Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

President Bush to Speak in New Orleans Tonight; Two Major Airlines Announce Bankruptcy; Wrapping up the Roberts Hearings

Aired September 15, 2005 - 12:30   ET

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

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: The president will be addressing the nation tonight from New Orleans, his fourth trip to the region since Hurricane Katrina struck, 9:00 p.m. Eastern. We'll be here in THE SITUATION ROOM, reporting to you on that.
Let's get some analysis now, what we can expect. Three of our best reporters are joining us in THE SITUATION ROOM -- Candy Crowley, John King, Dana Bash. Thanks to you for joining us.

Let's start with you, Dana. Give us a little flavor of what we might expect to hear from the president tonight.

DANA BASH, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, you're going to hear him do the kind of thing that frankly even his supporters say that he should have done a long time ago, which is really have that rally the country moment. He's going to try to say that he is empathetic, show that he is empathetic, say he is very glad that America came together.

But he's also going to try to have some substantive initiatives that he says the federal government is going to bring forward. He's been meeting with members of Congress. He's going to talk about legislation on housing, on health care and education, maybe even tax credits for small business. All aimed at trying to show that he cares, in terms of his words and also in terms of what he plans to do, in terms of initiatives.

BLITZER: Are they telling us yet some of those specific initiatives that he's going to unveil? Any specifics?

BASH: Not yet. We know the general terms and tone of what he's going to talk about. We do know that he's not going to ask for a specific dollar amount, not any more than what they've already passed. And we do know one thing that is also not going to be in the speech, and that is, he's not going to announce the czar to head this that many Republicans have been encouraging him to do. That's not going to happen.

BLITZER: No Colin Powell, no Rudy Giuliani?

BASH: Not yet.

BLITZER: No one like that. All right, listen to this excerpt of what the president said the other day, in saying that the buck stops with him.

Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government. And to the extent that the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: John King, you've covered this guy for a long time. That's not necessarily a very common statement that he makes.

JOHN KING, CNN SR. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It tells you a lot about the political predicament this president finds himself in at a key point in the second term. Remember during the campaign he was asked about Iraq? He had a news conference, name your biggest mistake. He's been asked about the intelligence. This is a president who does not have a regrets strategy. He moves forward. Even if he knows he's made mistakes or people around him have made mistakes, he doesn't address them, he moves forward.

But they understand the predicament they're in now. And the way to pivot, if you will, from all the criticism on the White House to try to say OK, maybe they made mistakes, but now they're getting it right -- they believe was to first do that, say I take responsibility, and now, as Dana said, to try to rally the country to say they have a plan to help the people here and the rest of the country has to pitch in and help.

There -- it was four years ago yesterday the president got up on that rubble in New York City. Many thought that changed the dynamics of his political leadership after 9/11. They know at the White House, he needs to change the dynamics.

BLITZER: Candy, we know the president's always going to be criticized by a lot of Democrats. Not necessarily all the Democrats, but a lot of Democrats. But how much trouble is he in with some of his fellow Republicans, as far as handling Katrina?

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SR. POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, a fair -- look, he still has his base. A good amount of his base still supports the man, still will continue to support. I can't remember the whole number. It was something like 70 percent of his base is, you know, still with him.

Here's the problem, I think, with this. Is that it strikes me that it might be too much, too late. It may be too late for your bullhorn moment. The Republicans I talked to a week ago said he should have done this on Labor Day. Think Ronald Reagan and the Challenger. Think JFK and Bay of Pigs. He should have done this before Labor Day.

Now think of the amount of money this is going to take. And that's where the too much comes in. You've already seen some conservatives say, look, we ought to spend what it takes, but let's not just give, you know, 60 gazillion dollars without some accountability. I think it's -- most Republicans believe that you're talking that this is a long-term -- this is not a single bullhorn moment here tonight. This may be the beginning of going around the curve, but this is not a time where tomorrow morning you'll find that, you know, the entire country thinks he's wonderful.

BLITZER: And even as we're speaking, we're seeing these live pictures come in -- let's show our viewers -- live pictures coming in from New Orleans. You can see big parts of the city remain under water, including what once was this truck still unde rwater, as well.

Dana, we spoke to Senator Tom Coburn, very conservative Republican from Oklahoma, a little while ago. And he was very critical saying yes, you got to come up with the money, but to do so, you've got to find other ways to offset the additional funding, whether it's $100 billion or $200, billion, unless you're going to screw up the deficit and screw up the economy for a long time to come. And he took direct issue with Tom DeLay, who says they can do it all. What are you hearing from the White House?

BASH: Well, that is definitely a big issue. You know, their initial sort of political response was to throw money at it, just to say look, we're going to do whatever we can. But then, you did -- they did definitely hear the pushback from the conservative -- fiscally conservative Republicans saying, wait a minute.

You know, this is a White House that was working very, very hard to get on track, to cut the deficit in half in five years, working hard to say we're going to keep spending down. And they knew that on the other hand, they had this humongous price tag for Iraq that is sort of out there. And so this is going to be -- they understand -- a very, very, difficult thing to balance.

The other big question is whether or not he's going to be able to -- the president's going to be able to have his other domestic initiatives that will also cost money -- that they're seriously in question now.

BLITZER: And what about the Democrats, John? You know, we know that they've been very critical. In fact, they're doing something -- I don't know how unusual it is -- even before the president speaks tonight, they're coming out with this pre-rebuttal, if you will. They're coming up with criticism, not even knowing specifically what he's going to be announcing tonight.

KING: They are well aware that this president is at one of the weakest points, if not the weakest point, politically, of his presidency. His approval rating is down. Support for him as a leader, trust in him as a leader is down. So the Democrats are trying to say that now -- don't make this disaster a laboratory for ideological ventures like school vouchers for those displaced children or tax credits instead of direct money to rebuild things.

So you're going to have an ideological a fight. There are some Democrats who say we should turn the volume down a little bit, step back and let this play out. The president's in trouble. Let him continue to be in trouble. Let's not push him. But especially the liberal base of the Democratic Party, they see the president weak. They think in the past they have made a mistake of not challenging him immediately and loudly. This time they're going to challenge him.

BLITZER: Look at these poll numbers, Candy. And we're going to put them on the screen over here so that you and our viewers can see them, as well. We call it the poll of polls. The George W. Bush approval ratings. And all of these polls, CBS News/"New York Times" at 41 percent, NBC News/"Wall Street Journal" at 40 percent, ABC News/"Washington Post" at 42 percent, CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup at 46 percent. Forty-two percent job approval ratings.

Now, the president and all of his advisers always say, we don't look at polls. We just do the job that we have to do. That's sort of like TV news executives saying we don't look at ratings, we just do the most serious, important news that we can always do. But if they're looking at these poll numbers at the White House, certainly they got to be -- they have to be concerned.

CROWLEY: Well, sure, that's why they're doing this speech tonight. I mean, obviously, they're concerned. Look, George Bush doesn't have to run again. We all know that. But he -- you know, this was always a president -- a legacy president who had an adviser, who foresaw, you know, four, eight, 10, 12 more years of really solidifying a Republican rule in the United States. It's in jeopardy. When you're a -- if you're a Republican looking at those poll numbers, you're out there criticizing him, trust me.

So this is a president who needs to get the gang back together here, particularly the public ones that are criticizing him for the deficit spending that's going to be required without any offsets, for the lack of leadership. So obviously, when they look at that poll, it's not personal in the, like, personal fortunes of George Bush, politically. He's going to go home to Crawford and retire. But it's what he leaves.

BLITZER: We're going to have to leave it right there. Candy, John, Dana, thanks very much.

We're going to be -- make sure you please join us tonight, 9:00 p.m. Eastern for the president's remarks. Our primetime coverage, looking ahead to the president's speech, begins at 7:00 p.m. Eastern with ANDERSON COOPER 360. We'll be here in THE SITUATION ROOM, though, at 9:00 p.m. tonight.

We're watching lots of stories happening. Today, more on Hurricane Ophelia off the coast of North Carolina. Where is it heading next?

The John Roberts hearings.

When we come back, though, our own Ali Velshi is standing by. Two major airlines announcing bankruptcy. What does that mean for your frequent flier miles? I want to know. I suppose you do, as well. We'll get the bottom line from Ali when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLITZER: Welcome back. CNN's Ali Velshi is joining us now from New York with the "Bottom Line". Ali, what's happening with those airlines?

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: Well, you know, the worst-kept secret in the world, two airlines, Northwest and Delta, declaring bankruptcy and going into Chapter 11. That's actually yesterday, late in the day, late in the day in a busy news time. Northwest filing, you know, within an hour after Delta.

There are a couple things going on here. First of all, Delta has about $28.3 billion in debt, and they list about a little less than $22 billion in assets. So that's problem number one, as you can tell. Strangely, the shares of both companies are trading under $1. But Delta is actually up on the news that it has filed for bankruptcy, because as you know, Wolf, bankruptcy protection in this country allows them protection from their creditors, allows them to get out of certain deals that they've made with people, including deals with their labor unions.

Now labor unions -- Northwest, as you know, day 26 of their mechanics strike. This is a great way for Northwest to continue to press their mechanics for either further concessions or just move on and get past it.

Both of these airlines, same problem. The debt at Northwest, about $18 billion, the assets, about $14 billion. So they're both -- they both owe more money than they have on the books.

For most people, Wolf, it doesn't make a difference. Business travelers don't care. They buy tickets and they'll fly on some airline. For people who are planning vacations far into the future or using miles, you know, perhaps a little more concern, but both airlines say they will run exactly the way they continue to run.

You know, between these two airlines, there have been tens of thousands of jobs cut since September of 2001. There will probably be more jobs cut. And, frankly, Wolf, there's no way to look at the airline industry in this country except to say it's very sick. There are four major airlines in bankruptcy protection right now.

BLITZER: All right, Ali, thanks very much. We'll see you back here in the situation room 3:00 p.m. Eastern. Ali Velshi with the "Bottom Line" in New York.

We'll take another quick break. Former Senator Fred Thompson. He's helping the White House right now, John Roberts specifically, get confirmed as the chief justice of the United States. Senator Thompson standing by live. We'll speak with him right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. We're continuing our coverage of the John Roberts confirmation hearings. They've wrapped up three days of questioning of the Supreme Court chief justice nominee. One of the final moments we heard Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer say, they're not only rolling the dice with this nominee. He says they're betting the whole House as far as this nominee is concerned.

Former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson from Tennessee has been helping John Roberts prepare for the questioning. He's joining us now live from the Senate Hart Office Building. Senator, thanks very much.

What do you say to Chuck Schumer, who says he really doesn't know enough about John Roberts to make a decision yet?

FRED THOMPSON, FMR. U.S. SENATOR: Well, they know more about John Roberts than they have, I would say, more than any other nominee that's been before them.

A couple of days after his nomination was announced, I think there was a "New York Times" story, you know, interviewing people he went to grade school with him. I mean, everybody who's ever known him, everybody who's ever worked with him, somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 pages of documents, things he wrote, going back to when he was, what, 26, 27 years old, a long questionnaire.

I don't know how much more you know about a person. When you say that you're rolling the dice with John Roberts, I mean, you need to recognize how the system works, and that is if you want to use that metaphor, you're rolling the dice with any judge. By the very nature of the process, a judge can't tell you how he's going to vote on future cases. So when you say you're rolling the dice with someone, you're not really saying anything or adding anything to the discussion, because that's true with regard to any judge. They simply know more about him, I think, than they could possibly know about anyone else. And you know, that's all they are supposed to know.

BLITZER: All right. Jeff Greenfield, Jeff Toobin are here with some questions as well. Let's start with Jeff Greenfield.

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SENIOR ANALYST: Senator, take a look at the body you used to be in. You once told me a couple years ago that you thought we'd never see a genuine bipartisan congressional investigation for the foreseeable future. With the Republicans constantly reading into the record what a great guy he is, and using to some extent I think talking points to rebut, and Democrats looking for any possible dent in the armor, did we see a bipartisan attempt to gauge the character and fitness of John Roberts, or did we see something else?

THOMPSON: I think you've got to look at the nature of the proceeding. When you're doing a job of investigation, you're trying to find out what happened and what's really -- what are really the facts -- then I think that's when you need to put bipartisanship on the table, and try to do that together.

I think that when you have a judicial nomination, it's entirely appropriate for each side to explore the areas that they want to and demonstrate their different philosophies. I don't think that that extends to voting against a person because they disagree with their philosophy. Everyone says, well, your -- or your philosophy -- judicial philosophy's not going to disqualify you. I just want to know what's in your heart and then proceed for days to ask questions, designed to get him to say something that would justify a no vote. I mean, that's hopefully not too crass an assessment, but that's what happens.

I think that for the most part, the proceedings are good. It's good to explore it from all sides. I take no issue with anything that has happened. What I am interested in, though, is the vote. And if this comes along down to a party-line partisan vote in this committee with this nominee, I don't think it bodes well for the committee.

I think it's going to render questionable the committee's relevancy in the future. If this nominee can't get any Democratic votes, what are future nominees going to do? How many documents are they going to be willing to give up? How many interviews are they going to do? How many questions are they going to answer if they don't have a chance? So I'm hopeful that that does not happen. I don't think it will. But I'll be interested to see.

BLITZER: Well, we'll know next Thursday. Jeff Toobin has a question. Go ahead, Jeff.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Senator, you said that the Roberts hearing was like any other judicial nominations hearing. If you're rolling the dice with him, you're rolling the dice with anybody because that's just the kind of thing that nominees don't talk about. There are kinds of things.

Would you like to see the system change? Would you like to see a system where nominees say, you know, abortion's a big issue, I'd like to know how you stand on abortion, and the nominee answer the question?

THOMPSON: No, I don't and there are a lot of reasons. But that is an excellent question. In fact, I think we need to go back a little bit to a little bit more about the way it used to be, not to the point where people didn't even come before the committee and not to the point where Justice White when he came before the committee -- what did they say? Forty-five minutes was his entire hearing?

But to the point where history, integrity, record, what people think about him, what their commitment is to the rule of law so forth, are the major -- are the major issues, the overwhelming issues, not what one says about oneself. In the rest of life, we think a person is their own worst witness when they're talking about themselves because you can say anything about yourself, and you always are going to be kind of prejudiced with regard to that. And they can bargain for votes under that kind of a system, and then they can go and take the bench and take a different position, and then everybody thinks they were lied to.

No. I think we're going too much in that direction. I think we need to get away from the notion that we need to plumb the depths of a person's heart and see whether or not they're going to side in a lawsuit with the person who has the most sympathetic case or the hardest background. That's not what the rule of law is supposed to be about. And that's not the way it used to be in these kinds of proceedings. And I don't think we're getting any better judges today than we did in times past with the other proceedings.

BLITZER: As well known as he is as a former senator, he's probably a lot better known as a movie star and an actor. Fred Thompson, always good to have you here in THE SITUATION ROOM on CNN.

THOMPSON: Thank you, Wolf. I appreciate it.

BLITZER: Thank you very much, Fred Thompson joining us. We're going to take a quick break. We'll digest what we just heard, everything we've been hearing for the past three days on John Roberts. Jeff and Jeff are standing by. We'll take a quick break. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. John Roberts has wrapped up answering questions from 18 United States senators, members of the Judiciary Committee, three days of questions. Bottom line first to you, Jeff Greenfield. How did he do?

GREENFIELD: Bottom line is John Roberts showed why he was one of the most effective litigators before the Supreme Court bar. And it does seem to me that unlike a Robert Bork or a Clarence Thomas, Judge Roberts did not give those opposed to his nomination particular fuel to say this is why I'm voting against him. I think what the Democrats who oppose him will say is he was too evasive and didn't know enough, didn't tell us enough.

BLITZER: Jeff Toobin?

TOOBIN: A dazzling intellect. I mean, I just thought, you know, you felt in the presence of someone who could speak well and did so. And I think Democrats are going to have a hard time voting against him. I think he went into this on the bubble in terms of his support among Democrats, whether he'd get any at all. I think he's going to get plenty.

BLITZER: All right. Thanks to both of you for helping us cover this story over the past three days. We'll wait till next Thursday. The Judiciary Committee will have their vote, then the following week the full Senate will decide.

In the meantime, we'll be back here in THE SITUATION ROOM in two hours, 3:00 p.m. Eastern. And then later tonight, 9:00 p.m. Eastern for live coverage of the president's address to the nation. Till then, thanks very much for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

LIVE FROM With Fredricka Whitfield is coming up next, right after a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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