Return to Transcripts main page
Rick's List
White House Apologizes to Shirley Sherrod; Interview With New York Congressman Anthony Weiner
Aired July 21, 2010 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Eric Boehlert, finally, where do we go moving forward? I mean, what is the lesson for all of us?
You know, it -- it so happened -- and we're feeling pretty good about this -- that we here at CNN were...
ERIC BOEHLERT, SENIOR FELLOW, MEDIA MATTERS: That's right.
SANCHEZ: ... Were pretty careful about this. I have explained to our viewers here on RICK'S LIST that we had the story Monday. And myself and several other executives and people on my staff, we talked about it, and we said, you know, we really don't have enough to go on. I think we are going to have to hold this, and maybe we will air it Tuesday, if we're able to get the things that we need journalistically before we put it on the air.
But is there a lesson here for all of us about the direction we're moving in, in this business and the impact especially of new media -- new media, blogs, for example, like Breitbart's?
BOEHLERT: The lesson is pretty simple. Don't believe anything Breitbart says and don't believe what you see on FOX News. It will save you a lot of time and effort.
SANCHEZ: All right. Eric Boehlert, obviously coming from a different perspective on this story, but he, too, like Mr. Breitbart, is a part of a blog that most would consider to be a -- a liberal blog, as discussed, obviously, on some conservative Web sites and on the conservative media, but he has much -- he has also been very much in play on this story. My thanks to him.
Oh, one other note, and I should probably say this to you before we move on. And I -- I wish I had said it when we first started this interview. We did ask Andrew Breitbart to join us on this show, as we did yesterday. And, as far as we know, he has not agreed to come on. If at any time he chooses to, he will have ample opportunity to express his point of view.
It is now hour two on the LIST. Here is where we are in our special report, "Race in America," Shirley Sherrod's story. If you haven't heard, the White House has apologized to Mrs. Sherrod. They did so while she was sitting right here listening, in fact, and smiling, I might add. And for the first time, you're hearing Sherrod's speech unedited.
We are the only broadcast network to bring you this entire speech, so, definitively, you can hear what she says for herself. You will hear everything, not just a small section that may be taken out of context. It's that out-of-context portion, in fact, that catapulted Sherrod into the national spotlight, the out-of-context part that had so many people calling Sherrod a racist, a racist who works for the fed who denies federal help to a white farmer.
She wasn't even working for the fed at the time. It's that out- of-context part that had Sherrod's bosses demanding her resignation. Since our show yesterday, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has acknowledged Sherrod's case merits a complete review. And the White House now says that Vilsack will acknowledge the mistakes that he made in this case.
Let's get you caught up on what we have heard so far. We have heard Sherrod talk about growing up in the South, how her father was killed 45 years ago by a racist. We haven't gotten to that part of what was taken out of context yet. That's deep into Sherrod's speech.
What we're going to hear now is Sherrod talking about how the murder of her father, something that was never in the Breitbart blog, the murder of her father, impacted her, her thinking, and her family. Here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHIRLEY SHERROD, FORMER USDA OFFICIAL: He didn't live to see him. My brother was born two months after he died, in June of '65.
We started the movement. But before I get there, I need to tell you something I -- and I want to say this to the young people. You know, I told how I looked forward and I dreamt so much about moving north and from the farm, especially in the South, and I knew that after -- on the night of my father's death, I felt I had to do something. I had to do something in answer to what had happened.
My father wasn't the first black person to be killed. He was a leader in the community. He wasn't the first one to be killed by white men in the county. But I couldn't just let his death go without doing something in answer to what happened.
I made the commitment on the night of my father's death, at the age of 17, that I would not leave the South, that I would stay in the South and devote my life to working for change. And I have been true to that commitment all of these 45 years.
You know, when you look at some of the things that I have done through the years and when you look at some of things that happened -- I went to school -- my -- my first two years at Fort Valley -- I know there are some Fort Valley graduates here, too -- I did my first two years at Fort Valley, but so much was happening back at home, and then I met this man here -- I will tell you a little about him -- that I transferred back to Albany State and did the last two years.
(LAUGHTER)
SHERROD: But two weeks after I went to school at Fort Valley, they called and told me that a bunch of white men had gathered outside of our home and burned the cross one night.
Now, in the house was my mother, my four sisters, and my brother, who was born June 6 -- and this was September. That was all in that house that night. Well, my mother and one of my sisters went out on the porch. My mother had a gun. Another sister -- you know some of this stuff, it's like movies, some of the stuff that happened through the years. I won't go into everything. I will just tell you about this.
One of my sisters got on the phone because we had organized a movement starting in June of '65, shortly -- not long after my father's death.
That's how I met my husband. He wasn't from the North. See, I was (INAUDIBLE). He's from up south, though, in Virginia.
(LAUGHTER)
SHERROD: But, anyway, they -- one of my sisters got on the phone and called other black men in the county. And it wasn't long before they had surrounded these white men. And they had to keep one young man from actually using his gun on one of them. You probably would have read about it had that happened that night.
But they actually allowed those men to leave. They -- they -- backed away and allowed them to get out of there.
But I won't go into some of the other stuff that happened that night, but do know that my mother and my sister were out on the porch with a gun, and my mother said, "I see you. I know who you are." She recognized some of them.
I should tell you that she became the first black elected official in Baker County just 11 years later, and she is still serving you all.
(APPLAUSE)
SHERROD: She's chair of the board of education, and she's been serving almost 34 years.
I didn't know how I would go about carrying out the commitment I made that night, but when the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (INAUDIBLE) he was the one who came to Albany and started the movement there in 1961. And he stayed.
You know, a lot of them went into the communities and they worked during the early part of the movement and they left. But he continued to stay in Southwest Georgia, and we've done a lot of stuff through the years. If -- some of the things that have happened to us, you would probably be on the edge of your seat if I were to tell you about some of them. We've been in some very, very dangerous situations through the years, but we continue to work.
And, you know, God is so good, because people like me don't get appointed to positions like state director of rural development. They just don't get these kinds of positions, because I have been out there at the grassroots level, and I paid some dues.
But when I made the commitment years ago, I didn't know how -- I didn't -- I just -- I didn't -- I prayed about it that night. And as our house filled with people, I was back in one of the bedrooms praying and asking God to show me what I could do. I didn't have -- the -- the path wasn't laid out that night.
I just made the decision to that I would stay and work. And -- and, over the years, things just happened.
And, young people, I just want you to know that, when you're true to what God wants you to do, the path just opens up, and things just come to you, you know.
(APPLAUSE)
SHERROD: God is good. I can tell you that.
When I made that commitment, I was making that commitment to black people, and to black people only. But, you know God will -- will show you things, and he will put things in your path, so that -- that you realize that the struggle is really about poor people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: And joining us once again is Brooke Baldwin to go through some of this.
You spent some time with her.
And I just want to clear something up, just to -- just to be real fair about this story, because I just had a conversation with Eric Boehlert.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes
SANCHEZ: We're also -- for those of you joining us a little bit late, we're giving you a chance to hear Shirley Sherrod's speech in its entirety, unedited, not selectively taken out of context, as many are now charging actually occurred.
But we just had a discussion about how this story got to the place where it was. And there's a lot of people now who are firing back. In fact, I have just been given a lot of information about some conservatives who are very angry at Andrew Breitbart and are questioning now his credibility.
But we were also raising the question of how the conversation took place at FOX News. And after my conversation with Eric Boehlert, I wanted to make sure I was fair with you in how we assess this. So, let's just be clear, because we did some double-checking, and I want to be as honest and as transparent as I possibly can with this story.
It does appear now that the first persons who picked it up after Breitbart was FOXNews.com. That's their -- their -- their news blog. It was in fact Bill O'Reilly -- on Bill O'Reilly's show -- who called for her resignation.
Bill O'Reilly called for her resignation after simply hearing the tape and seeing the information from Breitbart, it appears. At the time that he called for her resignation, she had not yet been disciplined or removed from her position by the Department of Agriculture, by Tom Vilsack.
Now, think about it. O'Reilly is asking for her resignation. Some of the other shows that came on after Bill O'Reilly do have some cover. They were reacting to the decision made by the Obama administration. They were reacting to the Department of Agriculture's discipline charges against her and the fact that they had removed her from -- or asked her to step down from her position.
But, prior to that, it was O'Reilly and it appears O'Reilly alone who actually asked for the resignation. Some would wonder whether Bill O'Reilly needs to apologize to her for that. And we will just have to wait and see.
In the meantime, Brooke Baldwin is joining me now.
Boy, I tell you, it's like trying to figure out a jigsaw puzzle with this...
(CROSSTALK)
BALDWIN: It is.
SANCHEZ: ... to see how all the parts -- but this is an important part of what is going on in this country. And I think maybe it's a learning experience for all of us.
In the meantime, you spent some time with Shirley today.
BALDWIN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: What a whirlwind for her. And I can just say this real quick, as I'm thinking about it, as I was sitting here watching her earlier today, some people in this world, when they're wronged, they turn inward or they become quiet or they're afraid that if they say too much, other things might come out.
BALDWIN: Not Shirley Sherrod.
SANCHEZ: This is a classic example of a woman who looked for the highest mountaintop -- and we were fortunate enough that that mountaintop was CNN -- to stand here and say, no, this is not true, what they're saying about me. I have been wronged. And I'm not going to stop until they hear my side of the story. I was just amazed by her reaction, and I thought I would point that out.
BALDWIN: And I think that's a good point and I think that's been kind of my rule today to talk to her about the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that were, in her words, spliced and diced out of that original speech that we saw. OK?
So, she talked a lot about her childhood. And why should we care, right? Why does that matter in this whole discussion? Well, she talked to me about, look, she grew up in the South here in Georgia. She talked about crosses being burned on her family's front lawn.
It was her father's murder, which we just heard about in that second piece of the speech. It was her father's murder. She wanted out of the South. She told me she never wanted to be a farmer. Shirley Sherrod was just 17.
Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: It was a white farmer who killed your father.
SHERROD: Right.
BALDWIN: It was a -- would you say it was a racist murder?
SHERROD: I'm certain it was.
BALDWIN: And the night that happened, you talk in the speech about making a commitment.
SHERROD: Yes.
You know, I felt -- I was the oldest at that point of five girls, with a baby on the way. I felt, as the oldest child, I needed to do something. I needed to do something.
The answer became very clear just a couple of months later, when we started the civil rights movement in my county, and we had the Student Nonviolent Working -- Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee members in there. My husband was the leader of it. And he wasn't my husband at the time. I later married him. But he was the leader of it.
And when I attended my first mass meeting and saw people who were living on plantations coming into that -- those mass meetings and talking about facing the giants, the white people who were there to deal with us when we would march and so forth, when I saw them being willing to do that, I just knew this was it. This would be the beginning of it. And that's where I started.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BALDWIN: And that was the beginning of when Shirley Sherrod really threw herself into the black farming movement, because at the time she told me, look, she thought it was a black-and-white thing, but, as she found out with the Spooners, which we're getting to, the most compelling stuff, it wasn't just black and white. It was something else. And she shared that with me a little later.
SANCHEZ: So, we're going to be able to hear in just a little bit how she describes why it is that her experience with the Spooners then made her understand how racism is not a good thing...
BALDWIN: The crux of this whole thing.
SANCHEZ: ... and that we should all fight against it. That was her point. How interesting that instead she was -- ended up being called a racist.
All right. We have talked about Breitbart. We have talked about FOX News. Well, what about the Obama administration? They're now admitting that they acted without all the facts.
But a woman lost her job over this whole thing. So, what should the White House, what should President Obama do now? We are going to be drilling down on this now with somebody who's been around the block with this kind of issue. CNN senior political analyst David Gergen who is going to join me live when this RICK'S LIST special report, "Race in America: Shirley's Story," continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. This is not your usual RICK'S LIST. We're doing another special report today.
We're calling this "Race in America: Shirley's Story," Shirley Sherrod's story. And it continues even as we speak.
I mentioned just as we were going to break to you that we need to analyze what happened at the White House and why the White House, according to Shirley Sherrod's accusation, made the decision to bump her through Tom Vilsack at the Department of Agriculture.
Well, listen, we just got this tweet from the Department of Agriculture. Look what's going to happen next. Take it, Robert, if you can. "Secretary Vilsack will now speak to members of the media and provide a statement regarding Shirley Sherrod at 4:45."
So, in about a half-hour from now, or less, we're going to be taking this news conference. They give you the address there. That's directly from the Department of Agriculture.
We go now to a man who's got an enormous amount of experience with this kind of thing. And I think he may be as frustrated and befuddled as the rest of us watching this thing unfold.
You know, David Gergen, I can't help but wonder if somehow the Obama administration in this case is going to be left eating crow. DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, it is. It already is, Rick.
I want to start out by saying I have no basis to be self- righteous about this. I have made mistakes when I was in the White House, including one on race that was -- to this day, I regret. It was during the Reagan years. And something came across my desk on a Friday afternoon. I signed off on it. We announced it that afternoon.
And, the next day, a reporter called and said, do you realize what you did? And I said, no, tell me. And he explained it. And I was appalled and humiliated that I had been involved in that decision.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Really?
(CROSSTALK)
GERGEN: We went in Monday morning...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: What did do you? Did you get somebody fired?
(CROSSTALK)
GERGEN: No. We let something go through, a policy recommendation that came from the Treasury Department regarding Bob Jones University, very racially sensitive. And we signed off on it, announced it on a Friday afternoon.
You know, a lot of things fly around the White House. You have got very little time sometimes to focus on things. But when we realized what we had done, Mike Deaver and Jim Baker and I and others were involved.
And Mike took a young African-American staff member in to talk to the president early Monday morning, talked it through, helped to understand it from the African-American perspective. We got it reversed that day at lunch, and because -- and we were all, I must say, shaken, because we had signed off on something we -- in retrospect, we had just wished we hadn't.
And we just blew it.
(CROSSTALK)
GERGEN: And so when you're sitting there in the White House, you -- so my argument about government is, people in government -- the important issue for people in government is not whether they're going to make mistakes. They're going to make mistakes.
SANCHEZ: Yes. GERGEN: The important thing is whether you correct and correct quickly, and to do it with the right sensitivities, especially on race.
SANCHEZ: Well, but here's the -- here's the difference, I think, David.
We're looking at a situation here where some would argue that the conservative echo chamber, that triad of, you know, FOX News on television, some of the very strong-willed conservative talk show hosts, and the blogs, when you put all of those three together, they are a force to be reckoned with.
Throw into that equation the fact that we have an African- American president dealing with a racial issue and would you then say that that may have led to their precipitous behavior?
(CROSSTALK)
GERGEN: In the White House?
SANCHEZ: Yes.
GERGEN: In the administration?
SANCHEZ: Yes, that they said, you know, we have got to act.
GERGEN: Absolutely.
I -- I think there's no -- I think there's no question that that happened. Listen, we know that on the media side that there's a food chain. And if you can put something in at the bottom of the food chain through the Internet and it gets picked up somewhere else, say on a do-com site, and then somebody puts it on the air, it ripples through.
And it's that old saying. You know, truth can travel halfway around the world before -- I mean, a lie can travel halfway around the world before truth can get its boots on. And if you can get a lie out into the public sector, it starts having a poisonous effect. And that's what happened here.
What -- what is surprising to me, in fact astonishing to me, is that the White House and the Treasury -- and the Agriculture Department seemed stampeded by what was coming out over FOX and what was sort of getting out into the culture.
There is -- if you're in the White House, it is important at all times to take that second look. And we didn't do that back in the Reagan years sometimes. I made mistakes like this. I understand it.
But it is important to be a little more deliberate if, after all, you are the elected official. And they fired a woman who was working -- for her -- due process for any employee requires that before you fire them, you get the facts. I don't care if she's white, black, or green. You owe that to her. And what is astonishing to me is, they got stampeded by the politics of this. It wasn't -- it wasn't the reality. It was what they were fearful of politically.
SANCHEZ: Anthony Weiner is joining us now.
By the way, we should make -- give some credit to Mark Twain for that story you just told about a lie going halfway around the world before it gets a chance to put its boots on.
Anthony Weiner joining us now, following this story as well.
Congressman, thanks for being with us.
What is your reaction to this story? And, if you could -- I know, you know, when you look at something like this, we're all wondering, well, where -- where was the biggest mistake made -- made that turned this into a tumultuous problem? What would your -- what would you say the mistake was?
(CROSSTALK)
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: Well, look. I think, for one thing, I think this is a learning moment.
And I think that Gibbs got it right. He walked around it a couple times, but ultimately got it right, to apologize. Ultimately, it seems the administration is getting it right to get this poor woman at least offered her job back. I don't know if she would still want it in this environment.
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Yes. She said she doesn't.
(CROSSTALK)
WEINER: First of all -- first of all, it is part of the Republican right echo chamber every time possible to stoke these things.
So, the first instinct has to be to not believe them. So, when someone like Breitbart, who is right maybe 5 or 6 percent of the time he puts something up, I think your first instinct should be to step back and try to get all the facts.
But it is very easy to say, you know, if CNN hadn't done that interview with her yesterday, I don't know if we still would have gotten to the bottom of this. It is very easy to take these momentary blips on the Internet and start to react to them. We all did it. The NAACP did it.
I think the bottom line here is, we have to learn from this that we can't judge someone on one sentence out of one speech in a lifetime of work. And maybe if that's the takeaway, we will be better off, both in the politics business and the media business, when we're done.
SANCHEZ: But, to be fair, by the way, to my colleagues and friends at FOX News, the whole network isn't like that.
There are only certain shows, some of them very noted in prime time, that have a tendency to run with this. Why is it so difficult for the White House and maybe other Americans, but specifically the White House -- these are supposed to be the really smart guys -- to not be able to tell the difference between commentary, opinion, bloviation, and a legitimate news story?
David?
WEINER: Well -- oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.
GERGEN: Go ahead, Congressman, please.
WEINER: Well, let me just say this.
First of all, you haven't been watching FOX News as much as I have then if you think that they don't bleed stories like this into their news coverage and treat them as big news stories every single day. They treated this one like a very big almost expose-level news story.
But the question is not who reacted and how. The question is whether or not the proper protocols are in place to take a step back and give people benefit of the doubt.
Mr. Gergen is exactly right. The first instinct should be in an administration is to support your employees unless you find out for sure they did something wrong. And in this case, if they would have taken a little bit more of a deep breath, I think we wouldn't have walked into this problem. But we are in that echo chamber in my line of work.
I have to tell you something. It doesn't take long for something to blow up.
SANCHEZ: David Gergen?
GERGEN: Well, I just want to say, Rick, just in fairness, we have seen the same thing happen on the left, as well as the right. You know, people feeding things into the food chain in order to expose or to put people or twist facts, you know, goes on across the spectrum, unfortunately.
And I think we have sort of seen -- just ripped away the veil, and we have seen the dark side of politics in all of this. What is still not completed and why we need -- what Secretary Vilsack is so important for is his own personal apology, as well as the reinstatement of Ms. Sherrod, as well as restoring her honor.
And I don't know whether they need to give -- you know, I think, as Americans have heard her story over the last 24 hours and saw it -- and I just think it was so valuable to play the speech -- they have become enormously sympathetic with who she is.
SANCHEZ: Yes. Yes.
GERGEN: And she is stepping forward now as a person we admire for rising above it.
(CROSSTALK)
GERGEN: The fact that her father was killed by white supremacists, and she is now in this place, it's unbelievable.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: And you ask yourself, why weren't those elements that you just mentioned in the original story? Why were they bypassed?
GERGEN: I agree totally with that.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Why did they...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Speaking of that, we want to be able to give the audience a chance to hear some of those elements.
So, with your permission, gentlemen, here is part three of Shirley Sherrod's real speech, the unedited version.
Let's listen together.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERROD: When I made that commitment, I was making that commitment to black people -- and to black people only. But, you know, God will show you things and he'll put things in your path so that -- that you realize that the struggle is really about poor people.
You know, the first time I was faced with having to help a white farmer save his farm, he -- he took a long time talking, but he was trying to show me that he was superior to me. I knew what he was doing, but he had come to me for help.
What he didn't know is, while he was taking all that time trying to show me he was superior to me, was I was trying to decide just how much help I was going to give him.
(LAUGHTER)
SHERROD: I was struggling with the fact that so many black people had lost their farmland, and here I was faced with having to help a white a person save their land. So, I didn't give him the full force of what I could do.
I did enough, so that when he -- I -- I assumed the Department of Agriculture had sent him to me, either that or -- or the Georgia Department of Agriculture. And he needed to go back and report that I did try to help him.
So, I took him to a white lawyer that we -- that had attended some of the training that we had provided, because Chapter 12 bankruptcy had just been enacted for the family farmer. So, I figured, if I take him to one of them, that his own kind would take care of him.
That's when it was revealed to me that it's about poor vs. those who have, and not so much about white -- it is about white and black, but it's not -- you know, it opened my eyes, because I took him to one of his own.
And I put him in his hand, and felt, OK, I have done my job. But, during that time, we would have these injunctions against the Department of Agriculture, and -- so they couldn't foreclose on him.
And I want you to know that the county supervisor had done something to him that I have not seen yet that they have done to any other farmer, black or white. And what they did to him caused him to not be able to file Chapter 12 bankruptcy.
So, everything was going along fine. I'm thinking he's being taken care of by the white lawyer. And then they lifted the injunction against USDA in May of '87 for two weeks. And he was one of 13 farmers in Georgia who received a foreclosure notice.
He called me. I said: "Well, go on and make an appointment at the lawyer. Let me know when it is, and I will meet you there."
So, we met at the lawyer's office on the -- on the date they had given him. And this lawyer sat there. He had been paying this lawyer, you all. That's what got me. He had been paying the lawyer since November, and this was May.
And the lawyer sat there and looked at him and said, "Well, you're all getting old. Why don't you just let the farm go?"
I could not believe he said that. So I said to the lawyer -- I told him, "I can't believe you said that." I said, "It's obvious to me if he cannot file a Chapter 12 bankruptcy to stop this foreclosure, you have to file an 11."
And the lawyer said to me, "I'll do whatever you say. Whatever you think." I said, well -- and he wasn't paying him (ph) any money.
So he said -- the lawyer said he would work on it. And then, He wasn't paying me any money. You know, so he said, the lawyer said he would work on it. And then about seven days before tha that land would have been sold at the courthouse steps, the farmer called me and said the lawyer wasn't doing anything. And that's when I spent time there in my office calling everybody I could think of to try to see -- help me find a lawyer who would handle this. And finally, I remembered that I had gone to see one just 40 miles away in Americus with a black farmer. So, working with him made me see that it's really about those who have versus those who don't.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's right.
SHERROD: You know. And they could be black. They could be white. They could be Hispanic. And it made me realize then that I needed to work to help poor people, those who don't have access the way others have.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SHERROD: That is remarkable when you think about it. Not only did she not give him less of an effort as everyone in America seemed to believe a couple of days ago, if you listen to her full story she went above and beyond the call of most bureaucrats in this case following this farmer and his wife around until she thought they had gotten the kind of service that they deserved.
By the way, one quick note. You saw that there was a dissolve in that video, right? And we told you, we did not edit this video.
We did not. That is -- the photographer that day who was shooting that speech changed his tape, took out one tape and put in another, and that's why you see that dissolved. We at CNN did not do that.
Breaking news now. Brianna Keilar joining us from Washington.
This is about Tom Vilsack I presume, Brianna. What do you have?
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Actually, what we know, Rick, is that after Secretary Vilsack gives his statement at the Department of Agriculture, he is going to be coming up here to Capitol Hill.
He's going to be meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus, which is a group of dozens of black lawmakers here. We just heard this from Congressman Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri. And he has been facing a lot of pressure from them even before the full context of Shirley Sherrod's comments came out.
There were members of the Black Caucus who said why did the Department of Agriculture move so quickly here and jump on this? And just talking with Congressman Cleaver, we were talking about the statement that Vilsack is about to make here shortly that we'll be covering here on CNN, and Cleaver said, "It better be a good one."
A lot of black lawmakers up here, Rick, feel like the administration had a knee-jerk reaction and acted too quickly without the full story -- Rick.
SANCHEZ: Interesting.
Congressman Weiner, are you still with us? Your reaction to that news, that apparently the Obama administration has some, as they say, some explaining to do and they're going to be doing it to the Black Caucus?
WEINER: Well, Press Secretary Gibbs basically said the same thing. Tom Vilsack is a good man, and I think he's a good secretary of Agriculture. I think he would be the first to admit they got this wrong, but it's very easy to point fingers here.
I have to tell you something. Just about all across the political spectrum, that first tape that we all saw seemed like this was a groundball, it was someone who said something inappropriate.
SANCHEZ: Yes, that is fair.
WEINER: The problem is that that kind of thing catches fire. It clearly caught fire here. And I'm just glad that at the end of the day, America got to see that speech to see how one sentence taken out of context cannot only get it slightly wrong, but get it completely wrong.
SANCHEZ: The truth is a wonderful thing, isn't it?
Were you taken aback when you just listened to that, David Gergen, about how she went on to tell that not only was she not giving improper service, as we first heard, but then she went beyond the call and followed them around, went to Americus, Georgia, a place you're familiar with? Habitat for Humanity's birthplace and the place where they coordinate it there.
Did the person who then told the story -- I suppose we have to go back to Mr. Andrew Breitbart -- did he know that was there, you believe, and intentionally ignored it, or did he just hear the first part of what she said, turned off the tape, and wrote his blog?
GERGEN: He hasn't told us the answer to that question to the best I understand it, Rick. I think he owes a much fuller explanation to the public. He owes a much fuller explanation to conservatives.
And it's going to be interesting to see how they respond to him, because he's hurt the cause. He's hurt a lot of people, including, first and foremost, Ms. Sherrod. But he hurt a lot of other people.
Now, coming to Tom Vilsack and the Agriculture Department, listen, there is something here that I think the government is required to meet a higher standard, frankly, than others in the press or elsewhere in the sense that she worked for the government, she was their employee. And I do think that when it comes to an employee, you've got a higher standard to meet to ensure that you're treating them fairly. And that they did not take the time but instead were stampeded reflects very poorly on their judgment.
And there is a second issue here, Rick. Secretary Vilsack -- she says that when she was called by the Agriculture Department by people lower down, they said the White House was pressuring them to get this done. Secretary Vilsack said, I made the decision, nobody from the White House called me. He has to answer the question now, did the White House call anybody else on his staff?
SANCHEZ: Good point.
GERGEN: Not just him. Did they call anybody else? Because we deserve to know the answer to that question.
SANCHEZ: We'll see if we hear that in just a little bit. I think he is going to be taking questions from reporters.
Before we go to Secretary Vilsack, though, here is the rest of the unheard speech, unedited, that we've made a decision we want you to hear.
Gentlemen, here we go.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERROD: And it made me realize then that I needed to work to help poor people, those who don't have access the way others have. I want to just share something with you, and I think it helps to -- you know, when I learned this, I was like, oh, my goodness.
You know, back in the late 17th and 18th century, there were black indentured servants and white indentured servants. And they all would work for the seven years and get their freedom. And they didn't see any difference in each other.
Nobody worried about skin color. They married each other, you know. These were poor whites and poor blacks in the same boat. They were slaves, but they were both slaves, and both had the opportunity to work out of slavery.
But then they started looking at the injustices that they faced and started then trying -- you know, the people with money, you know, they started -- the poor whites and poor blacks, you know, they married each other, they lived together, they were just like we would be. And they started looking at what was happening to them and decided we need to do something about it. You know, about this.
Well, the people with money, the elite, decided, hey, we need to do something here to divide them. So that's when they made black people servants for life. That's when they put laws in place forbidding them to marry each other. That's when they created the racism that we know of today.
They did it to keep us divided. And it started working so well, they said, gosh, it looks like we've come upon something here that could last generations. And here we are over 400 years later, and it is still working.
What we have to do is get that out of our heads. There is no difference between us. The only difference is that the folks with money want to stay in power, and whether it's health care or whatever it is, they'll do what they need to do to keep that power.
(APPLAUSE)
SHERROD: It's always about money, you know.
I haven't seen such mean-spirited people as I've seen lately over this issue of health care. Some of the racism we thought was buried, didn't it surface?
Now, we endured eight years of the Bushes, and we didn't do the stuff these Republicans are doing because you have a black president.
(APPLAUSE)
SHERROD: I wanted to give you that little history, especially to young people. I want you to know they created it, you know, not just for us, but we got the brunt of it because they needed to elevate whites just a little higher than us to make them think they were so much better and they would never work with us, you know, to try to change the situation that they were all in.
But where am I going with this? You know, I couldn't say 45 years ago -- I couldn't stand here and say what I will say to you tonight. Like I told you, God helped me to see that it's not just about black people, it's about poor people.
And I've come a long way. I knew that I couldn't live with hate. You know, as my mother had said to so many, if we had tried to live with hate in our hearts, we'd probably be dead now.
But I've come to realize that we have to work together. And, you know, it's sad that we don't have a room full of white and blacks here tonight, because we have to overcome the divisions that we have. We have to get to the point where, as Toni Morrison said, "Race exists, but it doesn't matter."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Breaking news coming into us as we conclude the part of the speech that we've been listening to from Shirley Sherrod.
I understand that Karrah Kaplan is joining us now. She's one of our CNN producers who has been traveling with Shirley Sherrod. I believe that she is reporting to us that she's just received a phone call.
Karrah, are you there?
KARRAH KAPLAN, CNN PRODUCER: Yes, I'm here.
SANCHEZ: What phone call did she get and from whom? And what did it say?
KAPLAN: Shirley just gave me a call, and she knew she wouldn't be able to be on the phone in the next hour or so, and she wanted me to let you know that she did receive a call moments ago from Secretary Vilsack. He apologized to her for the experience that she's gone through in her past. He apologized for the experiences she's gone through in the last few days. He did offer her a position within the department, and she said she needed a few days to think about it.
SANCHEZ: So he not only apologized, but he's offered her -- I guess the way you phrased it, it sounds like he didn't give her back her job. He is offering her a different position?
KAPLAN: Yes. She said that he didn't offer her back the same position, but he offered her back -- I guess she said it's still something that needs to be worked out, but a position within the department.
SANCHEZ: How did she sound to you? Did she sound -- I mean, this woman has been through a heck of a lot over the last 48 hours, so many ups and downs. Did she sound like she was excited about it?
KAPLAN: Yes. I mean, she sounded like she had a lot to think about.
I think she really sounded like she wanted to continue the work she's been doing. But obviously given what's happened over the last few days, I think she needed a few days to think about it and think whether or that was the right move she should take or not. And, you know, it's definitely something she said a few times, that she wanted a few days to think about it.
SANCHEZ: And Karrah, just to be clear, the phone call came from not the Department of Agriculture, but from Secretary Vilsack himself, right?
KAPLAN: Yes. I asked her a few times, actually read her back what I was going to tell you guys just to clarify. And I said, "Now, this call came from Secretary Vilsack?" And she said yes.
SANCHEZ: Hey, Karrah, thanks so much for bringing us up to date on that.
David Gergen, we're expecting Secretary Vilsack to come to the microphones any moment now, and he is going to address this issue. Now we understand what the timeline was. First he calls her, then he tells, I guess, the rest of the country what he did.
What do you make of this?
GERGEN: Well, good for him for calling her. I'm glad he apologized. I'm glad he sort of manfully stepped up to it.
It's very important now, Rick, to know, what job is he talking about? It strikes me that if he's moving her into some sort of bureaucracy, moving her out of the field, that may not be something she really wants to do.
I would think he would give her a choice if she wants to go back to the old job or she wants to go on to a different job so that she has a range of options, not something where she thinks I'm being sort of shuttled off to the side. I think this woman needs a full reinstatement or a promotion. Nothing less will do.
SANCHEZ: Did you -- by the way, just a programming note for the sake of our viewers as we continue our discussion with David Gergen. Brooke Baldwin is hanging out over here with us as well. She has been bringing us information from the stories that she's been gathering in her conversations today, spending part of her day with Shirley Sherrod herself.
We are expecting this news conference now from Secretary Vilsack.
Hey, Rog, do we have a shot of it yet? We don't?
Because oftentimes when we get the shot -- do we know where it's coming from? Is it going to be from his office? Do we know?
It's going to be from the Department of Agriculture.
I'm interested -- as soon as we get a shot up, that usually means that things are going to be moving.
David, when you heard her say there at the end that -- I guess she was putting the whole story together, as storytellers often do. And it seemed to me, as we say to our kids when we tell them stories before putting them to bed, that the moral of the story was that she had learned from her experiences and learned that it's not about the color of your skin, that it's about other things in life. That seemed to be what I was listening to her say, right?
GERGEN: I think it was. And I have to tell you, Rick, I don't want to put her on too high a pedestal. I don't think she would want that.
But I kept thinking about Nelson Mandela as I heard her story, because he had to overcome the same sort of hatred on both sides. And he became this larger-than-life figure. And I think we all loved him and revered him because he was able to grow like that. And there is that quality about her story.
And as you know, so many of us who come from the South have lived with race and have had to sort of struggle, sometimes had to struggle in our souls to reach this plane. And she sort of reached this place of ascendance, which I really respect in her.
SANCHEZ: Well, you know, this is where it gets very different. Not too many of us can say that our -- one of our parents was killed by a racist.
GERGEN: No, absolutely. I mean, that's the thing. To come back from that and say I still -- and have -- I don't know if you heard on "ANDERSON COOPER 360" last night, but the farmer was on there and she was on there, and they were talking.
I think they both thought they were off the air. And it was such a warm, heartwarming story to hear them, or just the conversation, because they really cared for each other.
And she asked him, "Do you still have that pond out on your farm? I want to come down and see you."
There was something so human about it that transcended race. And it's part of what the South -- the better parts of the South have become. And it is a very, very moving part of the American national story.
SANCHEZ: It's interesting that we began with this debate between the NAACP and the Tea Party. Then it turned into the firing of a Tea Party member and a bit of a rift between some members of the Tea Party and other members of the Tea Party. And then as the week progressed, it turned into this situation with Shirley Sherrod and the rest of the country looking on wondering, OK, what's going to happen next?
Brooke Baldwin has been following this as well here, David, and she has been looking at this situation, spending time with Shirley today.
Go ahead, Brooke.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I just want to get in this final snippet just to underscore the crux of her speech that was missing earlier, as she would say, and that is the fact that this, as she realized with the Spooner story, this was not about black and white. She said this was about the haves and the have-nots.
Let me play this epiphany for you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: This is the big "ah-ha" moment that you talk about in your speech, where before you thought it was just a black/white thing.
SHERROD: Right.
BALDWIN: You realized it's not black/white, it's rich/poor.
SHERROD: That's right. That's exactly right. That's my whole point, you know, in telling the story.
Working with the Spooners helped me to see that some white farmers get treated just like black farmers. So it wasn't about black farmers versus white farmers. Yes, black farmers were losing land at an alarming rate, and a much faster rate than white farmers. But it was more about poor people, those who have versus those who don't.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: And that was her whole point.
SANCHEZ: That's the point that she was trying to make.
David Gergen, that whole thing with the Farm Act, that goes back to your time, right? Were you involved in that?
GERGEN: I wasn't directly involved with that, but growing up white in the South, in which it was a segregated South -- and I grew up in North Carolina -- I can tell you that for many of us, some of our most -- biggest transitions in life came when we came to appreciate the black point of view, the black perspective.
You couldn't walk in their moccasins, but you could listen and you could begin to empathize with their perspective. And here, what's so remarkable is it's the African-American. The oppressed person is the one who's actually empathizing with the white, the person coming from the dominant position, and beginning to understand life from his perspective is very tough, and it's because he's poor.
And she relates to him and she comes to care for him because he's poor, not because he's white. And that is what makes this so moving, is the person from essentially the inferior position is relating to the dominant person, and she becomes sort of more transcendent as a result.
I think that's what gives this story a special poignancy, that she was able to grow like this and forgive, you know, what had happened essentially. She can't forget, but she can forgive the hatred that was shown to her parents, to her father, the murder of her father, the cross on the lawn, those kind of things.
For a woman to grow out of that and reach the point she has I think is a remarkable story. And it does reflect again the best strands of America. At a time we're looking at the dark side of politics, here she comes along and shows us what's still good about America and what we can still look up to.
SANCHEZ: David Gergen, the man who's a bit of a sage around here and has a wonderful way of expressing things sometimes. I simply didn't want to get in your way.
The break will though, because we've got to get a commercial in real quick.
Stay with us.
When we come back, you see the picture there.
In fact, Rog, if you could, let's take that full so you can see.
I think we finally got it now. There it is. That's the podium.
That's where Secretary Vilsack is going to come back in just a moment and give the comment that so many Americans have been waiting to hear, and certainly Shirley Sherrod has been waiting to hear, although we understand he just called her a little while ago.
Brooke Baldwin is going to stick around. She's going to be with me when we come back. Hopefully we'll be able to go right to that news conference.
You're watching a special edition of RICK'S LIST. This is "Race in America: Shirley's Story."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SANCHEZ: Here now, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.
Let's go live.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
TOM VILSACK, .U.S. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE: -- in the airport.
In the conversation, I started off by extending to her my personal and profound apologies for the pain and discomfort that has been caused to her and to her family over the course of the last several days. I wanted to give her the opportunity to express what I'm sure has been an extraordinary range of emotions that she must have had and still probably does have, but she was extraordinarily gracious. I wanted to make sure that she understood that I regretted the circumstances and that I accepted full responsibility for them.
We talked briefly about the process, and then I asked if she would be interested in figuring out a way forward that would take advantage of the extraordinary life experiences that she's had. She has been a claimant in a case against the United States Department of Agriculture and has experienced some of the prejudice and bias that we still today are dealing with in terms of claims against the department.
She's had a broad range of experiences at USDA and understands many of the programs in USDA. She has an extraordinary history of helping individuals in trouble, and of course she has gone through a very difficult period in the last couple of days. As a result of that experience, she has a unique set of skills which I think would lend themselves to assisting and helping USDA as we deal with trying to turn the page on our civil rights chapter which has been difficult.
For the last 18 months we've spent a good deal of time and effort in an effort to try to resolve thousands of claims that have been filed against the USDA. We're continuing that work. And we had an opportunity to discuss a unique opportunity here at USDA that might be of interest to her. She asked for the opportunity to think about it, which I certainly respected.
Again, I expressed my deep regret and apology to her and to her family, and advised her that I would be meeting with the press to publicly apologize to her and to express publicly my regret.
So with that --
QUESTION: Secretary Vilsack, you say that you accept full responsibility. You clearly seemed to have jumped to conclusions, this agency did, early on.
Why did you jump to conclusions? Was there pressure from the White House to make a quick conclusion here?
VILSACK: No. There was no pressure from the White House.
QUESTION: Was there any communication between this agency, anyone in this agency and the White House, consulting on this?
VELSHI: No. This was -- I want to make sure everyone understands. This was my decision, and it was a decision that I regret having made in haste.
You ask why. For the last 18 months we have really focused on trying to address the longstanding history of civil rights claims against the department. They're outstanding claims brought by black farmers, Hispanic farmers, women farmers, Native American farmers. And these are not just a few incidents or a few isolated claims. These are tens of thousands of claims that have been brought against the department.
I made it as a goal when I took this office that we would try to reverse that history, we would try to close that chapter; that we would be a department that would not tolerate in any way, shape, or form discrimination. I still hold that belief very firmly, and I know Shirley does as well.
I've learned a lot of lessons from this experience in the last couple of days, and one of the lessons I learned is that these types of decisions require time. I didn't take the time. I should have.
And as a result, a good woman has gone through a very difficult period. And I'll have to live with that for a long, long time.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, (INAUDIBLE) from the "CBS Evening News."
When you made the decision to dismiss Ms. Sherrod, had you seen her full remarks, in their full context, or had you only seen the clip that was posted on the Web?
VILSACK: I saw a transcript because I was out of the office. I was in Ohio. I saw a transcript.
QUESTION: Was that of the whole speech or was that from the clip from the Web site?
VILSACK: No, no. It was just of a portion of it.
QUESTION: Ms. Sherrod has told -- this is Rachel (ph) (INAUDIBLE) from CNN -- Ms. Sherrod has told CNN that Cheryl Cook called her and asked her to resign, and that she said tha the White House had made this decision to put the pressure on her.
Are we going to be able to hear from Mrs. Cook? Is that true?
VILSACK: You know, I think that -- first of all, I indicated to Shirley my personal regret and my responsibility for the fact that she received multiple phone calls. That's again a problem that I could have corrected if I had done this job properly.
Having said that, there was no pressure from the White House here. This was my decision. I obviously was not party to those conversations. It may very well be that during the course of the conversation, Ms. Cook indicated that a White House liaison had been contacted, but I don't know that she necessarily indicated that there was any pressure, because that was not the case. This was something I decided, and I have to accept full responsibility for this.
QUESTION: So what does that mean, a White House liaison?
VILSACK: We have a number of people in the White House that we communicate with from time to time when there are issues just to keep them informed. And I -- this was my decision.
I mean, you know, I appreciate the concerns that folks are expressing, but this was my decision. And I made it in haste.
EVAN MCMORRIS-SANTORO, "TALKING POINTS MEMO": Secretary, Evan McMorris-Santoro, "Talking Points Memo."
What do you say to other employees of the Agriculture Department? And are you worried that something (ph) might come up about them on the Internet and they might end up facing the same kind of problems that Ms. Sherrod faced?
VILSACK: Well, you know, this is a teachable moment for me and I hope a teachable moment for all of us. I think it is important to understand that each of us represents this department, each of us represents the administration and the president, and that we've got to be very careful about our actions and our words.
