrity of the administration.

ZAHN: Thanks for dropping by twice this evening, a twofer from Joe Klein.

KLEIN: My pleasure.

One of the biggest battles about the leak is who should lead the investigation. A new poll from ABC News and "The Washington Post" finds seven out of 10 Americans want a special counsel in charge, not the administration's own Justice Department. And that includes a majority who identify themselves as Republicans.

Well, what does all this mean? Well, we asked our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin to explain "In Plain English."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Who do we have investigating the White House right now? The Justice Department. The attorney general has the last word.

So who do the Democrats want to investigate the White House? The Democrats want the attorney general to turn the case over to a special counsel, who would be independent of the Justice Department. Then the special counsel would determine whether anyone would be prosecuted.

What's the difference? With the Justice Department, the attorney general, John Ashcroft, a member of the president's Cabinet, a close political ally of the president, he's in charge. With a special counsel, it's that independent person who decides who will be investigated and whether anyone will be prosecuted.

Finally, what's the difference between a special counsel and an independent counsel? In the '80s and '90s, there was a law that said, if the attorney general had a conflict of interest, a panel of three judges would appoint a prosecutor who was known as an independent counsel. But that law expired in 1999. So today, the decision about whether to appoint an outside prosecutor is totally up to the discretion of the attorney general.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: Jeffrey Toobin doing his thing "In Plain English" for us tonight. Thanks, Jeff.

The new report on the search for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, it may give both the Bush administration's critics and its defenders some new ammunition.

And key rulings today in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Welcome back.

Now we turn to the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The Bush administration's top hunter tells Congress he hasn't found any yet. However, David Kay also says his team has found plenty of evidence of intent. Republican Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas chairs the Senate Select Intelligence Committee and heard Mr. Kay's testimony today. He joins us from Capitol Hill. And in Watertown, Massachusetts, is Charles Duelfer. He is the former deputy chairman of the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq.

Good to see both of you. Welcome.

SEN. PAT ROBERTS (R), KANSAS: Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Paula.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, I'm going to start with you this evening.

Is it your belief, based on the testimony today, that no weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq?

ROBERTS: No, I don't think so.

I can't answer that question. Dr. Kay said he didn't know either. He's going to report back to us in about three months to both committees. And he was asked, in terms of the time period, what's it going to take to finally close the chapter on the WMD issue? He said six to nine months. We are finding that Saddam's program of concealment and denial and deception had a lot more strength than to it than we first imagined.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, for the Americans who are very cynical about the reasons why the United States went to war in Iraq, when you hear Mr. Kay ask, additionally, for millions of dollars, how do you justify that expense, if they believe this is sort of good money chasing bad?

ROBERTS: Well, no, I don't think that's a wasteful expenditure. It's a lot of money.

But, No. 1, we have to close the chapter to find out exactly what his program was about. We are learning that, but we haven't found the specific weapons. It doesn't mean that they won't be found. I'm disappointed. I'm frustrated. I think most people on the Intelligence Committee, Armed Services Committee, Foreign Relations Committee, or, for that matter, any average American, would have expected we would have found the WMD right now. That is not the case. But I do think we have to close this chapter in behalf of our national security.

ZAHN: Mr. Duelfer what avenues are left to explore for weapons of mass destruction?

CHARLES DUELFER, FORMER UNSCOM OFFICIAL: Well, there's a lot of documents which Mr. Kay has to go through. Remember, the documents were found in various locations by soldiers who didn't know what they were looking at. They were all brought to various warehouses. They have to be sorted through.

There's a lot of individuals as well who have been to be interviewed. And, remember, this is a program that had hundreds and even thousands of scientists and engineers. So they've got to put together all this.

And one more very important thing they have to do is find out what the system was for deceiving the U.N. inspectors. One of the key things of Mr. Kay's report was that there were a lot of things which were going on which the U.N. inspectors were unaware of. So what was the mechanism that Iraq followed to deceive the U.N.? And who was helping them?

ZAHN: Mr. Duelfer, do you think mistakes were made, additionally, in the process that might have hindered these teams to eventually finding these weapons of mass destruction?

DUELFER: Well, from what I understand, I think they got off on the wrong foot. They began a process of looking for specific sites. And Iraq is a large country. It's 444,000 square kilometers.

And I think a more successful strategy, and one which I believe Dr. Kay is following now, is to follow people and to understand where they're working, and to get them to lead them to the laboratories and to the various locations where ongoing research activity would be found.

(CROSSTALK) DUELFER: One of the mistakes they made was, they assumed that they would find large stocks of weapons ready to go, and these would be in bunkers. But they haven't found that. And they may not exist.

ZAHN: Senator Roberts, finally tonight, I know you said it's hard to tell at this hour whether weapons of mass destruction will be found or not. If there are none found, does that suggest to you that the intelligence that led to this war was flawed?

ROBERTS: Well, that's a possibility in terms of the credibility of the intelligence, and that's exactly why the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is conducting a review. We are about -- what? -- 85 percent done. We'll have more to say about that once we collect all the information. Then we will have a public hearing and we'll make that report public.

Just let me say that I do agree with the doctor and his assessment. The document exploitation and the people exploitation is very important. And one other thing that Dr. Kay said that makes a lot of sense, if we can capture or kill Saddam Hussein and take that palpable fear that the Iraqis have, it will lead to more cooperation and certainly better answers.

ZAHN: Well, thank you for sharing more of that testimony with us this evening. Senator Pat Roberts, and Mr. Duefler, thank for you your insights as well.

ROBERTS: OK. Thank you, Paula.

Celebrities with problems. Find out why Rush Limbaugh's troubles may be worse anyone thought.

And new heartbreak for Oscar-winning actress Halle Berry.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Here are the headlines you need to know at this hour.

A NATO spokesman says two Canadian peacekeepers were killed, three others wounded when one of their vehicles hit a mine today in the Afghan capital of Kabul. Officials are investigating whether the blast was the result of hostile action.

Prosecutors have dropped kidnapping charges against the Utah parents who went into hiding rather than allow their 12-year-old son to have chemotherapy. Instead, the couple agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in a deal will it keep them out of jail and their record will be wiped clear if they stay out of trouble for the next year.

And in a small town in Georgia, an army sergeant on leave from South Korea has hit the jackpot. Terrell Moore has claimed the $150 million prize in the Megamillions lottery. He was visiting his family during his 30-day leave when he brought the winning ticket at a convenience store.

Rush Limbaugh's week went from bad to worse today. His name has surfaced in a drug investigation in Florida. According to law enforcement sources, he allegedly bought large amounts of prescription painkillers illegally. This after he quit under pressure as host of ESPN's Sunday NFL countdown for his racially charged remarks.

"Miami Herald" reporter Glenn Garvin joins us tonight from Miami.

Good of you to join us. Welcome, sir.

GLENN GARVIN "MIAMI HERALD": Hi.

ZAHN: How bad do things look like for Rush Limbaugh tonight as far as this investigation is concerned?

GARVIN: Well, the allegations by the housekeeper are certainly very serious. Of course, they -- right now they're just that, allegations, nothing more.

This all stems from the drug investigation of a pharmacy in Lakeworth, Florida, in May. Lakeworth is a little bit north of here. The people who own the pharmacy, who are in jail right now on drug charges, are accused of distributing 500,000 painkilling pills, prescription painkilling pills to drug dealers around South Florida, and what the police are looking at -- what the law enforcement authorities are looking at in Pal Beach County, is whether some of those pills found their way to Rush Limbaugh.

ZAHN: And investigators found out about Mr. Limbaugh's alleged linkage to this plot through a maid who had worked for him. What -- what is she alleging?

GARVIN: She says that she supplied Limbaugh with these painkillers for about four years, from 1998 to 2002. This is in the wake, I guess, of his surgery for his deafness, which was pretty highly publicized at the time. And he suffered pain as a result of that, and she says became addicted to the painkillers.

She says she gave him truly massive quantities. In one seven-week period, 4,000 pills, she says.

ZAHN: Well, how reliable is she as a source, as far as law enforcement is concerned?

GARVIN: They're certainly looking at it seriously. She has -- she has given them tape recordings of two of her meetings with Rush Limbaugh where she, they say, covertly wired herself. She's also given them what she says are e-mails between her and Limbaugh discussing these transactions. So I imagine they're trying to determine the authenticity of that evidence as we speak.

ZAHN: The investigation could go on for some time. Glenn Garvin, thank you for sharing the latest info with us tonight. Appreciate it.

Now allegations about Rush Limbaugh and a drug problem were a very hot topic today, both in private and on the air.

Joining us from Washington is conservative radio talk show host Armstrong Williams.

Armstrong, welcome back.

ARMSTRONG WILLIAMS, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi, Paula.

ZAHN: First of all, do you believe these allegations that Rush Limbaugh is somehow linked to this drug investigation?

WILLIAMS: Nope. You know, I don't know, it's kind of shocking, the story is developing. You just have to wait for the facts to surface and then make your judgments.

Obviously he said he's unaware that he's under investigation and that he will do all in his power to cooperate with authorities.

ZAHN: And, in fact, why don't I read that part of the statement he made today, so people have a fuller understanding of that.

Here is what Mr. Limbaugh said, almost exactly what Armstrong just chronicled for us: "I am unaware of any investigation by any authority involving me. No government representative has contacted me directly or indirectly. If my assistance is required, I will, of course, cooperate fully."

It is interesting to note, there is no denial there of drug abuse. Does that strike you at all when you listened to a statement?

ZAHN: You know -- and you and I both have known people who have had excruciating pain in their lives, and to the point where sometimes they feel they would be better off if they were not living. And sometimes, you know, when you're in desperate situations, and you seek desperate measures to ease the pain.

And -- and no, he did not deny it. But that doesn't mean he affirmed it either. He said he would cooperate. No one has contacted him. And I find it astounding that someone who worked for him in his home would make these allegations. Certainly you can't not just dismiss that source if it's someone that he had in his trust who was in his home.

So, you know, it's quite bizarre. The issues -- you know, when you're a public figure and you have no idea who you can trust, and it's very difficult. People think -- you know, people want to celebrate those that are in the limelight. But, you know, there's a huge price you pay. And you know, we all have been in those storms at one point or another in our careers, and I've got to tell you, it's not pretty.

ZAHN: Do you expect Mr. Limbaugh to get much empathy from his followers?

WILLIAMS: Oh, listen, you know, no matter what people may say about Rush Limbaugh and what they may accuse him you of, the reason why people have such disdain for Limbaugh is, you know, there's a resentment against achievement. Rush Limbaugh is an icon. He's on over 300 radio stations in this country. Over 20 million people listen to him. People have even go far to say he may have tipped the scale in the 2000 presidential race and in the 2002 midterm elections.

The man has had a phenomenal influence on radio and talk show hosts in this country, and, you know, as much as you criticize him, you got to give the man credit. The only reason why he's so controversial with his remarks on ESPN -- because he's a conservative and people want to do all they can to malign conservatives in this country, whether you like it or not. Liberals don't fare very well on the talk show circuit and conservatives do very well.

And I don't think it's just an issue of Rush Limbaugh and ESPN, even though I think his remarks were very insensitive. I wish he had not used race -- make Donovan McNabb's race in his remarks, but I think his point -- his broader point was well-taken, is that given the history of black sport figures in this country, whether it's quarterbacking in football, whether it's tennis and the Williams sisters or golf and Tiger Woods, because of our history where blacks were shut out for so long in those sports, America goes out of its way to celebrate those that are successful.

And they're not successful because they're black, they're successful because they, like the Williams sisters' parents, they put in the hours, they put in the discipline and they made the sacrifice to prepare their children for the world of tennis. And so the problem here with Mr. Limbaugh, is that anything he says where he uses the issue of race and he's being a conservative will be controversial.

ZAHN: You have about five seconds left, because we have a commercial break we have to get here.

WILLIAMS: If he had been blessed with the hue of my skin, he would have probably been given a raise for putting a little bit of kick back in ESPN. He certainly would not have had to resign.

ZAHN: One man's opinion. Thank you for sharing it with us tonight.

More on the Rush Limbaugh investigation in just a moment. We'll hear from Al Franken, whose attitude about Limbaugh is a bit more critical.

And then tomorrow, my conversation with Senator Edwards, another Democratic candidates for president, and his wife Elizabeth. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Rush Limbaugh isn't known for going easy on his opponents. Al Franken isn't a shrinking violet, either. He joined me from Kansas City to talk about his reaction to Rush Limbaugh's double dose of trouble. I asked him if he was surprised by the allegations about Limbaugh and drug abuse.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AL FRANKEN, AUTHOR/HUMORIST: I was surprised.

ZAHN: Why?

FRANKEN: Well, I just don't think of him as someone who's involved in a drug ring. I wasn't surprised by the racist comments he made on Sunday night. That's sort of par for the course. You know, in my book Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot, I cite an example where he said that, late at night when you're watching television and they put up a picture of a criminal, it's surprising how often he looks like Jesse Jackson. So I wasn't surprised by the comments about McNabb. I was surprised about how long it took for ABC to fire him.

ZAHN: I'd like to share with you now, Al, something Rush Limbaugh told his listeners in 2001, when he announced he had some hearing problems. He said, "You would not believe the medications that are flowing through me in an attempt to reverse this. I'm popping pills. I'm shooting up stuff. I've never done stuff like this before."

If there is a drug problem, do you think it possibly could have stemmed from the medication he took during this very difficult time of his life?

FRANKEN: I'm sure it could have. What's sad is is that, you know, a public figure like himself, who's gone on record as being slightly holier than thou is afraid to go to a 12-step program like narcotics anonymous, and afraid that someone from the program will out him to a "National Enquirer" or something like that for money.

So I think that, especially these right-wing celebrities, these virtue guys. Bill Bennett, I don't know if he was a gambling addict or not. Usually when you lose $8 million or something like that, it might mean you have a problem. It's very hard than to go to gamblers anonymous.

But I think, actually, the statements that Rush made about black quarterbacks, he may have said it because he was high at the time. He may -- you know, I'm a Minnesota Vikings fan and Daunte Culpepper is our quarterback, he's great, he's a great quarterback and it's probably because he has that extra bone in his foot that I understand the blacks have, that bone can make him jump higher and run faster.

Isn't that what Al Campanis said? Or was it Jimmy the Greek? And I guess, Rush thinks the blood goes from the bone, from their head so that's how they have trouble calling plays and stuff and remembering the whole playbook and stuff.

ZAHN: In the past 48 hours, have any of these ailments (ph) slowed down the Rush Limbaugh empire?

FRANKEN: I don't think the -- the ESPN thing said you can't take him anywhere. He can't succeed in the mainstream media because of who he is. Someone's thought process -- he was supposed to represent every fan, because he doesn't know all that much about football, but it turned out he represented every racist fan. And I suppose there's a place for that, but within his own radio empire, I don't think this affects him at all. The drug addict stuff might. Right-wing listeners, conservative listeners tend to be anti-drug ring. ZAHN: And you can say that with 100-degree certainty this evening, with so many facts out --

FRANKEN: They tend to be. They tend to be anti-drug ring, right-wing listeners.

ZAHN: All right. Al, we're going to have to leave it there this evening. Thank you for dropping by.

FRANKEN: Okay. Paula. Thank you.

ZAHN: Good luck with the book.

FRANKEN: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZAHN: I was referring to the new book, we should also for perspective acknowledge that Mr. Franken has made a lot of money out of criticizing Rush Limbaugh.

Important rulings in the Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. Our legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin joins us to explain what today's developments mean.

And lessons from a very public breakup. Oscar winner Halle Berry says she and her husband are splitting up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: The woman accusing Kobe Bryant of sexual assault will not have to attend his preliminary hearing next week. That is one of several rulings made today by a Colorado judge. Our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin is here with details. So what else did the judge say?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: The judge said the woman does not have to attend the hearing. They can't introduce any of her medical records, and he said he might close the whole hearing to the public, because the material is so incendiary that it could jeopardizes his chance for a fair trial.

ZAHN: Do any of these rulings surprise you?

TOOBIN: Not really, because this is a very limited purpose for this hearing. The hearing is, does the government have probable cause to bring him to trial. The government almost always wins those hearings, they'll win this one, and anything besides the basic testimony of a detective and the videotape of the woman's own statement to the police, that's all this hearing is going to be, and the defense has no real right to call its own witnesses in this hearing, so they're not get much chance to do anything.

ZAHN: So the defense team shouldn't be scrambling, this was something that was expected?

TOOBIN: Right. And remember, this woman is certainly going to testify at the trial and they will have more leeway to introduce the records of her psychiatric problems if this case goes in front of a jury. As I expect it will

ZAHN: Are there any other tea leaves that you could read for us this morning?

TOOBIN: Well, I think the judge's real discomfort with the graphic nature of the evidence and the possibility of a bias in the jury pool suggests that he really may close some of this hearing to the public next Thursday, which means I'm going out there to Colorado, perhaps a long way, to see nothing, because remember, it's already no cameras in the courtroom, and the question is whether there will even be human beings allowed in the courtroom.

ZAHN: So, how does that affect anything? We were counting you to have seat five in the courtroom, but besides that.

TOOBIN: What it affects is we don't know anything about the evidence in this case. For all the discussion in this case, we don't know whether she was injured, what exactly she claimed he did. Those are the things that we expect to learn when the hearing takes place on Thursday, but if he closes the hearing, we will still not know much of anything about what really the evidence is here.

ZAHN: I have a feeling you'll be traveling one way or the other.

TOOBIN: I think I'm going.

ZAHN: I just have this feeling.

TOOBIN: The suits will make me go, yes, indeed.

ZAHN: Jeffrey Toobin, thanks.

It has been true for generations, being a celebrity couple is not easy. The latest case in point, Oscar winner Halle Berry and her husband. We're going to take a look at what went wrong with them with Pat O'Brien.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ZAHN: Oscar winning actress Halle Berry and singer Eric Benet have separated after less than 3 years of marriage. A statement from Berry reads, "Eric and I have had marital problems for some time now and have tried to work things out together. However, at this point, I feel we need time apart to reevaluate our union." "Access Hollywood" co-anchor Pat O'Brien joins us from L.A. to talk about this.

Always good to see you Pat, welcome.

PAT O'BRIEN, CO-ANCHOR "ACCESS HOLLYWOOD": Hello, Paula. Nice to see you.

ZAHN: Well, our pleasure.

When you look at the statistics with half of all marriages in America ending out of divorce, I can't imagine that the Hollywood community is too surprised by this news. What is the buzz?

O'BRIEN: This couple has been very volatile from the beginning. They had problems almost from the beginning, because after Eric and Halle got married, there were reports that he was cheating on her. Terrible tabloid reports and then he submitted himself to sex addiction rehabilitation. So, from the beginning this thing has been snake bit. It's very sad, because, you know, it's very tough to have a very public relationship like this, first of all to live it in public and then have it blow up in public has to be very tough and I know this for Halle and Eric.

ZAHN: Well, your show, got one of the few exclusive interviews that was done with this couple, and this was done months ago, but in this interview, we get to hear both Halle Berry and her husband talk about their marriage. Let's listen to it together.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC BENET, SINGER: You know, the truth is, yes, Halle and I are going through a personal crisis. And I have made some terrible mistakes. But the truth is, I love my wife I am so in love with my wife, and we are committed to each other. Our marriage, our love, and we are united. We're trying to make our way through this. The best way that we know how.

HALLE BERRY, ACTRESS: I just love him, and marriage is about sticking together through tough times, and we're sticking together.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZAHN: I know a lot of people listening to that are going to be cynical saying, wait, they had everything, they're rich, they're beautiful, they can go anywhere in the world. But clearly there was tremendous pressure on this couple from the get-go.

O'BRIEN: Maybe that's the problem, because, you know, here's a guy, Eric, who has to live with arguably one of the most beautiful women in the world, Oscar winner, great success, and every man kind of wants her. Every man is lusting after her and saying in public, I love Halle Berry. On our show tonight, we had a story about all these guys saying, Halle Berry is so beautiful, I love her. So it's got to be tough on the husband to go through that, but clearly there were problems there, and, you know, clearly this thing ended in tragedy for them.

ZAHN: Pat, just about 30 seconds to answer this. Just reaction to the Rush Limbaugh fallout and how it is that none of his co- broadcasters that evening saw fit to react to the statement?

O'BRIEN: I think Rush may still be deaf. What he was trying to say is Donovan McNabb was not having a great year and everybody knows that. If he had stopped at that -- by the way, Donovan brought this team to two NFC championships games. But they should have questioned him there, they're smarter than that. If you look at the body language of everybody, they were very uneasy at that. Any time you bring race into a football story, especially the black quarterback story, that story ended Rush, 15 years ago. So, it shouldn't have even been brought up that way. But he was trying to say that Donovan was having a bad year and even Donovan would say that.

ZAHN: We always love talking to Pat O'Brien. He's equally conversant in entertainment news as well as sports news. Good to see you, Pat. Continued good luck with your show.

O'BRIEN: We'll always have Albereville (ph).

ZAHN: Nobody has any idea what you're talking about. Because we've run out of time, we'll have to explain it tomorrow.

Pat O'Brien, again of "Access Hollywood" thanks.

And we thank you all for being with us tonight. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next with "Crossing Over's" John Edward.

END

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Rush Limbaugh Takes a Hit; Kobe Bryant's Accuser Doesn't Have To Appear At Preliminary Hearing>