Return to Transcripts main page

Rick's List

Public Funding For Abortion in Health Care Reform Plan?; The Book on Karl Rove; New York Attorney General Removes Himself From Paterson Investigation

Aired March 11, 2010 - 16:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Topping our list of embattled politicians on this day, Senator John Ensign, again, because of reports from the FBI of widening investigations into the efforts by him to get a job for the husband of his former mistress.

Here's what else we have got.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ (voice-over): Here's what's making the LIST.

This congressman threatening to hold up the health care vote because of -- quote -- "public funding for abortions." Is there public funding for abortions? What's the truth?

The man who wrote the book on Karl Rove responds to this.

KARL ROVE, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT BUSH: If you wrestle with a pig, you are going to get muddy.

SANCHEZ: And this:

ROVE: The right decision was made, and the world is a better place for Saddam Hussein being gone from power.

"Bush's Brain" author, Wayne Slater, joins me live.

The lists you need to know about. Who's today's most intriguing? Who's making news on Twitter? It's why I keep a list, pioneering tomorrow's cutting-edge news right now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Hey, everybody. It is the 4:00 hour. I'm Rick Sanchez.

The number at the top of the list is 216, 216. That's how many votes Democrats are going to need to pass the latest version of health care. The entire House, Democratic Caucus, met today on Capitol Hill, hearing more details on the plan from the White House's officials there.

And they are still trying to -- to line up enough votes. Across the Capitol, here is the way Senator Lamar Alexander, a Republican, a key player in the health fight -- health care fight -- described some of the -- some of the arm-twisting that's going on at the White House.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LAMAR ALEXANDER (R), TENNESSEE: What is happening here is the president is -- is inviting the House Democrats to join hands and jump off a cliff, and hope Senator Reid catches them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: That's what happens in politics, Senator.

One group of Democrats appearing to be no-votes, the anti- abortion lawmakers led by Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak. Have you heard of this? They are opposed to any federal funding of abortion, and they are unhappy with the wording -- interesting choice of words here -- the wording in the Senate's version.

There have been talks to try and reach some kind of compromise, but could Democrats go forward with their own support?

CNN's political editor, Mark Preston, is good enough to join us now.

All right, here's what's interesting about this, Mark. I checked. And, as things stand right now, if you want to have an abortion paid for, without Obama's plan, without health care reform, in other words, what we have now, many, if not most, of the plans in the United States pay for abortions. Many of them, if not most, pay for abortions, the big plans all over the United States.

If we implement this idea about health care reform, then, because of the Hyde amendment, you won't be able to get an abortion paid for, because you can't use government money to pay for abortions.

So, in actuality, what we have now would be more apt to have people have abortions paid for than what we might get in the future. So, my question is, what the hell is Stupak talking about?

MARK PRESTON, CNN POLITICAL EDITOR: Well, Rick, this is why things get so confusing here in Washington, D.C., because, as they say, making the sausage is a very dirty business, a very complicated business.

The Hyde amendment, which is what you are referring to, as far as federal funding not being allowed for abortion, has to be introduced every single year. So, each year, these appropriations bills that funds the federal government, the Hyde amendment, whenever there is an issue that has to be brought up that deals with the abortion or funding of abortion, the Hyde amendment is inserted, and basically neutralizes that.

However, with this health care bill, this would be a freestanding, stand-alone bill. And what Stupak is trying do is, get that Hyde amendment language inserted into the bill, no longer amendment at that point. It becomes permanent stand language. And that's what he is trying to fight for. SANCHEZ: But I thought there was already language in there that essentially says you can't have an abortion paid for with government funds, period. And if, by chance, it does get paid for, because you're -- you are one of those quasi-policies that's -- quote -- "public and private," then you are mandated to actually send a check for the amount of the abortion to the insurance company.

At least that -- that's how I read it. Is -- is the -- is the -- is the language that fuzzy at this point?

PRESTON: Well -- well, and -- and what you are talking about sending the check, what the Stupak people are saying, a Stupak spokesman saying is that you would have to get a rider if your premium is paid for by or at least subsidized by the federal government.

But even to make things even more complicated is that the Senate anti-abortion rights Democrats are not necessarily on board with the House abortion -- anti-abortion-rights Democrats.

PRESTON: So, it is even more complicated than that, Rick.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

PRESTON: And I will tell you, it is certainly an issue that's causing a lot of heartache here in Capitol Hill for Democrats who are trying to get health care passed. The question is, will they really -- will it in the end be the poison pill? I'm not so sure, to be honest with you.

SANCHEZ: Yes, well, that's the thing. I mean, look, Americans have common sense. Americans understand big arguments and big issues.

But it looks like, when you go into the weeds here and you start looking at these pithy little, well, but if the money goes there -- you know, it just -- it drives them crazy. It almost looks like these guys sometimes look for things to get into arguments about.

By the way, let me ask you, this Congressman Stupak, I heard him say he's got 12 people who are behind him, and they are never going to vote unless he gives the OK, like he's the anti-abortion marching guy here.

Is -- is that true? Does he have 12 people who are going to be opposed to this because of some kind of convoluted language explanation?

PRESTON: You know, I'm going to give you a Washington answer, because that's all this is -- really is...

(LAUGHTER)

PRESTON: ... a Washington answer. They are not going to release the list of 12. They said that some of those 12 have come out and said that they, in fact, are not going on support it as it is.

But, here in Washington, a vote is never a real vote until the vote occurs, until we see what happens at the end. SO, as much as we are hearing people say, look, I'm not going to support this because of This abortion language, in the end, as you talked about at the top, There is a lot of arm-twisting going on now. They, in the end, might support the bill.

SANCHEZ: And, by the way, I understand -- you and I talked earlier, and we had this discussion very similar to the one we are having now. And I told you, I said, look, I just don't get it. I'm reading both sides. And there's just nothing clear here, really, one way or the other, but it looks more clear to me that, under the new measure, there will likely be fewer abortions paid for in the United States than under the measure -- the -- the -- the health care system that we have now.

Regardless of that, you got off the phone with Stupak and his office. You talked to his aides. What are they say about this? How hard are they going to push it?

PRESTON: Look -- I mean, look, they're going to push it as far as they can push it.

The fact is, this is something that he believes in personally. You know, he is a very devout Catholic. I don't think he's going to move off the needle. Again, the question goes back to, will there be enough anti-abortion-rights Democrats to bring the bill down? You know, the magic number right now, Rick, is 38. That's all it takes, 38 Democrats to join all of the Republicans, to actually make sure health care reform does not pass.

So, when Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, President Obama are looking at, how are we going to get this bill passed, they want to make sure that the needle doesn't move to 38. And, in fact, they want a cushion before that to make sure that they get health care reform passed.

SANCHEZ: Yes, this thing -- this thing is brewing.

And do me a favor. Let us know when the brew is cooked. All right?

PRESTON: Will do.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Mark Preston.

All right, take a look at this.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

911 OPERATOR: Can you tell me what happened?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They tried -- they opened -- they ring the door, and they have guns to shoot my mom and dad.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: I just love this story. I think most of you do, too. It's a little boy who stopped the robbers in their tracks. There's a follow-up. And I'm going to share it with you.

Is Karl Rove spinning? The man who wrote the book on Karl Rove is going to join me in just a little bit, and he's going to be giving us his version of events. That's ahead in the next half-hour.

Next, we have got breaking news on New York Governor David Paterson. He's, as you know, in the middle of an ethics scandal. We have had extensive coverage on him. And we understand there's something that's about to break with this.

So, stay right there. And, when we come back, we will sort through things -- sort -- sort through this.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Oh, what a web we weave.

Listen to what's going on in New York. The governor of New York, David Paterson, as you know, is being investigated for potentially using his power or abusing his power in the case of domestic abuse involving his chief of staff, that he may have called a woman and told her not to appear at a hearing and not to testify against his friend.

That's obviously horrible, especially given the fact that a governor has so much power on a woman who may have been at this moment in her life as vulnerable as you can be, given the fact that she was accusing this person of violating her domestically.

Now, that's what you have. The person who would investigate this is Andrew Cuomo, who is the A.G. in New York, right, the attorney general of New York. Well, guess what? Andrew Cuomo is also running for governor. So, how is it possible that he could be investigating the governor and possibly do him harm politically, knowing that he wants to replace him in the future in that position?

There's movement on that. Andrew Cuomo, we understand just recused himself from this investigation, this news coming in to just now.

Let me bring -- let me bring Mark Preston back in to this.

I explained that as best as I possibly could. That's pretty much the situation, right?

PRESTON: Yes. It is, Rick.

You know, it makes a lot of sense for the attorney general of New York to recuse himself from this. As you said, he's widely expected to run for governor. We expect Andrew Cuomo to get into the race. Why would he want to be involved in this investigation at this point? There really is a no-win situation for him.

If he were to lead this investigation, and Mr. Paterson were to get off for whatever reason, Republicans would attack him for letting somebody in his own party off.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

PRESTON: And if he attacked Paterson too hard, he could get part of the Democratic base, part of the Democratic constituency angry -- so, very smart politically...

SANCHEZ: Yes. Well, and...

PRESTON: ... for Mr. Cuomo to step aside.

SANCHEZ: ... he -- he's -- he's conflicted. I mean, look, when you find yourself in a situation -- well, I know he is a politician, and they could usually give a hoot about conflicts of interest. But, anyway, that's another story.

He's in a conflict of interest here. He -- he -- he can't investigate the guy whose job he wants.

PRESTON: Yes, absolutely.

And -- and, again, going back to he made the right decision, again, politically, it is very helpful to him, but it is very smart to get out of it, no question about that. And to take a retired judge, as we are told, who will lead the investigation, another very smart move, because this is not somebody sitting on the bench. This is not somebody that we would expect that is beholden to any kind of interests in New York State at this time.

SANCHEZ: Mark Preston doing double duty for us, we thank you for standing around and for sticking around. I appreciate it.

PRESTON: Thanks, Rick.

SANCHEZ: All right, I want to tell you about this now, a 7-year- old boy who we have all said we wanted to hug. And I get it. I would want to hug him, too.

It was his 911 call that saved a family from home invaders. Now, we played the call yesterday and we talked to the 911 dispatcher. And it was a great segment. Well, after the show was over, the kid and the dispatcher finally were able to meet face-to-face and told each other their stories.

And we have a report on this I want to share it with you. Here it is.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

911 OPERATOR: Nine-one-one. State your emergency.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's some -- there's some guys who are going to kill my mom and dad. Can you come?

911 OPERATOR: Where you at?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: California.

911 OPERATOR: OK. What's your name, sweetie? What's your name?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Carlos.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One from was having just a jacket, and they both have guns. But there was three of them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And they have guns to shoot my mom and dad.

911 OPERATOR: Right now?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. Can you come?

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They were next to the door with my mom and dad. My mom was -- was putting her hands up and their head down.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And where were you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Me and my sister were at the bathroom, calling 911.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

911 OPERATOR: Listen to me. Take a deep breath. I already have the police coming.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED BOY: Can you come really fast? Hurry up.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I still hear his little voice on the phone. So, to hear him talking in person, it kind of just brought back the memories of that phone call. (END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

911 OPERATOR: Tell me exactly what happened, OK? Just stay where you are. And don't hang up, whatever you do.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. OK. The guys, they have...

(SCREAMING)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm very proud of myself that I kept it together as long as I did. But once I heard the screams toward the end, I mean, honestly, I'm holding the phone, and I'm in tears. I can barely talk. I'm shaking. I'm in tears, because all I hear is them screaming. And it was very, very tough for me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Let me ask you the question. Are you under an investigation right now by the Senate Ethics Committee and/or the Justice Department?

SEN. JOHN ENSIGN (R), NEVADA: Well, you know, we -- I will let the -- those folks speak for themselves.

There are so many other bigger issues. I have commented all I needed to comment on those kinds of things.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Sometimes, all you can do is as a reporter is ask the questions and get them on the record. Now the questions are being put on the record by the FBI in what is an apparent investigation of e- mails that could be proof that John Ensign tried to get a job for the husband of his former mistress, a job as a lobbyist, by the way, which is questionable ethically.

We are talking about that next. Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.

On the list of embattled politicians today, a repeat appearance for John Ensign. There are new revelations today about the lengths that he went to in order to find a job for his mistress' husband. You remember this tryst. We have reported on it before. John Ensign had an affair with Cynthia Hampton. Cynthia and her husband, Doug Hampton, both worked for the senator -- very closely. "The New York Times" is now reporting on new e-mails handed over to the FBI and the Senate Ethics Committee. Those e-mails reveal the senator's efforts to land Doug Hampton, the husband of his girlfriend/mistress at the time, a job with an energy investment company in Nevada after he left the Ensign camp.

There's just one problem here. That job would have involved lobbying. Lobbying is illegal for an aide, and certainly a chief of staff for a senator which is what he was, for at least one year after you leave the off -- the office or any kind of federal politics. That's what the rules say.

Senator Ensign spoke with me on New Year's Eve. It is the only time he has spoken with anyone to try and discuss these allegations against him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Are you under an investigation right now by the Senate Ethics Committee and/or the Justice Department?

ENSIGN: Well, you know, we -- I will let those folks speak for themselves. You know, Rick, I have been dealing with health care reform. My state has over 12 percent unemployment rate, we have two wars going on, these latest terrorist attacks.

SANCHEZ: Right.

ENSIGN: There are so many other bigger issues. I have commented all I needed to comment on those kinds of things. I was elected to do a job as a senator.

SANCHEZ: Well, but hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on. I have got to stop you there, because if there is a possibility -- here let me show the viewers what we're talking about. This is a picture of you and Doug Hampton. This is from the "New York Times" Web site right here.

And the question has to be asked, Senator, did you help him to get a job because you felt bad for him or because you had been sleeping with his wife and you wanted to get him out of the way?

ENSIGN: Listen, Rick, I have commented all I was going to comment on that. And I -- you know, we told you when we were going to come on here that I'm going to be focused on health care, I'm going to be focused on the economy. My state is hurting right now as badly as any state in the country. And I'm focused on doing everything I can to help Nevada.

SANCHEZ: But here is the problem with that, and I understand that.

ENSIGN: And that's what I'm going to focus on.

SANCHEZ: No... ENSIGN: So I am not going to answer your question. You can it all of the ways you want to ask it, but I'm not going to answer your question. SANCHEZ: But here is the problem. There is a law that says that someone who is an aide for a senator like yourself has to wait one year before they start lobbying. There is reason to believe, Senator -- in fact, a lot of reason to believe here that Doug Hampton, who was your aide, was lobbying within that one year.

If that is the case, sir, that is an illegality, and something that you own an explanation to your constituents about if you had any involvement in either that lobbying or helping him get those lobbying gigs.

ENSIGN: Right. Rick, that -- first of all, that is his problem. That is not my problem. But at the same time I'm not going to answer any of the questions, because I am focused on doing my job right now. All of that stuff will take care of itself over time. We have said we will cooperate with any investigations, and -- but at this moment, I'm just going to focus on being the best senator that I can be for my state.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: So, two months ago, Senator John Ensign said, that's Doug Hampton's problem.

Now Politico is reporting that the Senate Ethics Committee and the Justice Department are widening their investigation. So, it would appear that the problem is very much not a Doug Hampton problem, but a John Ensign problem, as he said it was one year ago. We will stay on top of it for you.

Now this:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: The right decision was made, Wolf, and the world is a better place for Saddam Hussein being gone from power, and for the -- for the emergence of a democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: OK. One of the so-called architects of the Iraq war is defending the Iraq war and defending himself in brand-new book that he has got out. Obviously, there's no surprise there, nor can you criticize man for defending himself against what people are -- critics are saying about him.

But we wanted to dig deeper into what Karl Rove's interpretation of events were and his interview that he did yesterday, his extensive interview that he did with my colleague, Wolf Blitzer. So, I have asked the man who wrote book about Karl Rove -- you have heard of it -- it's a documentary as well -- called "Bush's Brain" to join me. And he's going to give us his take on the interview that he did with Wolf Blitzer yesterday.

It should be interesting.

Also, "The Pacific," this man's idea? That's why he's on our most intriguing lust. Hmm. Who is it?

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We keep a list for you of relevant organizations and/or people who are tweeting about relevant information and news stories. You can check that list, by the way, just going to my Twitter account, and you will see it, so we make it so that you can access it.

Here's one we just got a little while ago. Look at this. This is from College Summit. And I'm going to explain this to you in a minute. They are bragging, as a lot of people are bragging right now, as we are seeing. "President Obama gives a portion of the $1.4 million award that comes with the Nobel Peace Prize to College Summit."

All right, remember when the president won the Nobel Peace Prize? He said, the money that comes with it, he was going to give away. Well, today, we finally found out who he is giving it to. He's giving it to different institutions and universities.

I understand he is also giving a lot of to it the Bush-Clinton Haiti relief fund, and he's giving a lot of it to Fisher House as well. If you ever come here to CNN and go downstairs, where you are first in the beautiful CNN headquarters, one of the things that you are going to see is an -- a -- a Humvee.

Thanks, Angie (ph).

And, in that Humvee, you can see a presentation of how we use that Humvee. There it is right now. And, right there, there is a monitor. And I do a presentation for what we here at CNN have done to collect money for the Fisher House. And the Fisher House helps soldiers who come back from the war and need help or need money or need services.

And we are so proud to be associated with that. So, I'm now very proud to report that the president is giving part of his $1.4 million to the Fisher House as well to help those soldiers when they come back. That's a good thing. And we are glad he did that.

All right, an actor on our list our most intriguing. But aren't all Hollywood types phony-baloney in many ways, full of themselves? Well, not this one.

Born in 1956 in California, this guy grew up watching "The Three Stooges" and "James Bond" movies while his dad was away in the Navy. Then he went Hollywood. A couple of Oscars later, he's been involved in so many film and TV projects portraying real-life events that "TIME" magazine calls him America's historian-in-chief. Today, the White House invited him to help honor hundreds of veterans at the National World War II Memorial. He is Tom Hanks. And he -- is a 10-part war series that he co-produced. It's called "The Pacific." It begins Sunday on HBO. This, we are told, will be good stuff. And that makes him today's definitely most intriguing people in the news.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, geez.

I have joked with other folks that it takes a real man to become a woman, because it is -- it's extremely painful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Yes, I would say. Why would a man go through all of that and more to become a woman, something most of us could not even imagine? It is his story. And we're going to share it with you -- some answers when we come right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Now on THE LIST, a man named Steven. He had it all. Wonderful wife, teenage son he adored, influential job as a Largo, Florida city manager, until the local newspaper revealed his secret, he was planning to become a woman. His transition to Susan, the subject of a new CNN documentary with great title, it is called "Her Name Was Steven." Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STEVEN STANTON, TRANSEXUAL: I joke with the folks that it takes a real man to become a woman because it is extremely painful. A transsexual, you kind of bring something out that is deep within, as opposed to cross-dressing, where you are concealing your masculinity. You are removing a shell and sort of letting what's there come out.

LINDA WEININGER, ELECTROLYSIST: Steve is actually -- has been very special to me all through the sessions. You have to be there for him because of the closeness you gain is so enormous. I can't even explain it. I can't put it in words. The bond you create with someone like that. It is a deep friendship.

STANTON: Emotionally, and spiritually, you connect over time. So, yes, the connection I developed with Linda the last year is pretty strong.

WEININGER: Feel good?

STANTON: Oh yes.

WEININGER: Feel like a new woman.

(LAUGHTER)

STANTON: Yes, right.

I'm in transition. Struggling to do it seamlessly, the most terrifying part of the day is the morning when you have to fight the hair. I want the hair to be perfect. I want the nails to be perfect. The whole selection of clothing, the way do you the makeup and -- what type of shoes that you wear. Everything is so totally different. It was a little bit more complicated than I initially envisioned, but as fulfilling as I thought it would be.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Talk about intriguing. A private choice with very public consequences. CNN's broadcast premiere of "Her Name Was Steven", -- was Steven, airs this Saturday and Sunday night right here at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez. So many cool stories to talk about today. The kind of stories that -- make you think and take us through almost a sense of our own humanity. As we look at the decisions that we are making as a country. Including decisions we make about what our priorities are. And then along comes a story called "Her Name Is Steven" Or "Was Steven", I should say. And a bevy of Tweets have been coming in on it.

I will share one with you, because it caught my attention. This is from somebody that calls himself Jennifer. I say it that way because you know, in Tweets, it is just names that people use, more as a handles, really.

"Going through my own sexual reassignment, must say it is painful, but it can be very fulfilling feeling to be as you see yourself."

Wow. Again, it is called "Her Name Was Steven." You will see it this weekend. Right here on CNN.

Let me tell you what we will be doing. Show this, Rog.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARL ROVE, FORMER BUSH POLITICAL ADVISOR: We had to act on what we knew at the time. It is nice in retrospect to say oh, well, somebody should have known. But everybody did examine this carefully.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: All right. He's as big a public figure as there is. So if he writes a book, and he goes on Wolf Blitzer for about a half hour to explain it, then you -- as a journalist, you are going watch, right? Which is what I did, then I decided to call somebody who knows Karl Rove as well as anybody else, and that's Wayne Slater. He wrote the book on Karl Rove. A documentary now. It is really probably as famous a book as has been written, it is called, "Bush's Brain". And Wayne is going to join me in a little bit. We are going to go piece by piece on Karl Rove's assertions yesterday, in his book, and in his interview with Wolf, and you are going to hear what Wayne has to say. This should be good. Stay right there.

Wayne, good to see you.

WAYNE SLATER, AUTHOR, "BUSH'S BRAIN": Good to see you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez. He is an unapologetic Karl Rove; and he's making the rounds this week. He's everywhere. He's not backing down on anything either.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: Now know, in retrospect, why Western intelligence agencies all across the board thought he had WMD; he wanted us to think he did. He felt the presence, that if we thought he had WMD, it made him strong in the neighborhood.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Notice how he uses-I mean this guy is so good. You notice how he uses Western intelligence? Western intelligence, which is why we went into Iraq because of Western intelligence. As we discuss Rove's new book, I want to welcome the man that wrote the book on Karl Rove. Wayne Slater is the senior political writer for "The Dallas Morning News" and the co-author of "Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential."

Good to see you, Wayne.

WAYNE SLATER, SR. POLITICAL WRITER, "DALLAS MORNING NEWS": Great to be with you, Rick, as always.

SANCHEZ: Did you catch-I mean, it is-there's subtle things but he's so good; he's masterful. He drops the word "Western intelligence" there. Almost as if implying that we, the United States, were dragged into the Iraq war, kicking and screaming by all these foreigners who forced us to invade Iraq. Right?

SLATER: Yes. Absolutely. I think that one of the questions that's raised throughout in the book, in a whole lot of areas, and certainly in the WMD question, is did Bush lie us into war? I know there are liberals and there are folks who believe that Bush lied.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

SLATER: And Bush -- and Rove denies that. A better question is -- was there the selective use of intelligence, including American intelligence, not just all Western foreign intelligence, in which our guys, because the White House wanted to go to war, saw the -- documents that it wanted to see, reasons to go to war, and ignore the rest. SANCHEZ: It is called -- yes. We have a term for that where I grew up. It is called cherry picking. In other words, I don't like that. I like this. I'm going to only go over here and into this bushel and get these. Well, he's revealing and sharing the political blame with Democrats a lot. You noticed he talks about the Western governments. He talks about the Democrats. After all, they went along with everything here. Listen to a little bit of him with Wolf.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: One hundred ten Democrats vote for the authorization of the use of force of resolution, 67 of them stand up on the floor of the House and Senate, and including John Kerry, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Bob Graham, chairman of the in the Senate Intelligence Committee.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: He's right. You know what? He's right. The Dems did go along with this thing, hook, line, and sinker. Right?

SLATER: Absolutely they did. It is interesting because it is really part of what Karl does very well. Understand what this book is. I have read it. It is quite an interesting book. It is a full- throated defense of all things Bush, which is part of a legacy rebuilding project. Burnish the legacy, give Bush credit for everything that went right, blame the opponents and adversaries for everything that went wrong. In an odd way, what he is doing is blaming Democrats for the decision by the Bush administration, using flawed intelligence, to go to war. Very interesting.

SANCHEZ: But it is interesting because we are going through this thing where the Republicans won't go along with anything that this president wants to offer, President Obama. And now, he's essentially using the Democrats, and criticizing them for going along with everything that President Bush, back there, had to offer. And the reason they went along with it was because Karl Rove was so masterful at spinning the idiot media, and the rest of the folks in Washington, to think that if they didn't go along with it they would be unpatriotic.

SLATER: And you had him on the issue of weapons of mass destruction, Karl's apologia included a claim that those who weren't going along with us on this issue were implicitly unpatriotic, exactly as you say.

SANCHEZ: It is -- he's good, right?

SLATER: He's very good. Look, throughout the book, it is Democrats, the media, including yours truly, others -- who are critics and adversaries and including Democrats who raised questions about the existence of weapons of mass destruction, which in the end, Rick, did not exist. He also in effect --

SANCHEZ: We got that effect. Hold on. Stop right there. We have a sound bite on that. Play it. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: Right decision was made, Wolf, and the world is a better place for Saddam Hussein being gone from power and for the emergence of a democracy in the heart of the Middle East.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Can he have it both ways, though? Can he say the only reason we went to war was because of weapons of mass destruction. And then say, yes, it is true. There weren't any weapons of mass destruction, but it still was a great thing because we got rid of a bad guy?

SLATER: Well, that's the defense. It is not a very good defense. It was not the original defense. I think that one of the real problems with the Bush administration and Karl's argument is one of the people on the inside, Colin Powell, was used by Karl as an example of someone who went, looked at the evidence, made the speech to the U.N., and went along with - originally, with the early idea of something that wasn't true.

What we now know from Colin Powell, and from his adviser, Lawrence Wilkinson, his chief aide, Lawrence Wilkinson, is that Powell did not get all of the evidence. He did not know about all of the memos and that some of the key evidence against Saddam involving the mobile sites, that key evidence was from an absolute liar, who they called "Curveball" and

SANCHEZ: Yes.

SLATER: And who the Defense Department, who intelligence sources knew was false, but again, he was only getting pieces of the information, what the White House, Chaney and Bush and company and the neo-cons wanted to be presented, Colin Powell shows up before the United Nations, defends it, and next thing we know we are at war.

SANCHEZ: Yes. He's has backtracked on that, by the way. But look, this is a free country. Everyone has a right to spin anything they want to, in any way that they want to. I mean, that's why we are here on, to try to look at it objectively. And that's when we try to do.

Now here is something he does. He admits to one mistake on the war. That the White House should have done a better job of fighting back against critics who were saying look, there were no WMDs, so you were wrong. Here is how he puts it with Wolf.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: Some people say well, you know what, if you wrestle with a pig you are going to get muddy. Don't go down that-don't re-litigate the past. Some people were simply worn out and wanted to move on. But we should have.

(END VIDEO CLIP) SANCHEZ: I mean, here, this is kind of ironic. The king of spin is saying he didn't want to enter the spin zone, right?

SLATER: You got it exactly. Interesting thing, the intriguing thing to me, I know Karl very well, is that in the rare moment, where he admits some culpability, some responsibility, it is not that we did something that was wrong. It is not admitting to larger mistake. It is that we just didn't spin well enough to convince people to go along with us. He does this again and again, incidentally.

SANCHEZ: It is brilliant! Oh, my goodness. I love political discussions about stuff like this. People are interesting. I don't think-there are none as interesting as Karl Rove. I'm glad we had you on. You know the man as well as anybody. You wrote the book, as they say.

Appreciate it, Wayne. Good to see you again.

SLATER: Great to be with you.

SANCHEZ: By the way, we have some breaking news coming in now. Here we go. Just in. I'm being told there is a huge fire. And boy, it looks like a remote area. What could be on fire? What is this, Angie? A gas line. There is a gas line fire in Chandler, Oklahoma, just northeast, I'm being told, of Oklahoma City. Boy, look at this thing burn. I'm told that it is near a highway, Highway 66. Thank goodness it is an area where it shouldn't affect a lot of people.

Do we know what kind of gas this is? We don't. We don't know if it is a methane gas, or what it is at this point. There is no reason to speculate. Only we are getting these pictures in from our affiliate. We want to thank our affiliate for making these pictures available to us, at KOCO. As we get more information -- there is something here. Look at that there. I can't tell. Are those homes? Just charred ground? Looks like there are old cars or something. Looks like it is desolate area. But the pipe that goes underneath that area, lot of times these pipes are buried on the ground, seems to have burst and caught on fire. That's the situation.

If we get anything else we will certainly bring it back to this story and share with you the details.

Meanwhile, Wolf Blitzer is standing by now. Can't wait to get his take on Slater's take on, his conversation with Karl Rove. A lot of spinning there, I suppose. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back. THE LIST everyone is watching on Capitol Hill. How the votes are falling and House and latest health care bill. Capitol Hill unit, and best political team on television, have been tracking that vote for us every day. And after a day of meetings here is where it stands. Democrats need 216 votes to pass the bill in the House; so far 17 House Democrats have said that they will vote no on the bill as it is written today. Six of those voted yes on the first version. So far no Republicans say that they would support this version.

Along with the Nobel peace prize, President Obama won last year, he received $1.4 million. The White House said all along that money could go to charity. And it has. Now we know exactly which charities will be getting it. Let's bring in Wolf Blitzer.

This is good. The money is going to some interesting charities out there. Hey, you and I were involved in this Fisher House thing. They are getting $250,000. That's good, right?

BLITZER: They are getting, I think -- yes, $250,000. Fisher House a great, great program, a great project. All over the country, dealing with war veterans who need some housing. It is for the families, especially for the families who are watching something of these wounded vets go through some traumatic surgeries, and it is really a great program. This is the number one charity that he is giving money to from this $1.4 million, $250,000, which I'm sure will do some important work.

SANCHEZ: Lot of folks have been talking about this ever since he got it. There was a lot of heat on him at the time because he had just become president. People are saying well, how can he win this award? He hasn't done anything yet. But nonetheless, hey, here's some dough. He will give it to some -- organizations that really need it.

What do you think of my conversation with Wayne Slater? We were talking mostly about your interview with Karl Rove.

BLITZER: Karl Rove has a hot new book. I'm sure it will sell a lot of copies out there; it is 600 pages, 40 pages of footnotes. He's worked hard on this book and he basically defends his record, President Bush's record. He goes through every controversial issue not only the war in Iraq, but the Valerie Plame uproar, the former CIA clandestine officer, who was outed as a result of all of the intrigue, as you remember, at that time. Goes through Katrina. Look, he has his case, and he's making it very forcefully. He not a shy guy.

SANCHEZ: Masterful at being able to control the message, isn't he?

BLITZER: Well, he got the George W. Bush elected president twice. He was very impressive in both of those wins in 2000 and in 2004. He is one of the best political operatives out there. There is no doubt about that. He is very, very smart.

SANCHEZ: Yes. You know, when you look carefully, though, at the dicta, as they say, sometimes, like everyone else, but he's particularly good at it, from a Machiavellian standpoint, at making sure the message is delivered from his point of view. And our job is to make sure that both sides are heard in these cases.

BLITZER: Right.

SANCHEZ: Hey, do you think, while I have you, I know we just read over these numbers. They need 216 votes. I mean, what are you hearing? I mean, is it looking like they are going to be able to at least get this thing to a vote?

BLITZER: It doesn't look like they will do it by March 18th which is the day the president is leaving for his trip to Indonesia and Asia. That's the day he wanted the House to pass the Senate version.

Nancy Pelosi is making it clear right now she doesn't think that that deadline is necessarily all that firm. Look, she has the capability of bringing it up for a vote only when she is convinced they will have 216 yea votes. At this point she's not yet convinced. There's a very strong article, Michael Barone, wrote it on the op-ed page of "The Wall Street Journal" today, making the point that she's -- there's a very good chance he says - and he's been watching Congress and roll calls for a long time. He makes the case he doesn't think she will get that 216 vote tally, which would be a huge setback for the Democrats and president.

SANCHEZ: That's Barone's column, Michael Barone?

BLITZER: Yes. Go take a look at that column.

SANCHEZ: OK, good stuff. Thanks, Wolf. I appreciate it. We are looking forward to seeing you in a little bit, in "THE SITUATION ROOM. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Let's go back to that shot we were looking at a little while ago. Look at this thing. That's a pipeline, right? It is a gas line that has apparently split and it caused the explosion, which now has a fire going. Which you are going to -- I imagine to put this out, you have to eventually cut the fuel line, right? I mean, Reynolds Wolf is watching this for us as well.

Does not look like it is too windy at least, it is going to keep that fire going straight up.

REYNOLDS WOLF, CNN METEOROLOGIST: They have had a few gusts there, Rick. Certainly nothing of the -- we are not talking 40-mile- an-hour gusts, or anything like that. But to put this thing out, the first thing they will do, as you mentioned, cut the source. I'm not sure where in the world they would do that, but of course that is really going to be the main thing. Obviously, you are not going to -- water is not be a - something that is going to help aid battle this that is for sure.

SANCHEZ: I'm looking here at my Tweets. And I have somebody telling me that could be from a fault line in Oklahoma shifting. Are their faults, are there fault lines in Oklahoma? I know they are in the strangest places.

WOLF: There are some in the strangest places. There are some that are a little bit closer to say, like, St. Louis, that is one area. Most of them tend to be along towards the West Coast. There are some - on the East, but the ones most active, obviously, farther out west. SANCHEZ: There you go, new information. Thanks, Reynolds.

WOLF: You bet, man.

SANCHEZ: Here is Wolf Blitzer and there is "THE SITUATION ROOM."