Return to Transcripts main page
Rick's List
Tropical Depression Threatens Gulf of Mexico; Journalism in America
Aired July 22, 2010 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(VIDEO CLIP IN PROGRESS)
GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, (R) CALIFORNIA: Last week, I lifted 375 pounds -- yes, 375 pounds.
(APPLAUSE)
SCHWARZENEGGER: I lifted Rush Limbaugh out of the chair.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
KAREEN WYNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And he goes on and on, Rick.
(LAUGHTER)
WYNTER: By the way, Gibson -- a rep for Gibson says he is happy Schwarzenegger is maintaining a sense of humor here, perhaps paving the way for a return to showbiz. This has got to be one of the most bizarre stories.
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, that was a heck of an audition.
My thanks to you, Kareen Wynter. Good report. Thanks for bringing us up to date on that story that doesn't seem to want to go away.
As we begin the next newscast, I'm honored to report that we're the news of record for American Forces Network at this hour. We welcome all the troops that are watching us from all over the world as part of our national conversation.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: Here is what is making the LIST today.
ANDREW BREITBART, PUBLISHER, BREITBART.COM: This was not about Shirley Sherrod.
SANCHEZ: Who is Andrew Breitbart? And why did the White House believe him?
I suggested on air that Bill O'Reilly may need to apologize.
(on camera): Some would wonder whether Bill O'Reilly needs to apologize to her for that. And we will just have to wait and see.
(voice-over): Did he? And what's the state of journalism in America?
Look at what is heading for the Gulf. I am going to tell you why a left turn could be real bad news.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're driven and motivated by hate.
SANCHEZ: This is who he's talking about. This controversial Border Patrol activist has links to others in neo-Nazi groups. What does he believe? I will ask him in a must-see interview.
And: Ahh.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And there's a buffalo.
SANCHEZ: One with nature. Isn't that amazing?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh (EXPLETIVE DELETED).
SANCHEZ: Run for the hills in the "Fotos" list.
The lists you need to know about. Who's today's most intriguing? Who's landed on the list you don't want to be on? Who's making news on Twitter? It's why I keep a list.
Pioneering tomorrow's cutting-edge news right now.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: And hello again, everybody. I'm Rick Sanchez.
We're going to begin this hour with this question. Why was the Obama administration so quick to judge a woman who appears to be a decent public servant based solely on the word of a blogger and that -- not just any blogger, but a very controversial blogger. His name is Andrew Breitbart.
He is the one who selectively pulled a portion of a speech completely out of context that made Shirley Sherrod appear to be a racist. We know that now, but before we knew that, here's what Mr. Breitbart told John King.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "JOHN KING USA")
BREITBART: My problem is not with Shirley Sherrod. My problem is with the double standard in the media, that it's willing to -- to play up that the -- that the Tea Party is racist, without any evidence. This is my evidence to the NAACP that they condoned racism at a freedom dinner around a group that's supposed to be about non- discrimination.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Although the record seems to be clear now that the audience really was not applauding or condoning racism. What they were applauding was a woman who said that she had learned to not use race or racism as her guide.
Breitbart is not doing interviews now, but he does have a history, and we keep lists on this show, and here's one that I want to share with you about Mr. Breitbart. I think it's important, and let's start with number five. Yes, it's a list. He began his career at The Drudge Report, did you know? He started out working for Matt Drudge and his Drudge Report Web site, which often features stories with a conservative slant.
Drudge reportedly introduced Mr. Breitbart to Arianna Huffington, and he later went on to help her develop her Web site, The Huffington Post.
Number four, he is the founder of Breitbart.com. His own Web site says it offers real-time access to top news and analysis and gives people access to raw news feeds. But it wasn't until at least a day later that they posted the unedited version of Sherrod's remarks.
Number three, frequent FOX News guest, he is, and his stories often get picked up by outlets like FOX News, which is where his stories often also gain traction.
Number two, remember ACORN? Breitbart.com was the original distributor of the now infamous ACORN tapes, where a Breitbart protege and a conservative filmmaker, along with a female filmmaker and a female associate, posed as a pimp and a prostitute to get advice from ACORN employees.
Well, the California attorney general investigated those tapes and found that they were -- quote -- "a highly selective editing of reality." Remember those words, "selective editing of reality." In the end, ACORN's fall, its demise, can be traced in large measure to those tapes.
Here's number one. Breitbart has become an influential member of the Tea Party movement through his Web site and through his FOX News appearances. Breitbart is, in fact, so closely aligned with the Tea Party movement that he was invited to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, where he introduced Sarah Palin.
So, now let's move beyond Breitbart, as we understand this story, because he did not work alone. FOX News Channel picked up the story, but, in fairness to them, they were given some cover, because they reported it in large measure after the USDA had already, as some have characterized it, thrown Shirley Sherrod under the bus.
So, they reported after the government made its decision. However, Bill O'Reilly called her out, in fact, called for her resignation before Sherrod was forced to resign, before he heard the true complete story. And it's why yesterday, while I was -- we as a network were figuring out what the actual timeline was, because this thing was happening so fast, I actually suggested that maybe O'Reilly should do -- well, here it is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: 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...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: So, did he apologize to her for that? Yes, he did.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE O'REILLY FACTOR")
BILL O'REILLY, HOST, "THE O'REILLY FACTOR": So, I owe Ms. Sherrod an apology for not doing my homework, for not putting her remarks into the proper context.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: But we should add that he also went on to say during that same program last night that she shouldn't be trusted to serve in a public capacity.
And then his guest Dick Morris -- used to work during the Clinton administration and then has been a FOX -- since then been a FOX News analyst -- he came on and he called her the next Joycelyn Elders of the Obama administration.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE O'REILLY FACTOR")
O'REILLY: Not so much rash, but I did not analyze the entire transcript, and that was unfair to Ms. Sherrod, as I have said. She does deserve to be treated fairly.
But, on the matter of her world view, "Talking Points" believes it's very clear Ms. Sherrod may very well see things through a racial prism and did make political statements under the USDA banner.
Should she be doing the people's business with that kind of resume? I don't think so. She should be in the private or charity sector.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Some of what you have just seen is information that you may have already known, but it's leading to another and perhaps a more important question that many people are now asking around the country.
What does all of this that's transpired over the last 48 to 72 hours really say about the current state of journalism in America, and is it possible that ideologically-driven journalism is not good for America?
That is what is being suggested by many ethic -- ethicists and critics around the country. Coming up, we are going to talk to a media critic from "The St. Petersburg Times" who has a lot to say on that topic. In fact, that's -- that's -- that's a large -- that's a large part of his argument, that ideologically-driven media is bad for America. Think about that for a moment.
Also, the Gulf and parts of Florida are on alert this hour. As crude oil sits in the water, folks are watching the weather and waiting for trouble from the tropics. Chad Myers has been diligently following this all day long. He's going to tell us what happens if it goes this way or what happens if it goes that way.
And, of course, the Shirley Sherrod firestorm continues. The blogs and media certainly played a major role, but, again, wait until you hear the trends we're finding in the coverage of the controversy. That's next right here on your national conversation.
We are "RICK'S LIST".
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: There is a conversation that somehow is getting lost in this Shirley Sherrod firestorm, a conversation that a lot of not -- not -- not many folks are having, and yet some are, but we're having it right here, and we think it's important.
There's a popular saying: Don't always believe everything that you read.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: But, these days, in this culture of clash, the same goes for believing what you see and what you hear. The first second that we here at CNN heard about the Shirley Sherrod tape was Monday at about 11:00, I understand. We were very careful not to rush it to air. Were we a little tempted by it? Yes, but we didn't, because in journalism asking the tough questions and digging for the truth is the core of what we do.
Finding the whole story is how we do it. All we can promise you is, look, not perfection, far from it, but rather that we will do our very best to fulfill that day in and day out, which is why Monday at 11:00, when one of my colleagues, Jim Lemay (ph), came and said, take a look at this tape, he and I and many other people here at CNN then had discussions about how we would handle it, and we decided we just weren't ready to air it until maybe the next day, if then.
But then the story went, and you know the rest. So, over the last couple days, there's been a debate about this in the journalism community and with people around the country. The developments and -- and the facts that you heard right here forced other news networks to play catchup.
It exposed the commentators as well who often shout opinions. It even forced the leaders of this country to examine their actions and to be held accountable. That's heck of a thing to say, all over one story.
That's not how we played it. It's just the hand that we were dealt as we kept following the story and then uncovering, you know, layer after layer after layer. It's like un-peeling an onion.
Today, we're talking to a media writer who is calling out news organizations. He, too, has been giving this story a lot of thought and watched it as it's developed. He says that ideologically-driven news is hurting America, and -- and -- and there's a blurred line that he wants to make clear.
I mean, I'm being transparent about this here, because the facts, I know, matter to you, and -- and they matter to journalism. And we are, after all, as many say, the very first drafts of history that we write every single day.
Up next, we're analyzing some very disturbing trends in today's media world, our world. And I'm going to warn you, I mean, there are some big elephants in the room that we're going to be talking about.
Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Hi, everybody. Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
The Shirley Sherrod story has prompted plenty of finger-pointing. Who did what, and when, and, more importantly, why? But what about the role of some of the news outlets that have been involved in this?
"The St. Petersburg Times" media critic has written a scathing commentary that caught our attention of the mainstream media and says it contributed to the assassination of Ms. Sherrod's character.
Eric Deggans called out a particular news organization when he posed the following question: "Shouldn't someone be asking why organizations such as FOX News Channel, a cable channel with news in its title, passed along the clip without vetting it? This, in the end, is the value of transparency in media organizations, so you know why something happened when they get a story wrong."
It's an interesting question.
And joining me now is the man who wrote the remarks, "St. Petersburg Times"' TV and media critic, Eric Deggans.
Mr. Deggans, thank you so much for being with us. We certainly appreciate your time. You seem to have a broader problem with what's going on in the media right now. You seem to be saying -- and I mentioned this to our viewers just a little while ago -- that you believe ideologically- driven news organizations are doing a disservice to Americans.
ERIC DEGGANS, "THE ST. PETERSBURG TIMES": Well, one of the things I said was ideologically-driven media outlets, because what I wanted to include was Web sites like Breitbart's Web site, because he's established this dynamic where he uncovers things that he says are news, and he reveals them on his Web site, and then they become a part of the general news mix through the controversy he creates and the excitement he creates.
He pulls mainstream news organizations into covering the issue on the terms that he -- that he chooses. And I think that was something that we saw happen, for example, in the ACORN videos that you talked about earlier, and this is also something that almost happened and sort of happened and kind of happened in the Sherrod case.
SANCHEZ: Well, let me ask you about something, because, when we talk about somebody being ideologically-driven. Back, I believe it was, in the 1960s and '70s in the news organization, there was a shift. And I can tell from you experience.
Suddenly, consultants started coming into the business and telling us how we really needed to know our audience and we need to target audiences. So if you're targeting a specific audience and you want to push their buttons, aren't you going to have a certain ideology that you know fits their thinking, fits their to-be-pushed buttons?
DEGGANS: Well, I think, in journalism especially, it's important to be aware of the values that you're using to make judgments.
And certainly you want to appeal to your audience. You want to know what your target audience values, but, as a journalism organization, your highest values should be accuracy and fairness.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Yes, but when you get to the point...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But when you...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But hold on a moment. Let me give you an example, and -- and -- and we will just use them because they are the ones that are in the mix now, but it can also fit other news organizations, but let -- let's look at FOX.
Let me ask you a question. These stories that they have run with that most people haven't, the New Black Panther Party, the Van Jones story, the ACORN story, the Shirley Sherrod story, do you see that some of those stories have something in common?
(LAUGHTER)
DEGGANS: Other than the fact that scary black people are supposedly at the heart of a lot of them?
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Well, what is -- what is...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, no, no, I'm serious now. I'm quite serious.
DEGGANS: Sure. I know you're being serious.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: And this is not to demean or criticize FOX.
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: I'm being facetious, but I'm making a serious point, which is...
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: ... that's something that -- that troubles me a lot.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, what is FOX's target audience?
DEGGANS: What's that?
SANCHEZ: What's FOX's target audience?
DEGGANS: You know, you would have to ask FOX News Channel that to know that for sure.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, let me ask you...
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: I'm only making assumptions about their target audience based on what I see them doing on the air and the people who host their -- their programs.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, let me just ask you, do you think...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Do you -- let me stop. Hold on.
DEGGANS: Mm-hmm.
SANCHEZ: Do you think their target audience is blacks and Hispanics?
DEGGANS: I don't think their target audience is blacks and Hispanics, but I think -- I think what -- what's really going on here is that they know what's effective with their audience is -- is presenting boogeymen, presenting figures who are scary.
SANCHEZ: But now you're saying -- but...
DEGGANS: Particularly to conservatives.
SANCHEZ: But now...
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: And one thing that is -- one thing that...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: ... has been proven to be kind of frightening is the scary minority person, the scary person of color, which is what I think is at the heart of a lot of these stories.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But here's the -- here's the key word in all of this. There is nothing wrong -- look, it's not just FOX News.
Urban radio, when I listen to it coming into work, does stories that I know are targeted to a certain audience. Hispanic radio, Hispanic -- Univision, Telemundo, there are other examples out there of news outlets or media outlets that target a certain audience.
The key word in all of this -- and I think you might agree with me -- I don't know -- let me ask it in the form of a question -- is, when you get to the point where you start to distort to reach that audience, is that not what's most important here?
DEGGANS: Certainly.
And, as I said earlier, I said, you know, if you're a journalism organization, then your highest values are accuracy and -- and fairness. So -- so, the idea that is, if you get a video -- in terms of Breitbart, if you get a video and you're not sure where it came from, and you're not sure if it's the whole video, and you're not sure if what you're seeing is just a sensationalized clip of what that person said, then, if you're going to report on it, you at least try to make that clear.
And -- and, ideally, you would find out what the whole video was before you even reported on it at all. And I -- and I think that -- what bothered me the most about some of the journalism that I saw, even after Sherrod resigned, was that stories didn't seem to be pointing out that this video had come from a questionable source, and that we -- we hadn't seen all of it, and -- and it was hard to know exactly what she was saying, even in the clips that were released.
SANCHEZ: Well, but to be...
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: And so -- so all that comes together to be kind of troubling.
SANCHEZ: To be fair -- and I think there's some cover here in the journalistic community -- it was the White House, arguably, and certainly the Food and Drug Administration -- or the Department of Agriculture...
DEGGANS: USDA.
SANCHEZ: ... that -- yes, the -- the -- the Department of Agriculture that co-opted that information and based a decision to ask a woman to resign on that information.
So, it really put journalists in a difficult situation when they did that. Is that not true?
DEGGANS: I don't know that it put journalists in a difficult situation. I mean, you have to report the facts.
And part of the story is that the government reacted to what they feared would be the media discussion of this clip.
SANCHEZ: Hmm.
DEGGANS: But the other part of that story is that we don't know what exactly she said, because we don't have the full story. We don't have the full speech.
And that, to me, is a more interesting story.
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: And, you know, I saw some news reports that didn't acknowledge that until, you know, Sherrod really spoke out in the media, and the NAACP posted the full video on Tuesday evening.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
Well, and, for the record, we went and got it ourselves, and we here on RICK'S LIST posted and showed and played during our show all 35 minutes of her entire speech, so that viewers can see that for themselves. It's a difficult question, and I'm glad you and I had a chance to have this conversation, because, look, we're -- we're -- we're in an imperfect...
(CROSSTALK)
DEGGANS: Can I interject one thing, too?
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Please, go ahead.
DEGGANS: Can I interject one thing, too?
I -- I also want to say that I understand, you know, this is CNN, and you are competing with FOX News, and I just want to note that you guys have your reasons for wanting to talk about whether or not FOX News is a part of this, too. And I understand that.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
DEGGANS: And I'm not just singling out FOX News. You know, your competitor MSNBC has its own political tilt that people are concerned about.
SANCHEZ: Mm-hmm.
DEGGANS: And I'm also concerned about this forest of Web sites, like Breitbart's, that create these -- this material that -- that isn't necessarily following journalism values, but somehow gets swept up into the news mix.
SANCHEZ: Well...
DEGGANS: That's really what I was trying to talk about.
SANCHEZ: Well, I will tell you this, though. We -- we don't claim to be perfect. We try the best that we can on every given day. We rarely talk about what our competitors do, unless the actions of our competitors really becomes a national conversation and a legitimate story, as it has in this case.
And then suddenly we find in -- ourselves in a situation where, to be able to define the story and take it apart through its parts, it's necessary to talk about what some of our competitors have done, just -- just -- just to raise -- just to answer the question that you may have raised there.
It's been a pleasure talking to you. My thanks. I really enjoy these types of conversations. And maybe from time to time we need to be more introspective in this business. We will see you next time.
DEGGANS: Thanks a lot, Rick.
SANCHEZ: Trouble in the tropics, but the fate of folks along the Gulf Coast and all that oil may depend on something this simple: whether the tropical depression goes to the left or to the right. Chad Myers joins me next right here, as the LIST scrolls on.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Smart, interesting discussion, and now we get to see some razzmatazz with Chad Myers joining us now. CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: What you need, man?
SANCHEZ: I will tell you what I need. I want you to definitively exactly what it is this storm is going to do.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: And I know you can't provide that.
Maybe -- God, hello?
MYERS: But, you know...
SANCHEZ: I guess what we need to know is, what happens if it goes right, what happens if it goes left?
MYERS: I think it goes left.
SANCHEZ: Really?
MYERS: Really.
SANCHEZ: That's not good.
MYERS: It's not good. It's not good. It has a longer drive, a long -- all -- we call it the fetch, how long it can be in the Gulf of Mexico.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
MYERS: The longer it's in water, the bigger it can get. Also, it's the way the wind is blowing. And if it blows it on the right side of this storm will blow the oil on to the shore.
Now, that said, Mr. Suttles with BP was on the air today, saying...
SANCHEZ: Yes?
MYERS: And I watched the -- every bit of his -- his little press conference. They only skimmed 56 barrels of oil yesterday, because that's all they could find.
SANCHEZ: Hmm.
MYERS: They think that they have got a lot of the oil out of there.
SANCHEZ: Well, but, remember, they used a lot of dispersant and some people would argue it -- they can't skim it off because it's no longer on the surface, it's mixed in with the water, and it's killing animals. But that's another story that we can do a different time.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Go to your map. MYERS: I got you on that one.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Go to your map and show us what this thing could do and where it is right now.
MYERS: All right. All right.
Here's what's going on. It developed a lot overnight. It really did get its T.D. And we thought maybe it could be a T.S., which means tropical storm. We thought it maybe would have been able to get a name this morning. That didn't happen.
We're 30 minutes or so from the next 4:00 update, and it still looks not very good. I would suspect that, if this thing was going to make its way into a name, it would need more convection around that spot right there. I can't tell you. It's going to be in 30 minutes. We will figure what the NHC, the National Hurricane Center, has to say about it.
What we know is that every single computer model now that we believe -- there are a couple that we really don't -- one is called the clipper, which is climatology. And that means if the storm is there over the last 100 years, where did it usually go?
Well, that's where it usually went, but that has nothing to do with the current conditions. So the current conditions say, yes, somewhere this way.
And Rick, look at this. The farthest east model is New Orleans. The farthest west model is Beaumont-Port Arthur.
So this cone we see here is turning to the left, compared to what we were yesterday, which was to the right. Not left.
SANCHEZ: If we had to choose between -- if we had to choose between -- get me going here, will you? If we had to choose between here, A, or here, B, where would we want it to go now that we know it's not going to take this path we wished it would have taken?
MYERS: Yes. Where did we want it to go?
SANCHEZ: Yes.
MYERS: Well, the farther it stays to the left, there's even a potential if it does this.
SANCHEZ: That's good.
MYERS: That would even be far enough away that maybe we wouldn't get the wind blowing much on to the shore here, and it would only be a 45-or-55-mile-per-hour storm. There's a lot of shear here. There's a lot of wind going in different directions here.
SANCHEZ: Yes. MYERS: And shear, we talked about this yesterday. You want to build a thunderstorm in the middle of the plains with a tornado on it, you want shear, you want winds in all different directions. You get it down here, it kills a hurricane.
Hurricanes don't want winds blowing all over. They want to be the windbag.
SANCHEZ: Hold on just a minute.
Let's go to Dave Mattingly. He's standing by on the Gulf Coast. He's been talking to the folks at BP.
Are they freaking out about this? Are they getting ready to start getting some boats out there to get some heavy gear out of there? What are they doing, David?
DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They are watching and they're getting ready, Rick.
Right now we've got some good news though from Admiral Thad Allen. After watching that well and the tests they have been doing for the last seven days, they say they now have enough confidence in it that they can leave it closed if they have to abandon it when a storm comes through. So that is great news for this operation. That means no more new oil going out into the Gulf of Mexico.
And you've been talking about how there seems to be so little oil out there. That's the whole reason.
Seven days of no fresh oil has allowed them to go after those big patches that they have. And now that spill, even though it still covers a tremendous area, is made up of smaller pieces, weathered pieces, and emulsified pieces out there, that it's actually harder to track down now. The oil is still out there, but not in those big black bands that we saw earlier.
SANCHEZ: David Mattingly looking at the situation there in the Gulf of Mexico.
And it's funny. He just mentioned what you had mentioned earlier, that they're not seeing big, giant signs of an oil spill. Then we can get into that discussion.
But for right now, you're saying this looks like it's going to be heading in a westerly direction for sure.
MYERS: Correct, compared to the right turn that was forecast by many models yesterday. And there were a few going this way yesterday. Now there are none doing this.
And we think the closer we get to landfall time, the more accurate the computers are. Two weeks ago the computers were awful because it didn't exist yet
SANCHEZ: Right. MYERS: The closer you get to D-Day, the day that it makes landfall, the closer or the smaller this cone is, compared to the bigger the cone is, the farther you are away. So the closer we get to the real time, that's when we think it's getting more accurate and the computers now are taking it this way, not that way at all.
SANCHEZ: The next advisory comes in at -- wait, look --
MYERS: Ten minutes.
SANCHEZ: Right off the press.
(CROSSTALK)
MYERS: Pressure is 10,006, which is not very low, which means that you would need -- the lower the pressure, the stronger the potential for this thing to be.
SANCHEZ: Right.
MYERS: And it's right here. We're still only at 30 knots, 30, 35 and 40 knots. It is still not forecast to be a hurricane. That's good.
SANCHEZ: OK.
MYERS: And this is just the initial things.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: This is what they send out before they give you the actual advisory, and that's coming at exactly 5:00 or just before 5:00.
MYERS: I'd say we'll have it in five minutes.
SANCHEZ: Five minutes?
MYERS: I'll be back.
SANCHEZ: Let us know. Let us know.
And you're going to join us tonight at 8:00 for our primetime debut?
MYERS: Yes.
SANCHEZ: Thank you, Chad.
Take a look at this piece of tape right here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHIRLEY SHERROD, FMR. GEORGIA DIRECTOR, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, USDA: Hi. This is Shirley Sherrod. Just had the conversation with the president. (END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: This one was no beer summit, but Shirley Sherrod had her moment today with the president of the United States. Interestingly enough, the president actually texted her first.
We're going to tell you how that went down. In fact, Brooke Baldwin has been carefully monitoring that situation all day long, and she's going to be out here to follow this trending story in just a little bit.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: By the way, we should let you know that we're preparing a special newscast for you tonight, except it's going to be in prime time. As a matter of fact, it's called "RICK'S LIST PRIMETIME," and we're going to debut that tonight, right here on CNN at 8:00 p.m.
Meanwhile, President Obama has chatted with Shirley Sherrod by phone, and we were there. So what did the president of the United States say to her, and then what did she say back to him, and then what did she say after she spoke with the president?
Now, guess who has got this handled for us? Our own Brooke Baldwin has been working on this, and she's got the entire scoop.
This thing involved a text message.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A text message after multiple phone calls.
SANCHEZ: This is where we are in a society now, where people have to text each other because they can't get a hold of each other on the phone.
BALDWIN: Because they say, "Call me, please. I'm the president."
SANCHEZ: That's interesting. Take us through it. Will you?
BALDWIN: I will.
SANCHEZ: We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. It's time for trending.
By the way, I should let you know, you know, we've got a big studio here, and just a while ago Chad Myers came out and gave me one of these. That means the advisory is in from the National Hurricane Center, and he's going to be sharing it with us in just a moment. Let him go over the data.
BALDWIN: Right.
SANCHEZ: Doesn't that sound good, go over the data?
BALDWIN: Sure. That sounds kind of smart.
SANCHEZ: All right. Brooke Baldwin is here, and here's what she does for us -- she looks at the stories that are trending, the stories that people are talking about, the people -- the stories that people are e-mailing each other and blogging about.
And really, throughout the course of the day, most people have been talking about Shirley Sherrod --
BALDWIN: Right.
SANCHEZ: -- because she wanted to get a call from the president.
Did she get it?
BALDWIN: She got the call.
SANCHEZ: All right.
BALDWIN: But it started with a text message. Actually, let me back up a little bit.
OK. So we all know she was here at CNN yesterday, she was a busy lady. I got, like, 15 minutes with her. Her phone was ringing off the hook.
And so, apparently, two of those phone calls at some point last night was the White House.
SANCHEZ: Right.
BALDWIN: Couldn't get a hold of her, mailbox was full. So, finally, today she gets this text message midday. Our CNN crew were with her.
She gets this text. The text says, hey, we've been trying to call you from the White House. So she finally calls the president, they have this conversation.
We didn't roll on the conversation. We wanted to respect her privacy. But we did get her reaction moments after she hung up the phone.
Here is Shirley Sherrod.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERROD: I just had the conversation with the president, and it was a very, very good conversation. I'm well pleased with how it went. And he wanted me to know he supported me. And I've been dealing with some of the same issues he's had to deal, you know, especially, over the last five years.
(END VIDEO CLIP) SANCHEZ: I'm just thinking of something, because yesterday we were talking about a lawsuit --
BALDWIN: Right.
SANCHEZ: -- that involved African-American farmers.
BALDWIN: Right.
SANCHEZ: And she was involved in that.
BALDWIN: She was. It was over that new community's farm, and they won. They finally won the settlement, $13 million. They got it, like, three months ago. It was this huge deal proving racial discrimination within the USDA during some years in the '80s.
And that is one of the topics that she and the president talked about, her experience with that, with civil rights. And discrimination is certainly one of the reasons why the president has said, according to the spokesperson for the White House, hey, he would like her to take Vilsack, Ag secretary, up on his offer to give her the job.
Now, the White House spokesperson, Robert Gibbs, actually spoke a bit about Shirley Sherrod and this conversation at the tip top of the briefing today. Here's a snippet.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT GIBBS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: She has a unique set of experiences and a unique opportunity to continue using those experiences to help people. That's what he said to her, and obviously the decision about what she's going to do is up to her.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Did the president invite Shirley Sherrod to the White House? No, but Robert Gibbs did say that the agriculture secretary, the department -- Vilsack would be calling her later on today to follow up on that job offer that he had extended yesterday.
The president reiterated to Shirley Sherrod on the phone -- he said, look, Tom Vilsack was sincere in his apology. This was a total misunderstanding. And, again, at the tail end of that conversation, our producer who was sitting with her she also invited the president to south Georgia.
SANCHEZ: Oh, is that right?
BALDWIN: We'll have to see if he'll take her up on it.
SANCHEZ: Well, we heard from Ed Henry -- and this is news as well -- that maybe he'll go there because he's heading down to the Gulf Coast with his family to make an example of how more Americans should travel to the Gulf Coast beaches.
BALDWIN: Swing on through.
SANCHEZ: Because after all, they are really not filled with oil.
BALDWIN: I know.
SANCHEZ: Fallacy, not true. It's simply perception.
Good stuff.
BALDWIN: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: You're all over this thing.
BALDWIN: Thanks.
SANCHEZ: Take a look at this tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're tired of this invasion that's going on.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even though they are professing to be trying to do something good, they are driven and motivated by hate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Well, that person that he's talking about, the people who are driven and motivated by hate, is an accused Nazi group leader who is patrolling for illegal immigrants along the border in Arizona.
So is he a Nazi? Well, we've -- this thing will probably go viral because everyone seems to be talking about it, and I've got about a thousand tweets since I did this interview. We're going to share some of that interview with you in just a little bit, and expect to see it tonight at 8:00 p.m. in primetime as well.
Before he was an Internet hero, he was nobody's hero. Those who know him say that's why the "Barefoot Bandit" became an alleged one- man crime wave.
So, while Colton Harris-Moore doesn't make our "List U Don't Want 2 Be On," someone very close to him -- very, very close to him -- does.
Who do you think that is? Who?
Stop for a moment. Who could be so close to him? You probably know who it is, but you'll hear it in just a moment.
Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(WEATHER REPORT)
SANCHEZ: All right. Let's go with some breaking news now. We understand that there's some new information. This is a story that we here at CNN have been following now for quite a long time.
Representative Charles Rangel, New York Democrat, forced to step aside as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee over ethics questions. He will now face -- we are now learning that he will now face a hearing before the House Ethics Committee. A senior Democratic source tells that to CNN.
Rangel told reporters that he welcomed the news and wanted to testify -- wanted to testify at a July 29th Ethics Committee meeting.
So there's the latest coming in on Charles Rangel.
Coming up, who is making it into our political list? Wolf Blitzer is going to join me in just a little bit.
And then, of course, there's that list you don't want to be on. Well, who made "The List U Don't Want 2 Be On"?
Stay with us.
There's Wolf.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
In order to better understand a person no matter what he or she has done, you need to know their past and what led them to their experiences -- the people, the struggles.
In this case, there's a 19-year-old teenager facing years behind bars, accused of stealing cars and boats and even planes. His nickname is the "Barefoot Bandit," a kid who grew up just an hour in a trailer home outside of Seattle. And there's a person in his life, the central figure of his past.
Who do you think that could be? Who do you think this person is who finds themselves on this day on "The List U Don't Want 2 Be On"?
This is a fascinating story, and here are the facts that you need to know.
Colton Harris-Moore spent nearly two years on the run. The feds couldn't catch him. Police say he toyed with them, leaving footprints and messages at the scene of his crimes.
He stole and flew airplanes, apparently without training, and he allegedly committed all of his crimes in at least eight different states. The game of hide and seek continued until police in the Bahamas arrested him a couple of weeks ago. They say the bandit led them on a high-speed boat chase in his final minutes of freedom. Today, CNN obtained court documents revealing new details about the bandit's troubled childhood and the events leading up to his capture. The documents show how he spent his childhood running from "demons and a home situation marked by instability, loss and alcohol abuse."
He once told a psychologist that his mother screams at him, breaks his toys when he's being punished. Protective services responded to incidents at their home 12 different times.
Neighbors reportedly say that he used to break into their house to steal frozen pizza and cookies. Neighbors say they fear the bandit's mother because she keeps a sign at the end of her driveway warning, "If you go past this sign, you will be shot."
The documents paint her son as a lost child, often hungry before going into a hallway -- or finally into a halfway house for juveniles. That's where the feds say he escaped before beginning his live on the lam
In no way does this new information excuse the crimes that he's accused of committing, crimes that could have hurt a lot of innocent people. His mother though, Pamela Kohler, has not responded to CNN's calls, e-mails, and a letter asking for comment on these allegations her son faces.
But Pamela Kohler is herself facing serious questions about how she brought up her son and the environment in which she raised the child who has become one of the best known fugitives in the past decade. And that is why on this day she has landed herself on "The List U Don't Want 2 Be On."
Wolf Blitzer is standing by now to bring us up to date on some of the stories that he's going to be following in "THE SITUATION ROOM."
Boy, I'll tell you, there's plenty to choose from on this day, Wolf.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: It's never dull.
Obviously what's happening in the Gulf with the oil, this bad weather that's moving in, could have dramatic ramifications setting back some of the processes they want to do to stop it once and for all, the relief wells specifically. So we're watching that weather story, as I know you have.
Obviously the president making that phone call to Shirley Sherrod today. A dramatic development on that front as well. We're all over that.
Donna Brazile, by the way, is going to be joining us. She's really been emotionally moved by everything that has happened this week, as so many folks around the country have been. She's looking closely at what's going on.
We're going to pick her brain on the lessons learned from this entire story. And there are a lot of lessons we're going to be learning, all of us who cover politics, for years to come, based on what happened this week, as I know you've been working on as well -- Rick
SANCHEZ: Well, I found this fascinating, and I found this to be one of those introspective stories that we come across from time to time when it makes us, guys like you and I, who do what we do every single day and think about it an awful lot, makes us wonder, well, what is it about our business that maybe we need to consider? How are we doing this? How can we possibly do it better on a daily basis?
So, yes, you know, it is an important story. And there's a lot of people looking at us right now, Wolf, and saying -- and by "us," I mean the collective us. I mean all of us who toil in this craft about bringing news gatherings. There's a lot of people looking at us and saying, well, maybe -- I wonder if the atmosphere, as the Obama administration put it, is right in America right now.
BLITZER: You know, one of the most important lessons for journalists -- and I think all of us should relearn this lesson -- it was a lesson that I learned as a very young journalist a long time ago in my first job in journalism, I know it's a lesson you learned. But I learned it because I worked for a wire service, the Reuters news agency, and a veteran said to me, you know, it's great to be first, but it's more important to be right.
Make sure you have it right before you get it out there. And, you know, there's a lot of competitive pressure to get the story first, but all of us have to take a deep breath and make sure we're really comfortable with the news we have before we put it out there. And I think all of us have to relearn that lesson every single day.
SANCHEZ: Regardless of how tempting and how delicious a story may sound when you first read it, you always have to make sure, even if it takes a little longer to get it out there --
BLITZER: Right.
SANCHEZ: -- that everything is right and that the other side had an opportunity to react to it.
BLITZER: Especially if it's an explosive story. And if it sounds too good to be true, it almost always is too good to be true.
SANCHEZ: There you go, spoiling it again.
Wolf Blitzer, always a pleasure talking to you. I appreciate it.
BLITZER: All right. We'll see you later.
SANCHEZ: So, what are you saying about today's big stories? We're going to be looking at the Twitter boards to see what you say and some of the relevant people in the news have to say.
And as we go, I want to introduce you to some of the folks who come by and visit with us every single day. They come here to be part of RICK'S LIST.
And give them a wave as we go to break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: We often get a lot of reaction to some of the stories that we cover, but it's been a while since we've gotten as much reaction as we have with this.
I don't know if you saw it a little while ago, but I interviewed a person who is a self-described U.S. border protector. He's an activist, and he's working down on the border. But he seems to have a past.
Unlike most of the people who go down there because they are very concerned about securing the United States border, he had a different perspective. In fact, he's got ties to neo-Nazis, even though he says he's not a neo-Nazi. But he seemed to be saying that he was a Nazi.
Yes, you figure that out.
Well, many of you have been writing about this, and I want to share now what some of you have been saying.
Let's go to that if we possibly can. Let's go to the Twitter board.
And there you see it. "I liked the interview with Harry Hughes. Good, unbiased questions, and I will admit that I agree with some of what Hughes had to say."
Now, that's interesting. He said he agrees with what Hughes had to say, but yet he said it was a good interview.
"I get it. He's not a neo-Nazi. He's an original one. Give him his due! The most un-American views I've heard in a while."
And then, "Free speech at work. Kudos to Rick for letting the Nazi speak his peace. Don't hate him. Just reject Nazi ideas and move on."
We got so many comments on this interview, I'll tell you.
"I am a white female ashamed of what Hughes said on THE LIST today. The only difference in you and I, you are male and I am female. SimplyShy, Anne Marie Bauer (ph)."
May thanks to you. In fact, my thanks to all of you.
Because there's been such a huge response on all that, I'm going to replay most of that interview tonight at 8:00 p.m. So set your DVR, tell your friends and neighbors to see the interview with that fellow who works down on the border who says he's not a neo-Nazi, just a Nazi.
We'll see you tonight, right here at 8:00. In the meantime, here's my colleague and good friend, Wolf Blitzer, and here's your "SITUATION ROOM."
