Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Prosecutors: Libby Testified Bush Authorized Intel Leak; Congresswoman McKinney Apologizes for Scuffle With Capitol Police Officer; McCain, Falwell Find Common Ground

Aired April 06, 2006 - 19:00   ET

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


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: To our viewers, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where new pictures and information are arriving all the time.
Standing by, CNN reporters across the United States and around the world to bring you tonight's top stories.

Happening now, it's 7:00 p.m. here in Washington, where court papers show President Bush himself authorized a leak of secret intelligence. How damaging is this latest development?

Joining us in THE SITUATION ROOM, Senator John Kerry, who has some very strong words for the president, and "CBS Evening News" anchor Bob Schieffer, whose comments on this controversy will be brought forth, as well as his comments on the woman who will replace him in the anchor chair. That would be Katie Couric.

And there's also a stunning new translation of an ancient gospel. Did Judas really betray Jesus? Could 2,000 years of Christian tradition be wrong?

I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

A dramatic new development today stemming from the CIA probe puts President Bush in the spotlight, and the fallout out could be damaging. The former top aide to the vice president, Dick Cheney, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has testified that a leak of highly classified Iraq intelligence was approved at the highest level. The secrets came from a White House National Intelligence Estimate, or NIE, that's put together by the CIA.

Libby is a defendant in the separate probe into the outing of a CIA officer. In court papers released today, prosecutors say that Libby "testified that the vice president advised him that the president had authorized defendant to disclose relevant portions of the NIE."

Given that he's spoken out so strongly against government leaks, how big a setback could this latest development be for President Bush?

Standing by, we have a team of reporters and analysts. Our Suzanne Malveaux is over at the White House. Abbi Tatton is watching the situation online.

Let's begin with our senior political analyst, though, Bill Schneider -- Bill.

WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Wolf, the court documents created a problem for President Bush. They raise a serious question about his political credibility.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCHNEIDER (voice-over): In September 2003, President Bush made this pledge.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of.

SCHNEIDER: At issue, who leaked the name of a CIA agent? In June 2004, President Bush had this exchange with a reporter.

QUESTION: Do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

BUSH: Yes, and that's up to the U.S. attorney to find the facts.

SCHNEIDER: A year later, the president qualified that pledge.

BUSH: If someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.

SCHNEIDER: A new standard -- the leak would have to be a crime. Now we learn that Scooter Libby testified that he was told by the vice president he had authorization from President Bush to leak classified information to a reporter.

Libby testified that the vice president's legal counsel told him, "presidential authorization to publicly disclose the document amounted to a declassification of the document." In other words, when the president authorizes it, the leak is not a crime. Congressional critics were quick to pounce.

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D), NEW YORK: A president could declassify something for political reasons and no one has the authority to second guess him, because he's the commander in chief.

SCHNEIDER: The issue is President Bush's political credibility. That's what got him elected.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCHNEIDER: During his last year in office, only 21 percent of Americans considered President Clinton honest and trustworthy. But when President Bush first took office, 64 percent called him honest and trustworthy. The contrast could not have been sharper -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Bill, thank you very much.

Let's get some more now on this developing story. We'll go to our White House correspondent, Suzanne Malveaux. Suzanne, what is the White House doing now/ What are they saying about all of this?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, it's interesting, because while officially the White House and the vice president's office say they are not commenting on this because, of course, it pertains to an ongoing investigation, all you have to do is take a look at what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said today and you will get a sense of the strategy here from Bush administration officials how they're going to respond to this.

First of all, they make the point here that the president has the inherent authority to decide who he is going to share classified information with.

Secondly, they're also making the point here that the president, by disclosing information, ultimately is declassifying that information.

And third, expect Bush administration officials to make the case here that there's a distinction between the National Intelligence Estimate and the president and his campaign putting forward trying to set the record straight on Iraq, the state of national security and the whole issue of Valerie Plame, outing a CIA agent -- Wolf.

BLITZER: What about that? Are they -- are they suggesting there may be or may not be any connection with the decision to leak classified information from the National Intelligence Estimate, as opposed to the naming of Valerie Plame-Wilson?

MALVEAUX: Well, right, they're certainly saying that these are two separate things, that they're two separate issues. Whether or not the American people will make that distinction as well, leaking of certain information over here, whether or not that's valid, and leaking information about Valerie Plame, we'll see what the American people think about that. But they feel the president has a legitimate case here because, of course, there was a huge public relations campaign that was going on the summer of 2003 to rebut what Joe Wilson was saying and what they thought was inaccurate information about Iraq.

BLITZER: Suzanne, thank you very much.

Let's go now to our Internet reporter, Abbi Tatton. She has been digging into those court documents filed by the Office of the Special Counsel.

Abbi, what are you picking up?

ABBI TATTON, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, that court filing has just recently been put online at the special counsel's Web site. And looking at the filing, you get an interesting glimpse into the government's case.

First of all, it talks to the documents that have already been turned over to Libby's lawyers, over 2,000 -- 12,000 pages of them. And it says many more to come.

It then goes on to look at some of the specific documents that have been requested pertaining to potential government witnesses like Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove. What Fitzgerald goes on to say is, essentially, you can't have those documents because the government does not intend at this time to call Karl Rove as a witness. He could be called for the defense -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Abbi, thank you very much.

We're going to have a lot more on this dramatic development, a lot more coming up. Bob Schieffer of CBS News standing by. We'll hear what he has to say, his analysis of the situation. We'll also get reaction from Democratic Senator John Kerry, the former presidential nominee.

In the meantime, let's get some reaction from Jack Cafferty. He's standing by in New York -- Jack.

JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Wolf.

Critics of the president wasting no time reacting to the latest in the CIA leak case. Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said the following: "The fact that the president was willing to reveal classified information for political gain and put the interests of his political party ahead of America's security shows that he can no longer be trusted to keep America safe."

The White House says it has no comment on the ongoing investigation.

Isn't that what they always say?

Here's the question: In light of new revelations in the CIA leak case, Howard Dean says President Bush can no longer be trusted to keep America safe. Do you agree with that statement?

E-mail your thoughts to caffertyfile@cnn.com or go to cnn.com/caffertyfile. We'll share the answers with you later, assuming there isn't an ongoing investigation.

BLITZER: Thanks Jack. Thanks very much.

Tornadoes now on the ground in the Midwest. Our meteorologist, Reynolds Wolf, standing by to tell us what is happening right now -- Reynolds.

REYNOLDS WOLF, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Well, certainly a busy afternoon, busy evening, as well.

(WEATHER REPORT)

BLITZER: Reynolds, thank you very much.

WOLF: You bet.

Severe weather in big parts of the country.

Coming up here in THE SITUATION ROOM, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney apologizes. But for what? Find out what really caused her apparent sudden change of heart. We're going to share that with you.

And John Kerry one on one right here in THE SITUATION ROOM. I'll ask him some of the serious questions on your mind. Find out what he thinks about the possibility of running, perhaps, for the Democratic nomination against Senator Hillary Clinton.

Also, Jesus and Judas. Newly-discovered ancient text that tell a very different story about what happened and why.

Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back.

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney is now apologizing for a scuffle with a Capitol Hill Police officer. All this comes as a grand jury here in Washington is deciding whether to bring formal charges against her.

CNN's Brian Todd is joining us now from the newsroom with the latest developments -- Brian.

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this apology comes, we are told, after some considerable pressure was brought to bear on Cynthia McKinney from members of her own party.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (voice-over): How do you go from this...

REP. CYNTHIA MCKINNEY (D), GEORGIA: This has become much ado about a hairdo.

TODD: ... and this...

MCKINNEY: It doesn't matter if you're in the United States Capitol or the Georgia Capitol, the issue is racial profiling.

TODD: To this dramatic about face.

MCKINNEY: There should not have been any physical contact in this incident. I have always supported law enforcement, and will be voting for HR756, expressing my gratitude and appreciation to the professionalism and dedication of the men and women of the U.S. Capitol Police. I am sorry that this misunderstanding happened at all. And I regret its escalation and I apologize.

TODD: Cynthia McKinney's office tells CNN McKinney was apologizing to anyone who might have experienced discomfort in the scuffle with the Capitol Hill Police officer. But that apology did not come easily. A member of the Congressional Black Caucus, requesting anonymity, tells CNN other members told McKinney in a closed-door meeting she must apologize, that the situation had to be defused. Other Congressional sources tell CNN the attention on McKinney frustrated the House Democratic leadership.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: Let me say this on Cynthia McKinney. This is a matter that is under investigation. I have said that I don't see any conceivable reason why someone would strike a Capitol Police officer.

TODD: But as McKinney apologized, a Washington grand jury prepared to hear from two Congressional aides -- one Democrat, one Republican -- who witnessed the incident. Sources familiar with the investigation tell CNN it's unclear what impact her apology will have on the case. But at least one former federal prosecutor believes McKinney's contrition may carry weight.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is something certainly that the prosecutor will take into account, whether or not there is true remorse for whatever action she took.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD: When we asked if McKinney herself hoped the apology might sway prosecutors, her communications director said it was his hope that what he called the "leadership and courage" the congresswoman displayed today will enable her to get back to her work for her district -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Brian, thank you very much.

Politics now. Are Senator John McCain and the Reverend Jerry Falwell becoming the latest odd couple of American politics? One's a maverick, the other is a minister. What do they, though, have in common?

Let's turn to our chief national correspondent, John King -- John.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, let's start here, what do they have in common? They both sparred with each other back in campaign 2000, but they appear to be striking an alliance for 2008.

BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KING (voice-over): The old warrior of the moral majority is looking to shape the next presidential campaign and striking what to many is a surprising alliance.

JERRY FALWELL, CHANCELLOR, LIBERTY UNIVERSITY: For those of us social conservatives, he, at this moment, is by far the strongest candidate we could field against Hillary Clinton.

KING: He is Arizona Senator John McCain, the same John McCain who lashed out at Falwell six years ago, as his 2000 presidential campaign faltered.

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of the American politics and the agents of intolerance.

FALWELL: I paid no attention to it then. And, when we sat down last year in his office, it was as if it had never been said.

KING: Moving on includes McCain delivering the commencement address next month at Falwell's Liberty University, where young evangelicals are urged to be active in politics.

No outright endorsement yet, but Falwell is helping McCain arrange other appearances before conservative groups and offering to travel with the senator to help heal the wounds of campaign 2000.

FALWELL: My guess is, it will take him about six months of sincere communication with people in the religious right on certain platforms to put that all to -- to rest.

KING: It is a risky choice for Falwell, a test of his influence a quarter-century after the moral majority's heyday. But it's clear he relishes being back in the game and thinks the risks of a less tested Republican nominee are far greater.

FALWELL: Well, there's no question in my mind that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic candidate. She is going to have to shoot Bill or something not to be.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: A risk for Reverend Falwell, quite colorful there, Wolf. There's also a risk, of course, for Senator McCain.

He has a reputation, he uses the slogan of being a straight talker, and some say he's pandering here to the right. I sat down with Senator McCain today. He says that's not the case.

He says he doesn't hold grudges, he wants to make peace with Jerry Falwell. He wants to reach out to all wings of the Republican Party as he plans to run for president again in 2008. And he says that final decision, of course, he insists won't come until after November 2006. But he's doing everything he needs to do to get going -- Wolf.

BLITZER: He certainly is. Thanks very much, John, for that.

And to our viewers, remember, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where political news is arriving all the time.

CNN, America's campaign headquarters.

It's not every day a citizen of the United States stands up and tells the president of the United States he ought to be ashamed of himself. So how did President Bush react when that happened today in North Carolina? We're going to play for you that contentious exchange.

And how does John Kerry feel about the prospect of taking on Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008? I'm going to ask him.

Plus, my interview with CBS News anchor Bob Schieffer. We'll talk about the latest revelations on the White House leak story, also about Katie Couric coming to CBS.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We'll get to that amazing exchange that the president had with a private citizen in North Carolina earlier. You're going to want to see that.

But let's go to Carol Lin. She's joining us from the CNN global head quarters with a closer look at some other stories making news -- Carol.

CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Wolf.

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani says images from September 11, 2001 are forever etched in his mind. He was the government's first witness today in the penalty phase of Zacarias Moussaoui's sentencing trial.

Giuliani described watching a couple holding hands and jumping to their deaths to escape the burning World Trade Center towers. Jurors will decide if confessed al Qaeda conspirator Moussaoui should be executed or get life in prison.

Well, the New Orleans Police chief promises to investigate all allegations of misconduct against his officers. He announced that today after more than 80 officers have been fired following an investigation into accusations some police officers abandoned their posts during Hurricane Katrina. At least 50 officers were suspended. The police chief says the department is putting reforms in place, including more training and monitoring complaints.

Well, it's the British Isles' first confirmed case of bird flu. British officials say a wild swan found dead in Scotland was infect with the deadly virus. Tests are being done on 14 other birds to determine if they also have the disease.

Health officials say the British public is not at risk. Now, worldwide, millions of birds and more than 100 people have died of bird flu since 2003.

Well, they once wore the badge of New York's finest, but today a federal jury convicted two former police officers of moonlighting as mob hit men. Prosecutors say the so-called Mafia cops were on a mob family payroll at the same time they worked for the New York Police Department. Now, two could get life in prison for their roles in eight murders. Sentencing is May 22nd. And Wolf, their attorneys, of course, say that they plan to appeal.

BLITZER: Carol, thank you very much.

It's not often that someone publicly tells the president of the United States he should be ashamed of his policies and ashamed of himself. But that's exactly what happened today when the president visited North Carolina.

Listen to this exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without -- without charges, to...

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water and eating safe food. If I were a woman, you'd like to restrict my opportunity to make a choice and decision about whether I can abort a pregnancy on my own behalf.

You are...

BUSH: I'm not your favorite guy. Go ahead.

(APPLAUSE)

BUSH: Go on. What's your question?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I don't have a question. What I want to say to you is that I -- in my lifetime, I have never felt more ashamed nor more frightened by my leadership in Washington, including the presidency, by the Senate and...

BUSH: Let him speak. Let him speak.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I would hope -- I feel like, despite your rhetoric, the compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration. And I would hope from time to time that you have the humility and the grace to be ashamed of yourself inside yourself.

And I also want to say that I really appreciate the courtesy of allowing me to speak what I'm saying to you right now. That it is part of what this country's about.

(APPLAUSE)

BUSH: It is, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I know this doesn't come welcome to most of the people in this room, but I do appreciate that. I don't have a question, but I just want to make that comment to you. BUSH: I appreciate it. Thank you. The -- let me...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can I ask a question?

BUSH: the -- I'm going to start off with what you first said, if you don't mind.

You said that I tap your phones. I think that's what you said. You tapped your phone -- I tapped your phones, yes. No, that's right. No, let me finish.

I'd like to describe that decision I made about protecting this country. You can come to whatever conclusion you want. The conclusion is, I'm not going to apologize for what I did on the terrorist surveillance program, and I'll tell you why.

We were accused in Washington, D.C., of not connecting the dots, that we didn't do everything we could to protect you or others from the attack. And so I called in the people responsible for helping to protect the American people and the homeland and said is there anything more we can do?

And there -- out of this national NSA came the recommendation that we -- it would make sense for us to listen to a call outside the country, inside the country from al Qaeda or suspected al Qaeda in order to have real-time information from which to possibly prevent an attack. I thought that made sense, so long it was constitutional.

Now, you may not agree with the constitutional assessment given to me by lawyers, and we've got plenty of them in Washington. But they made this assessment that it was constitutional for me to make that decision.

I then, sir, took that decision to members of the United States Congress from both political parties and briefed them on the decision that was made in order to protect the American people. They -- and so members of both parties, both chambers were fully aware of a program intended to know whether or not al Qaeda was calling in or calling out of the country.

It seems like to make sense. If we're at war, we ought to be using tools necessary within the Constitution on a very limited basis, a program that's reviewed constantly to protect us.

Now, you and I have a different of agreement on what is needed to be protected, but you said would I apologize for that? The answer -- answer is absolutely not.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Earlier exchanges the president often had at these so- called town meetings, they were very carefully scripted. The questions pretty much known in advance. But you can see in recent weeks that has changed as these unscripted questions and very tough questions coming forward. That happened today in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Just ahead, intelligence leaks, the war in Iraq and a possible presidential run, including a challenge to Hillary Clinton. I'll ask Democratic Senator John Kerry about all of that. My one-on-one interview with him, that's coming up.

And did Judas really betray Jesus? A first-time look at a long- lost gospel that tells a very different story.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: The bottom line on the markets, inflation worries helped drive down the Dow and the S&P. The Nasdaq managed to squeak out a small gain.

With court papers revealing that he authorized the disclosure of some classified intelligence, President Bush may find himself in more hot water with the American public. His last election opponent, Democratic Senator John Kerry, is happy to help turn up the heat. I sat down with the senator earlier on Capitol Hill.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And joining us now, Senator John Kerry.

Senator, thanks for joining us in THE SITUATION ROOM.

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: A pleasure.

BLITZER: Let's talk a little bit about the news of the day, which is this disclosure and the government, the prosecution put forward some documents suggesting that the vice president's former chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was authorized actually by the president to leak classified information from a national intelligence estimate on Iraq. What do you make of this development?

KERRY: Well, it's incredible! I mean, it means, first of all, if it's true, it means that there is no accountability in this administration, the buck doesn't stop anywhere. It means you have a president of the United States who stood up in front of Americans and said, gee, we have to find out who did this, we're going to have an investigation, if I find the person, I'll fire him, and so he's been looking for himself for two years. It's stunning, and ...

BLITZER: The document didn't say that the president authorized Libby to leak the name of Valerie Plame, the CIA operative, only to leak information and the NIE, the National Intelligence Estimate, unclear which information in the NIE, although it's presumed involving former Ambassador Joe Wilson's trip to Niger.

KERRY: Right. But to the best of my knowledge, it's part of the same effort to discredit Joe Wilson and to credit illegitimate arguments for going to war in Iraq, and the fact is that the bottom line remains that if the president of the United States is authorizing for political purposes the release of classified information, you have a very serious issue.

BLITZER: How serious of an issue is it? There's already one motion to censure the president that Senator Russ Feingold has put forward because of the domestic warrantless wiretaps.

KERRY: Well, this would certainty be item number two on that list, if it is true. As I said -- I don't know all the facts, but I know what the court papers allege to have said, and if the court papers are accurate, then that is something that the Congress would have to take a very hard look at.

BLITZER: As you know, a lot of Republicans, including the former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, are saying if the Democrats take the majority in the Senate and/or the House, the first thing they're going to try to do is impeach this president.

KERRY: The first thing that the Democrats are going to try to do is put this country back on track and get a policy in Iraq that doesn't have our young kids being killed because of a bunch of Iraqi politicians won't come together and we're not involved enough to get them to.

And we will do the things necessary to put this country on a track, not a political track like we have today, but one that deals with health care, with jobs, with the budget deficit, and the real concerns of the American people. One thing I know we know how to do is govern, and I think this country needs governance of its best quality.

BLITZER: Is impeachment an option out there?

KERRY: Look, I don't even want to -- that's a road that's all political, all Washington, all process. What Americans want for us right now is to deal with the issues they're concerned about, and number one, they are appropriately concerned about young Americans who are putting their lives on the line in Iraq for a policy that doesn't work.

It is inexcusable that five months or four months plus after an election, they don't have a government, they're sitting around arguing with each other, and every day you've got kids coming back to Bethesda and to Walter Reed Hospital without their arms or limbs, with serious disabilities because of this policy of the president's. His policy is wrong, we need to be tough with the Iraqis, we need to say you've got until May 15th to put a government together, and if you don't put it together, our troops are leaving.

BLITZER: I want to get to Iraq in a moment, but let's just wind up on the censure. Senator Feingold has got this motion out there. Senator Leahy, the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee said the other day, he said this, "Our witnesses today will address whether censure is an appropriate sanction for the violations," the wireless wiretapping. "I am inclined," he said, "to believe that it is."

Are you inclined to believe that the behavior of the president, authorizing the wireless wiretaps, the surveillance, is appropriate for censure?

KERRY: Yes.

BLITZER: So you would support Senator Feingold on that?

KERRY: I am inclined to believe it, and I think the hearings are appropriate, and I would be prepared to vote for it, if there shows the appropriate linkage of what they've done to the requirements of the law. I believe it is, and I believe it is appropriate, but we have to have it properly vetted through the committee and I think it's appropriate to do that. But I think it's more than appropriate to be having this discussion and that debate, and it ought to be deeper than that.

Wolf, you've got a war that's being prosecuted by a secretary of defense who's been wrong on almost every step of the way, but there's no accountability. It's like our FEMA director, Mr. Brown, who wasn't prepared for Katrina. You have Mr. Wolfowitz, who leaves the Pentagon after designing the war, and he's promoted up. You have intelligence that was faulty, but you give the Medal of Freedom to the director of the CIA.

There is no accountability in this administration, and the Libby, Scooter Libby, the Scooter Libby evidence with respect to leaking is just one more example of the lack of accountability in this administration.

BLITZER: Here's what you wrote in "The New York Times" this week. You wrote, "Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15th to put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military."

What if it takes longer to do it? This is a historic, dramatic moment in Iraq. They're trying to forge an alliance between Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. It's clearly not an easy matter for them, given some of the historic ethnic tensions.

KERRY: But there's been almost no legitimate, major diplomatic effort to get them to do it over the last months. You know, a quick visit of the secretary of state, with all due respect, is not real sustained and deeply engaged diplomacy. You remember Henry Kissinger and shuttle diplomacy. You remember Jim Baker and his amazing Herculean efforts to try to piece together a legitimate coalition.

Where is that kind of engagement by the president and highest officials to bring the Iraqi ...

BLITZER: They do have the U.S. ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, he's working tirelessly to try to do that.

KERRY: But an ambassador is not. I have great respect for Ambassador Khalilzad. He is very good. I've visited with him there. He's doing his utmost, but it takes more than an ambassador in Baghdad to make this happen.

It takes a president, a vice president, secretary of state, working with the surrounding neighbors, working with the Arab League, working with the United Nations. That's why I've suggested you must have a Dayton Accords-like conference that brings people together in order to put that diplomacy on the table.

But secondly, and this is very important: the Iraqis have only responded to deadlines. It took a deadline for the transfer of the provisional government. They didn't like it, but they did it. It took a deadline for first election, a deadline for the referendum on the constitution, a deadline for the last election and they must be given a deadline, and it has to be serious. No young American soldier should be killed or lose limb or gain a major disability because Iraqi politicians can't seize this moment of democracy.

BLITZER: In that same "New York Times" article, you said even if they do put together a new government by the middle of May, which is not an easy challenge, obviously, but let's say they do. By the end of this year, you say the U.S. should pull out of Iraq. When we spoke here in the Senate on November 17th, this is what you said to me, and I'll read it to you. You said, "You set out a timetable not for withdrawal, but for success, that allows you to withdraw." You've had a change of heart since then?

KERRY: Because the situation on the ground has changed since then, and what I did say at the same time that I said we need a timetable, I said I believe we could have most of the troops out by the end of this year.

Now, the key is that back then, most people thought we were fighting the jihadists, the foreign jihadists on the ground. That has now completely transformed, and it is not the jihadists who present the greatest threat, it is a civil war that presents the greatest threat.

BLITZER: You think there is a civil war right now?

KERRY: There is a low-grade civil war. It has not yet burst out into a full-fledged civil war, but it is such. Former Prime Minister Allawi called it a civil war. It is sufficient that the problem is now principally Shia and Sunni, and the only solution, according to our own generals, General Casey said this can not be solved militarily, it must be solved politically. I believe over the next eight months, we have the ability to do that and our troops have done their job.

BLITZER: So are you running for president again?

KERRY: I honestly don't know yet. It is too early. I am working mostly on the 2006 races. I've been supporting over 135 candidates around the country. I've been in 33 states, many of them have nothing to do with presidential politics, but they have everything to do with building a broader Democratic base in the country. That's what I think we have to do, is win seats in the House and Senate, and I'm determined to try to help do it.

BLITZER: And in our CNN/"USA Today" Gallup Poll, among registered democrats, we asked their favorite choices for the 2008 presidential nomination. Senator Clinton gets 39 percent, Senator Kerry 15, Al Gore 13, John Edwards 12. What would be different between a John Kerry run, another John Kerry run, and a Hillary Clinton run? She hasn't announced she is running. But a lot of people think she will.

KERRY: First of all, I'm not going to get into a race that doesn't exist, that's premature. That's just not worth your time or mine.

BLITZER: Well, Senator Biden, who's running, he says that he brings a lot more to the table in terms of his experience than Senator Clinton.

KERRY: When and if I decide that I'm going to be a candidate, I'll tell you, but I'll tell you this, I came within 60,000 votes, I won 10 million more votes than Bill Clinton did for re-election, and we exceeded our goals in every precinct in America. We won a lot of seats in legislatures and elsewhere around the country. I'm proud of the campaign.

We made some mistakes. I take responsibility for them. I know that if I ran again, I've learned a lot, I won't repeat those mistakes. I think I know how to win, but it is way too early to be getting into a head-to-head analysis and I'm just not going to do that.

BLITZER: One of your former supporters was quoted in the "Boston Globe," your hometown newspaper, saying this, John Wertheim of the New Mexico Democratic Party, chairman, "I do sense that there is a feeling in the party that he," referring to John Kerry, "has had his chance, and that we need to move on to someone new. We need a real breath of fresh air, a new voice for the party." I'm sure you've heard that ...

KERRY: Some people have that feeling and they are entitled to that feeling and I respect that feeling and I will listen carefully to people. As I said, I haven't made up my mind, but I'm confident in my ability to be able to win if I make a decision to run based on the lessons learned in the race I ran last time.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: John Kerry speaking with me in his Senate office earlier today. Up ahead here in THE SITUATION ROOM, the "CBS Evening News" anchor Bob Schieffer will be turning over the reins to Katie Couric. I'll talk with him about how he feels about that decision and what he thinks about the new White House leak revelations.

And was Jesus Christ really betrayed, or was Judas being obedient? A newly discovered gospel that may challenge everything you've read before. Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We'll talk a little bit more about our top story. In a stunning development in court, papers filed, prosecutors now say the Vice President Dick Cheney told Lewis "Scooter" Libby that President Bush personally authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq before the war.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Joining us now to talk a little bit more about that, as well as some widely watched changes over at CBS News is the veteran journalist Bob Schieffer. He's the anchor of "The CBS Evening News." Bob, thanks very much for joining us. Also the managing editor and a good one at that.

I want to talk about the changes. But what do you make, given your experience here in Washington over these many years, about this latest revelation involving this leak, Bob?

BOB SCHIEFFER, "CBS EVENING NEWS": Well, I think that the irony here is that here you have the Bush White House, which is known to be anti-leak -- and if there's one thing the president doesn't like, it's officials in the White House talking out of school and leaking documents.

And now if what Scooter Libby says is correct -- and all we know is his version of the events here -- but if it is correct, you have the president and the vice president using their aides to leak selectively classified information. That's a pretty serious charge.

There's a real question, you know, Wolf, as to whether a president can declassify things on the spot. And I'm not the legal expert to give you an answer on that, but I'll tell you one thing for sure, this is going to make for some fine political fodder for the Democrats. And I would guess that they're already churning out the press releases as we speak.

BLITZER: What does this feel like for you, Bob, a veteran journalist that has been in Washington for decades? A lot of us remember Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinsky, Whitewater. What does this have the feel for you? Is this a big deal or a little deal?

SCHIEFFER: Well, it's a deal that's going to keep the deal going, that's for sure, Wolf. I mean, this thing just seems to find new legs. And when you have the disclosures like this, it gets it back into play and the papers and on television. It just sort of keeps it on the front burner, as it were. And if there's one thing that the president, of course, and the White House doesn't want is for people to keep talking about this thing. Well, this keeps them talking for a while, whatever the legal implications.

BLITZER: All right, let's move on and talk a little bit about Katie Couric, the big announcement yesterday. She's going to be taking your chair at the "CBS Evening News." You've done a great job over this past year. The ratings are way up. A lot of the people at CBS News -- and I know many of them have been inspired by your leadership. What do you make of this decision for Katie Couric now to step in?

SCHIEFFER: Well, I think it's a very good thing for us at CBS News. And you and I have talked about this on camera and off, Wolf, and you know that I never had any idea of this being a permanent assignment. I'm just too old to do this. I'm not the person you want to build the news department around.

BLITZER: You're only 69 -- you're only 69 years old. Mike Wallace thinks you're a youngster.

SCHIEFFER: Well, today's 69 is yesterday's 68 or something, I suppose. But whatever the case, this was always going to be a temporary thing for me, and I wanted it to be that.

But here's the latest, Wolf. The "New York Daily News" today, this sort of sums up my feelings. There's that old fellow Bob Schieffer standing there and he says, "No one ever talks about my legs."

BLITZER: I'm sure you have lovely legs, Bob. Let me read to you, though, what Andy Rooney said on "Imus in the Morning" yesterday. Andy Rooney of CBS News, "I'm not enthusiastic about it," referring to the Katie Couric decision. "I think everybody likes Katie Couric. I mean, how could you not like Katie Couric? But I don't know anybody at CBS News who is pleased that she's coming here."

I assume you heard what Andy Rooney had said.

SCHIEFFER: Well, if he says he didn't know anyone, I hate to tell you, Andy, but you must have not talked to me because I'm pleased she's coming here. So I would have to question you on that.

You know, I learned a long time ago that I let everybody speak for themselves. That's Andy's view. That's what, you know, that's what Andy does. He speaks his mind. I just don't agree with him. He's a great friend of mine, but I don't agree with him on that.

BLITZER: Bob Schieffer, a journalist's journalist, one of the best in the business. We hope you will frequently join us here in THE SITUATION ROOM, as well.

SCHIEFFER: Thank you very much, Wolf.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And up ahead, did Judas really betray Jesus? There is a controversial discovery that challenges the basic facts of this story. We're going to tell you what it is.

Plus, your answers to our question of the hour. Do you agree with Howard Dean's statement that President Bush can no longer be trusted to keep America safe in light of the new revelations in the CIA leak case? Stay with us. Jack Cafferty standing by.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: He's the eternal symbol of betrayal, but did the disciple Judas really get a bad rap? A new document challenges the long held assertion that Judas betrayed Jesus.

Let's bring in Mary Snow. She's in New York and she has more -- Mary. MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Wolf, in the dictionary the name Judas is synonymous with betrayal, the apostle who turned on Jesus and led to the crucifixion. Ancient documents that were salvaged are now providing a different version.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SNOW (voice-over): It questions the way Jesus died and what has been considered gospel for nearly 2,000 years. Was Judas Iscariot, one of the 12 disciples with Jesus in his final days really a traitor, or was he the favorite disciple given a secret as part of a divine plan?

ELAINE PAGELS, NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC PANEL MEMBER: The Gospel of Judas is a real surprise. It pictures Judas not as the worst villain in the history of the world, as he's always been thought of in Christian tradition, but as the one disciple whom Jesus entrusted with secret understanding.

SNOW: That secret understanding, say scholars, is contained in these writings from 300 AD, and referred to by researchers as the Gospel of Judas. The writings revealed Judas handed Jesus over to the authorities, because Jesus instructed him to do so as part of a plan for salvation, and not for money or because of Satan, as written in the Bible.

Why is it only coming to light now? Scholars say the early church considered these secret teachings blasphemy.

PAGELS: Many of these were buried, attacked, challenged, denounced, and this text has just barely survived.

SNOW: The National Geographic Society partnered with scholars to restore and translate the battered documents that were found in a desert in Egypt in the 1970s, traded on the antiquities market, and then stashed inside a safe-deposit box for 16 years in New York before an arts dealer returned them to Europe.

There is skepticism about their content. A Vatican historian calls the Judas Gospel, quote, "a product of religious fantasy." Other scholars say it changes nothing.

JAMES ROBINSON, CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY: It's artificial, mythological invention of the 2nd century.

SNOW: The scholars who studied these texts say, whether they're true or not, they add to the understanding of the complexity of Christianity.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SNOW: But all seem to agree that the Gospel of Judas will be the subject of intense debate and interest. It's also the subject of the National Geographic Channel special this Sunday -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Thanks very much for that, Mary Snow reporting. Our Internet reporter, Jacki Schechner, has more on this potentially very significant development -- Jacki.

JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Wolf, you can study the entire manuscript yourself online at nationalgeographic.com. You can also interact with it. Take a look. This is page 46 right here. And what you can do is take a look at just the document itself and scroll over different portions of the document. You can also pick up the English translation of certain pages.

This one here, if we can get that to pop up, says you will be cursed by the other generations and you will come to rule over them. There's also photographs online of what the manuscript looked like after being in storage for so many years, and also past documents that have been found, like the Gospel of Mary that was discovered in the late 19th century and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were found in 1947 -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Thank you, Jacki, for that.

Let's check in with Paula now. She is standing by to tell us what is coming up at the top of the hour. Hi, Paula.

PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Do you notice my new home tonight, Wolf?

BLITZER: You look (inaudible).

ZAHN: You recognize this corner.

BLITZER: Yes, I do.

ZAHN: Yes, we're right outside CNN's New York Broadcast Center near Columbus Circle, enjoying the buzz of the city. You just missed a very exciting scene here with about three or four dozen New York police cars going by. We're not too sure why.

But what we're going to be talking about at the top of the hour is some very severe weather in the Midwest tonight. It is extremely dangerous. Where are the tornadoes touching down? We're going to get the very latest forecast and the latest details on the 12 that have touched down so far.

And did you know that in some places, one in four victims of domestic abuse happens to be a man who was attacked by a woman? We're going to look at the role reversal that is surprising lots of people, and we'll also be taking you inside the very emotional testimony of the former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, at the Moussaoui trial. All that and more coming up at the top of the hour, Wolf.

BLITZER: Thanks. Sounds good. Thank you, Paula.

Still ahead here in THE SITUATION ROOM, Howard Dean says President Bush can no longer be trusted to keep America safe in light of the new revelations in the CIA leak case. Do you agree? Jack Cafferty going through your email.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Let's get right up to Jack and "The Cafferty File" -- Jack.

CAFFERTY: Wolf, in light of new revelations in the CIA leak case, the Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean says President Bush can no longer be trusted to keep America safe. We asked if you agree with that statement.

Tom in Waukesha, Wisconsin: "I'm appalled at the attitude of President Bush. He has no concern, no need to explain, absolutely no guts to rationalize and help the American people understand his decision-making process. He apparently is running our country as his kingdom, and his arrogance is inexcusable."

Jen in New Jersey: "Jack, I don't need Howard Dean to tell me Bush can no longer be trusted to keep America safe. Four and a half years after 9/11, our borders and ports are wide open. You don't need to be a genius to figure out the risk there."

Tom writes: "Jack, I might be concerned about what Howard Dean said today, if I, like millions of others, first cared what Howard Dean ever says, period."

Robert writes: "President Bush has spent his capital. In fact, his account is overdrawn. I'm surprised it took so long for the American press to discover the commander in chief is, in fact, the leaker in chief. Too bad the safety and secrecy of our intelligence has taken a back seat to political gain."

Patricia in Tyler Hill, Pennsylvania, writes, "Do we have enough to impeach him now?"

And D.C. in Tennessee: "One leaks confidential information. One releases declassified documents. Or is it that obnoxious phrase we've heard before, define leak?" Wolf.

BLITZER: If the president wants to release classified information, Jack, he has the authority to do so, but the normal procedure is you go back to the agency...

CAFFERTY: That's right.

BLITZER: ... the CIA, and they review it, and then he can do it. But this is an extraordinary decision, I assume, on his part.

CAFFERTY: Well, it's like that old -- the play on the Clinton thing, depends on what the definition of is is. I guess this depends on what the definition of declassified is. But it's pretty lame from where I sit. I don't know.

BLITZER: See you tomorrow, Jack. Thanks very much.

We're in THE SITUATION ROOM weekdays, 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. Eastern, back at 7:00 p.m. Eastern. Paula Zahn standing by to pick up our coverage -- Paula. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com