Return to Transcripts main page

On the Story

Correspondents Discuss Stories Behind the Stories

Aired January 07, 2006 - 19:00   ET

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

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: ON THE STORY is coming up in a moment, but first a look at what's happening now in the news. Doctors say the sole survivor of a West Virginia mine disaster is showing some physical improvement and they say that Randy McCoy may be relocated from Pittsburgh to a West Virginia hospital tonight to be closer to home.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon still critical, still in a coma and according to his doctors, not out of danger. They don't know the full extent of his condition. Sharon has undergone three brain operations.

And Hugh Thompson, Jr., is dead. He's the army helicopter pilot credited with rescuing Vietnamese villagers during the infamous My Lai massacre. Thompson reportedly died of cancer at a veterans hospital in Virginia.

Coming up next, ON THE STORY, our correspondents discuss the criticism about how CNN and other news organizations covered early false reports about the West Virginia mining disaster.

And later, "CNN Presents, Hope and Heartbreak," what really happened inside the Sago mine? That's coming up at 8:00 Eastern. Thanks for joining us. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. See you in about 30 minutes.

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR, ON THE STORY: This is CNN and we are ON THE STORY. From the campus of the George Washington University, in the heart of the nation's capital, our correspondents bring you the stories behind the stories they're covering.

Wolf Blitzer is on the story in Israel. What's in stake after Ariel Sharon for his country and for peace?

Randi Kaye was on the story in West Virginia as first reports, then final reports raised and then ended hopes for a dozen miners.

Suzanne Malveaux tells how the lessons of Katrina kept President Bush more visibly engaged in the mine accident and the aftermath.

Internet reporter Jacki Schechner goes online where bloggers slam CNN for reporting on the disaster.

Ed Henry explains the new phase of the Washington scandal swirling around super lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

And in Texas and Oklahoma, Jeanne Meserve is on the story of the hard, dangerous fight against wildfires.

Welcome. I'm Ali Velshi. With me here, Suzanne Malveaux and Ed Henry and our studio audience. Our correspondents will be taking questions from the studio audience, which is drawn from visitors, college students and people across Washington.

First, the Middle East and the impact over the years of Ariel Sharon. He's been hated and loved and condemned for making war and praised for seeking peace. CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer is on that story. Take a look at Wolf's reporter's notebook.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is a critical time here in the Middle East. Do you have a sense what's going to happen in this country? Sharon, a hard liner, someone who's the architect of the settlement policy, a military man, was seen as someone who had the credibility within Israel to deliver. I did interview him several times and it was always a tough interview because he would never really budge.

Israelis and Palestinians are now beginning to contemplate a future without the man who's loomed so large over the Middle East for decades. It's a great story for me. It's a story that I know quite a bit about. The first job that I got as a reporter was working for the Reuters news agency right here in Israel and that was in the '70s. So I've covered this story for 30 years.

VELSHI: And Wolf Blitzer joins us now from Jerusalem. Wolf, you normally say goodbye to the audience at 6:00 Eastern and come back at 7:00 Eastern. On Wednesday night when this story broke, you said goodbye to the audience at 6:00 and then you were on your way to Israel. You just got up, got on a plane and left. How does that work? How do you get there and end up doing your job from there, after not doing that for so long?

BLITZER: Well, it just comes with the territory. I've been doing these kinds of things for 30 years. You just go with the story. And we got the word that Ariel Sharon suffered a massive stroke and made a few phone calls. It was really, really serious. I literally went out to Reagan National airport, got on a plane, flew actually on Air Canada to Toronto. We discovered there was a nonstop from Toronto on Air Canada to Tel Aviv. I was on that plane. Had a suitcase that my wife brought over to the airport for me. And the crew and my producers, all of us made it and we were the next day reporting from Jerusalem. It's just part of the territory. It comes with the struggle to be a journalist, which we all love doing.

VELSHI: Wolf, the audience very rarely gets a chance to ask you questions directly so we're going to go there. Sir, your name, where you're from?

QUESTION: My name's Kasan (ph). I'm from Great Falls, Virginia. And my question is, with all the uncertainty right now in Israel, regarding Sharon's health and the future of the Israeli government, what is the general mood of the people and the politicians there?

BLITZER: It's remarkably calm Kasan. You would think there would be a lot more attention. But people have come to terms now with the fact that Ariel Sharon almost certainly is not going to be able to reemerge as Israel's political leadership -- leader. And there's going to be a whole bunch of others who are going to be emerging now in this political campaign between now and the end of March when Israel has its scheduled election. So people have adjusted to it. It sort of reminds me of what happened 10 years ago in the immediate aftermath of the assassination of Yitzach (ph) Rabin under very different circumstances. People quickly grasped what was going on. And this is a democracy here. And they realized that, yes, one of the leaders is gone but they're going to have to move on and that's what they're doing right now.

VELSHI: And just like in American politics, Wolf, stability, whether or not you like a leader is worth something. And on Friday, we saw the price of oil shoot up more than $1 just on the fact that there might be less stability in the Middle East as a result. We have another question from the audience. Sir, your name and where you're from.

QUESTION: I'm Doug from (INAUDIBLE) Arkansas. What are the prospects for Ariel Sharon's new party in this changing political landscape?

BLITZER: Right now, the polls show this party, the Kadima (ph) party, a centrist party that Sharon founded, doing remarkably well, even without Sharon atop that list. Two polls that came out on Friday in Israel from major Israeli news organizations showed that with Ehud Omert (ph), the acting prime minister, the former mayor of Jerusalem, a close associate of Sharon, this would still be the dominant party in the new election if the elections - in the new parliament if the new elections were held today. With labor coming in second and Likud under the former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu coming in third. Having said all that, it's still a long time between now and the end of March. And the political landscape in Israel certainly capable of changing. But right now, this new centrist party that Sharon created would do remarkably well.

VELSHI: Your name and where you're from.

QUESTION: My name is Ashley Amidon (ph) and I'm from Dale City. Sir, given the now inherent vacuum in the Israeli political infrastructure, how do you think that the Bush administration's reaction and goals in the Middle East will be changed towards going for peace?

BLITZER: I don't think there's going to be any significant change in the Bush administration's approach. The Bush administration would like to see the peace process get off the ground, would like to capitalize on the Sharon government's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, the dismantling of those Jewish settlements there and would like to see the process go on, would like to see a dialogue, a real serious negotiation, develop between any Israeli government and the new Palestinian authority leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian authority president. Palestinians by the way have their own elections scheduled for the end of this month. And Abbas faces a stiff challenge from Hamas, other Palestinian militant groups. So that's very much up in the air right now. But I don't see any significant change as far as the Bush administration is concerned.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, this is Suzanne and a lot of people I've been talking to in the Bush administration as you know, they describe the situation as really quite vulnerable, that they are very worried that perhaps this whole sense of moving forward with the peace process has been weakened because Sharon was such a powerful force. Is there that sense of nervousness or vulnerability that you're getting from Israeli officials there?

BLITZER: Certainly Palestinians are nervous about it. One thing that's almost ironic, Sharon, the hard liner, architect of the settlement policy, they used to call him the bulldozer, he did come around as prime minister and make concessions, which few had thought he was capable of making and he moved towards the center of the Israeli political spectrum. He had as a warrior of Israel, as a general who fought in all of Israel's wars, that credibility with the Israeli public. If Sharon said Israel's security could withstand these kinds of concessions, a lot of people in this country believed him. And the Bush administration is right to be worried now because these other leaders on the horizon may not necessarily be able to deliver as effectively as someone as Sharon potentially could have. So it's a serious problem.

VELSHI: Wolf Blitzer, a pleasure to spend every afternoon with you in the situation room. Thank you for being with us tonight. Wolf Blitzer in Jerusalem.

From Israel to West Virginia and the mine disaster, there was sadness mixed with anger over how we all learned the 12 miners were not alive but had perished deep underground. Our Randi Kaye is back on that story in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: CNN is on the story here on the campus of the George Washington University in Washington, DC. The drama of the West Virginia mine disaster dominated the start of the week, a rescue mission that found only one miner alive. Twelve men were found dead deep in the mine and a situation so confusing that wrong information gave false hope for hours. Our correspondent Randi Kaye was at the mine on the story. Look at Randi's reporter notebook.

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: As a correspondent, we're supposed to disconnect ourselves from the story. We're not supposed to get emotional. But it was so emotional. I shed a few tears when I could see these people here at the church hugging and crying and I was here with them celebrating with them.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We have a number of people down at the church. We're trying to get information. But Randi Kaye is standing by I'm told. Randi, what are you hearing?

KAYE: I spoke with a woman. And it turns out that she's saying the same thing. She's told that they were just told in the church that there is only one survivor. But when it came out that the miners hadn't survived, in fact, only one of them had, I felt deceived. I felt angry. I felt frustrated. It was not a pretty scene here at the church where the families had been gathering. They were angry. They were -- they didn't want to talk to the media. They threw one of our photographers on the hood of the car. They were yelling, shouting at the mine officials, calling them hypocrites and liars. It was just a terrible emotional scene. Peggy Cohen is a daughter in pain. Her father Fred Ware Jr. died in the Sago mine. In one interview with Peggy Cohen, I just felt for her. She was tearing up. I having lost my own dad, could understand what she was feeling. I hugged her and I cried with her. It was really tough.

VELSHI: Randi, it seems like a lifetime's gone by between that night where I was one of those people watching you on TV and watching this unfold. A lot of questions here. Ed Henry's going to kick it off. Ed.

ED HENRY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Randi, I wonder, how did you gain the trust of some of these people? You landed so many important interviews, very emotional interviews. And obviously these people were angry in addition to grieving. How did you gain their trust? How did you approach them? It's obviously difficult because you want to let them grieve, but you still have a job to do

KAYE: Absolutely and that's the real challenge Ed is just finding the right balance between getting the story. We know how our bosses want us to get the story. They want to hear from these families. They want to celebrate with these families and they also want to mourn with these families and we're certainly here to do a job. At the same time, you have to know when to approach them. Many of them didn't want us near them. They made it very, very clear, do not approach. And others really wanted to get their story out. They were so angry. But it's all about gaining the trust and also just talking to them and trying to let them know that we're all here to do a job and if they don't want to talk, that's OK too.

VELSHI: Randi, a question from the audience, your name and where you're from sir.

QUESTION: Hi. My name is Michael. I'm from Pikeville College in Pikeville, Kentucky. And I was wondering, how do you distinguish reporting emotion from fact on a story like this in West Virginia?

KAYE: It's very difficult Michael. Here when the good news was coming out, I actually started to get very emotional just standing next to Anderson Cooper live on the air. And then he brought me in on the air and we were both very excited. But you have to sort of keep that excitement in check. Even though you're happy for these families, you still have to be professional. And at that time, we didn't even know exactly what had happened. We were hearing it from somebody live on our air, but we hadn't confirmed all the facts yet. So I ran up and again trying to keep the excitement in check, because we didn't know yet, got some confirmation from a congresswoman and also the governor who was leaving the church and giving the thumbs up saying we had a miracle here in West Virginia. But it is really tough to keep those emotions in check.

VELSHI: Your name and where you're from? QUESTION: My name is Tristin (ph). I'm from Pensacola, Florida. Misinformation on the mine tragedy seems to be showing that you're trying to provide a very accurate response in a very quick amount of time. My question is, when you are a reporter, how do reporters accurately respond with or quickly respond with only a small amount of accurate information to work with?

KAYE: Well, we never know if the information that we're getting is accurate. And really, television is changing so much, live television is changing so much, we're on the scene. We have somebody run up to our live camera with tears running down his cheeks, jumping up and down, out of breath, saying 12 miners are alive! Twelve miners are alive. And we were saying to him, how do you know this? Who's telling you this? So we weren't necessarily reporting it. But here we have somebody standing next to us telling us this right on our air. So we right away get set and try and confirm some of it. We tried to reach the mining officials. But they only hold very scheduled press conferences so we couldn't get any confirmation there. So I ran about 100 feet from our live camera, which was just down the street, to the Sago Baptist church where the families were, and just started talking to people and grabbed that congresswoman who told us, 12 are alive.

VELSHI: Ma'am, your name and where you're from.

QUESTION: I'm Pat from (INAUDIBLE) University in Hamden, Connecticut. How does your job change when the media becomes part of the story, like happened in West Virginia and also with hurricane Katrina?

VELSHI: Two stories which Randi's been a big part of.

KAYE: Certainly. This was really -- we were certainly right smack in the middle of it. And partly because it was unfolding live on our air. And in that situation, you can't help but be part of the story. There were some questions about, maybe we shouldn't have gone with it. But we did go with it because we didn't have a choice. People were talking about it on our air. So I guess the media being part of this story, you just sort of go with it. You try and confirm what you can. Make sure that you're not too much of the story. Remember what the focus should be. And that would be the simplest way of looking at it. That was certainly the case here.

In terms of Katrina, we were really part of the story because I think in a way we were making things happen. We were affecting change in that community. I was on the scene when people were saying to me, where is FEMA? Where is the Red Cross? Where is our help? It's been three days. I'm out of my medicine or whatever else they need. They had no food, no water. So by putting that on the air, we were able to get them some help. So we did become part of the story. But I was happy to get them some help so I didn't mind that.

VELSHI: Randi Kaye in West Virginia, stay with us. This conversation's going to continue in a second. Our Internet reporter Jacki Schechner is back on the story online with how the mine story played out and how some bloggers ripped into CNN for how we reported the story and told what we knew. Stay with us. ON THE STORY is coming right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: We are on the story. We're going online. This is an early-morning copy of Wednesday's newspaper. "Alive, Miners Beat Odds." This is just one example of a reputable news organization that got it wrong. We were one of those too. Many of us were watching as CNN correspondents worked long and hard to get the mine disaster story right. A lot of people and a lot of newspapers ended up on your door like this one with the wrong outdated information. CNN brought you the story through the night, updating it and changing it and CNN has its critics too. Our Internet reporter Jacki Schechner is on this story online. Jacki, take it away.

JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Ali, it was a rough night Tuesday night all around and there was a lot of finger pointing at the international coal group and at the media and the way that we covered the story. I want to talk to Jeff Jarvis, who blogs at buzzmachine.com. He's a former media executive himself and he wrote a post about this. He's joining us live via web cam from New Jersey. Jeff, I want to talk to you about this. Your title of your post was "Tragic Error" and you said that the media can't be trusted. Why do you say that?

JEFF JARVIS, BUZZMACHINE.COM: I think it's really a lesson Jacki that we never could be. We get things wrong in media. Everybody does. The mistake was that media acted as if it did not make mistakes. But we do.

SCHECHNER: When you say we, you're talking as a blogger but you consider yourself the media. Do you do that because of the nature of blogging in journalism and how they're meshed together now?

JARVIS: Yes. I think there's no difference. The camera that I talk to you from tonight I could have on the site of a news story. And anyone can report now. And anyone can gather news differently now. And the fog of war is the fog of news. And we will get things wrong. The important job, the thing we have to learn from this story is how do we better inform the public about what we don't know, what we don't know?

SCHECHNER: But Jeff, we talk about transparency. I cover the blogs for a living and everybody's screaming transparency, transparency. We want to see it happen. Here's a story where we saw it happen. And then we get slammed for showing everybody what happened. How do we reconcile that?

JARVIS: I'm not sure we do. Newspapers are in the worst shape because they couldn't correct quickly enough. When you have cameras on the scene and the church bells are pealing, what can you do but show that? You can't say, well those church bells are unconfirmed folks. You have to show that. But what else do you do? Perhaps you say more. Perhaps you say what you don't know yet.

SCHECHNER: Jeff, let's bring in a couple more of our reporters. Let's bring in Ali and Randi. Guys.

VELSHI: Jeff, let's take it right over to Randi because she was there when it happened and we all have that benefit of looking back on it. Randi, have you had that benefit of looking back on it? And would you, could you have done anything differently?

KAYE: I don't think so Ali. I think -- I don't think we got it wrong. I think we got it right. I think it was unfolding live on our air. Immediately I left the Anderson Cooper live shot, ran to the church, started speaking with families. I based -- we based our information and said it this way that we were getting -- this is what we are getting from family members, telling us not only have the miners been found but they're coming to the church and they're fighting to see their families. I went right for Congresswoman Shelley Capito who we had come to know this week and talked with her and said, we're hearing 12 miners alive. I specifically said to her, what can you confirm for us at this hour? And she said, 12 miners alive. We also had one of our other producers here on the scene. And he watched as the governor left this area with his thumbs up saying, there's a miracle in West Virginia. You hear all that information, what else are we doing to do? Tell those people that they're wrong? So I think we got it right. When it changed, we corrected it immediately. I don't think we were wrong.

VELSHI: Jeff?

JARVIS: New Orleans, where we had to say what the mayor said, even when it was wrong. But maybe we have to -- do you think there was any lesson you learned Randi about maybe different ways to communicate? That the next time this happens, you and we don't want to get trapped again? Could you have said the story any differently, or the next story would you say it any differently?

KAYE: You know, I don't think we could have done anything differently in this case because we had people coming up to our camera. They knew where CNN was this week. They were coming to us with whatever information they had. This man walked right and up said, "12 alive." Just like hours later, sad as it was, a woman and her children walked right up to our live camera on the air and said "there was only one alive." Immediately in that case, I had my producer out of New York yelling at me, go get confirmation, get a second person. That's what we do. We know what we're supposed to do and I happened to come right to the woman who was coming out of the church, who happened to be the mother-in-law of Randall McCoy, the only surviving miner and she told me the same thing. I went right back to the live camera and told them we had a second source. Everybody at that point was filing out of the church telling us the same thing. So I don't think we could have done anything differently when it was unfolding so quickly.

VELSHI: Jeff, back to Jacki's question, where does this problem develop from? Is it because we have news on all the time or is it because you guys push us to have news on all the time and not filter anything?

JARVIS: I'm not sure it's a problem. I think it's a new opportunity we have to figure out. We do now have news all the time. We have ubiquitous coverage of news. I think what has to happen is we have to understand that the public now has to act as an editor. They have to be as suspicious as we as reporters always were. But we had hours before the show came on or the edition came out. Now, news is constant. The flow of information is constant. And the public has to learn how to judge news the way editors do. The truth is, I think the public has always done that.

SCHECHNER: Ali, back to you.

VELSHI: Thanks to Jacki Schechner on the story online and to Jeff Jarvis of buzzmachine.com and also thanks Randi Kaye who's had a long week joining us now from Tallmansville, West Virginia.

Well, from the mine disaster we're coming back to Washington. Straight ahead, a check on what's making news right now, plus congressional correspondent Ed Henry back on the story of Washington's scandal in the case of super lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

But first, here's a behind the scenes look at how the mine disaster sent us looking for other angles of the coal story.

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Fredericka Whitfield.

ON THE STORY returns in a moment.

But first, a look at what's happening now in the news.

At this hour, the sole survivor of the West Virginia mining disaster is being relocated from Pittsburgh to a West Virginia hospital. His doctors OKed the move because they say Randy McCloy is showing some signs of physical improvement.

Republican Congressman Tom DeLay has announced he is permanently giving up his post as House majority leader. DeLay temporarily stepped down in September after he was indicted on campaign finance charges in his home state of Texas. He is now saying, as he's said all along, he has done nothing wrong.

New wildfires have broken out in Oklahoma. A state official tells CNN that more than 20 new fires broke out today, including a large grass fire in the City of Edmund. We'll have more on the fight to save homes tonight at 10:00 Eastern.

And doctors in Jerusalem say the swelling in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's brain has decreased, but he's still in critical condition. Sharon has undergone three rounds of brain surgery after suffering a major stroke on Wednesday night.

And later, on "CNN PRESENTS," "Hope and Heartbreak: Inside the Sago Mine Tragedy." What really happened in the mine, from the first anxious moments to the final letter of a dying miner? That's coming up at 8:00 Eastern.

That's what's happening now in the news.

I'm Fredericka Whitfield.

Now back to ON THE STORY.

ALI VELSHI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: CNN is on the story at the George Washington University in the nation's capital.

Well, what makes this town tick? Is it politics, money, power? All of those were on display in the case of lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He pleaded guilty this week to tax evasion, mail fraud and conspiracy, including allegations that he bribed public officials.

Our congressional correspondent, Ed Henry, was on the story from the halls of Congress to the federal courthouse.

Here is his notebook.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

ED HENRY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This is the kind of story where, as a reporter, you start calling congressional offices to try to get reaction. Nobody is around. They're all running from the phones. They're scurrying for cover.

That deal was just cut moments ago in the courthouse behind me.

It's like one Washington scandal after another. You just change the names, but they all end up going through the same courthouse, the same camera people, the same reporters, all hanging out, waiting for that one shot of somebody coming out of their court appearance. In this case, you had Jack Abramoff emerging.

While Democrats are sort of feasting on this right now, they may have some of their own lawmakers pulled down by this, as well.

This story has been bubbling and bubbling and it's hard to keep on top of it, because there are so many angles to it, there are so many parts of the web, people cutting deals even before Abramoff cut his deal. And you're trying to stay on top of it while you're covering all kinds of other stories and all of a sudden it's bubbling, it's bubbling and the dam just breaks. And finally he cuts the deal.

But now the big question is who else is he bringing down with him?

(END VIDEO TAPE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: So, Ed, that was a really exciting day for both of us.

HENRY: It was.

MALVEAUX: CNN broke that story. It was really, it was really quite fun in the beginning, because we got a tip early in the morning and had to actually embargo the information and finally got the call. And you and I had been on the phone talking back and forth that morning. We broke it. And it took 45 minutes before anybody else got it on the air. It was a little nerve-wracking at that point, wondering, oh, you know, we're out there by ourselves. And they ended up confirming this.

But what was it like for you? Because I know this story has huge political implications.

HENRY: It does. I mean I've been hearing from sources who basically say that Jack Abramoff was sort of this ferocious e-mailer who was constantly on his Blackberry laptop and e-mailing all of his business partners. And that's a treasure trove for these prosecutors, because I hear there are tens of thousands of e-mails they've gone through that may demonstrate some of the corruption there, implicating people beyond him.

Normally, prosecutors have one word against somebody else's word. In this case, they may have documentary evidence.

And there was another story that broke late this week, as well, with Duke Cunningham, the congressman who had already resigned because he took bribes...

VELSHI: He was in tears when he resigned.

HENRY: Exactly. And CNN confirmed that, in fact, a couple of months back, he was wearing a wire and talking to some of these defense contractors. He was recording conversations. That's sending people on the Hill scurrying around, as well.

Did any of these contractors implicate any more members of Congress?

I mean it's combustible on the Hill right now because Republicans in particular are wondering what shoe is going to drop next.

VELSHI: A quick show of hands -- how many people think that corruption in Washington is rampant? What do you think that looks like, 70 percent of our audience?

HENRY: Eighty or 90.

VELSHI: All right, let's take a look at a new poll. It was conducted between December 16th and 18th. And it shows 49 percent of people saying yes to the question, "Are most members of Congress corrupt?"

HENRY: I think, you know, stepping back for a second, that's unfortunate, because the fact of the matter is, as somebody who's covered politics a long time, like Suzanne has, most members of Congress are not corrupt. And most lobbyists are not corrupt either. There are thousands and thousands of these lobbyists, but they're not all like Jack Abramoff.

And I use the example of like the "New York Times" scandal from a year or so ago...

VELSHI: Yes.

HENRY: ... where you had the reporter making things up.

VELSHI: Jayson Blair.

HENRY: And there was a whole critical look at the media, and there needs to be, and there are problems. But just because one person does it, doesn't mean that it's rampant in the media.

And I think, in fairness to politicians and lobbyists, if somebody has to stand up, you know -- half jokingly here -- the fact of the matter is they don't all do it.

But I think Democrats right now are cheering, saying boy, the Republicans are going down. They're going to lose the next election.

Well, you know what? That poll shows that sometimes when there's a scandal, whether it's on one side or the other, or on both sides, they think they all do it, the public thinks, and it may be a case where maybe the Democrats don't gain that much out of it because people think that everybody does it.

VELSHI: It's all.

Your name and where you're from.

TIFFANY.: My name is Tiffany.

I'm from Potva College (ph).

In light of the Abramoff scandal, do you believe Congress will be taking their oversight role more seriously now?

HENRY: You'd better believe it. And I -- but it's going to take some public pressure.

I think part of the problem here, people are talking now about lobbying reform and cleaning up the system. Well, some of the laws are already on the books, but Jack Abramoff was not following them. And some lawmakers apparently were not either.

That hasn't been proven. They've denied wrongdoing.

But there are a lot of big names -- Tom DeLay, there's a powerful Republican named Bob Ney from Ohio -- that are sort of under the microscope right now. And I think that a lot of people are waking up to the fact that maybe there needs to be a bit more scrutiny.

VELSHI: Sir, your name and where you're from?

JOHN: I'm John from Austin College in Sherman, Texas.

And my question is what single person has the most to lose from Jack Abramoff's testimony?

HENRY: Well, one person, as I mentioned, Tom DeLay. He's already been pushed out as majority leader. He's been trying to get back in. He was somebody who was close to Abramoff. One of DeLay's former staffers has already cut a deal with prosecutors. A second one is under the microscope. A third one is under the microscope.

So, DeLay is going to have a hard time even if he himself ends up not being implicated. Politically, it's trouble for him.

Bob Ney, I mentioned, it's difficult.

But I also think there are some Democrats out there, clearly, you've seen this week, rushing to give back campaign money they got, either from Abramoff or Abramoff's clients. So the fact is that people on both sides did get the money.

What Democrats point out, though, is that Abramoff was a Republican lobbyist. So even though some Democrats got money, they didn't necessarily do anything for him.

The allegations here are that a lot of Republicans pushed legislation through and sort of cooked the books on the Hill to help his clients.

That hasn't been proven yet, but this plea deal suggests that there's a whole mountain of stuff that we're going to uncover over the next few months.

VELSHI: I wonder if you'll get to cover any Congress in 2006.

We're going to check on how these stories played at the White House and why, and how the president made sure that he was seen as being tuned in to the mine disaster.

White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux is back on the story after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: CNN is on the story now.

Just like we watched the events in West Virginia unfold this week, so did President Bush.

Our White House correspondent, Suzanne Malveaux, says the president's team had learned the lessons of hurricane Katrina, when President Bush seemed out of touch and on the sidelines.

Here's Suzanne's Reporter's Notebook.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

MALVEAUX: America was riveted by the story about the trapped miners in West Virginia. And it really was no different here at the White House. We were all paying very close attention to what was happening.

And what became really clear was that after the government's failed response to hurricane Katrina, this White House wanted to make it very clear, first, that the president was in tune with America's suffering, their struggle. And, secondly, that the government was able to quickly respond.

So, unprompted, at an event about the Patriot Act, the president went on record about his concerns for the miners.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And may god bless those who are trapped below the Earth.

MALVEAUX: The White House has made an effort to really show that the president was briefed about this, even releasing a photo of the president making a phone call, reaching out to the governor of West Virginia, offering federal resources.

Tragedy fell overnight and there was news that only one miner had survived. And the next day President Bush, from the Pentagon, came out and offered his condolences.

BUSH: Today our nation mourns those who lost their lives in the mining accident in West Virginia.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

VELSHI: And that mining accident and Ariel Sharon, those stories eclipsed what would otherwise be complete headline stories, Jack Abramoff and the nomination and confirmation hearings that we're expecting for a Supreme Court Sean Carson.

HENRY: Yes, I mean this is a big deal, because Samuel Alito next week, he's going to be on the Hill. This is his first grilling, the Senate Judiciary Committee. And, let's face it, this is for the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor, who was a swing vote. Something like 140 cases that went 5-4, she was the one that tipped the balance. And that's why I think both sides are going to dig in.

But what we're hearing so far is the Democrats don't feel like they're knocking him up on issues like abortion so much, that they might turn this into more of an effort to beat up on the president, specifically on the domestic spying story, because they have a case on domestic spying that Alito had written a memo as a young lawyer. And they want to try to make a lot out of that.

And I think the White House has obviously been a little bit nervous about the political ramifications of that story.

MALVEAUX: The White House is somewhat nervous. But at the same time, they're much more confident that they're going to be able to get this through. They do not think that they have really a strong opposition. It's going to be a very tough fight with the Democrats. But they feel like the ABA, the American Bar Association, with the highest rating, came forward supporting Alito, that they have a very strong case to make.

But, yes, I mean, it certainly complicates the situation when you've got these questions about whether or not the president overstepped his bounds in authorizing that domestic spying program.

Alito's -- his opinions on that matter, of course, are going to play very heavily in those hearings.

VELSHI: Yes. So that domestic spying you were talking about, it feels like 16 stories ago.

HENRY: Right.

VELSHI: So much has happened. But that's another one of these stories that would otherwise dominate all of the headlines.

Where are you from and your name, please?

CATHERINE: I'm Catherine (ph) from Derwood, Maryland.

I was just wondering, what is the White House reaction to Pat Robertson's comments regarding Ariel Sharon?

MALVEAUX: The White House was very strong today. They came out, one of the spokesmen said that it was outrageous. And they have been very consistent in distancing themselves from those kinds of comments, particularly from Pat Robertson.

They have also, too, of course, been very sensitive to the whole situation with Sharon, with Israel, and they do not want to get ahead of that story.

VELSHI: You think sometimes Pat Robertson just dips his hand into a bowl and pulls out a name and says I'm going to cause some trouble about that person today?

I think we've got another question over here.

Sir, your name and where you're from?

STEPHEN: Hi.

I'm Stephen from Vienna, Virginia.

My question is given that midterm elections are less than a year away and that the Republicans' popularity has begun to wane in the eyes of the public, I was wondering if -- what you envision to be the main themes in Bush's State of the Union address? And do you see the tone continuing to evolve as it was apologetic about the war?

MALVEAUX: Sure. There are two things that the Bush administration is focusing on for this year. One is the war on terror and emphasizing that it is going to be successful. It's a real gamble. I mean that is really one of the -- one of the great unknowns here, because the next six months are going to be critical, whether or not that actually comes to fruition after the elections.

The other big, big issue that we're seeing is the economy. And we saw the president this week, he's talking about economic numbers, unemployment down, home ownership up. Those are the kinds of things that he's going to be focusing on.

And look to a much less ambitious domestic agenda. Last year, tried to push forward Social Security reform. It did not work. Failed on that front. There were so many bad pieces of information, bad ways that the government handled certain aspects. They are going to pull back, much more modest when it comes to the domestic agenda and pushing forward when it comes to the war on terror and the economy.

VELSHI: Well, with that, let's talk about another story that's been dominating the news.

Federal officials were also watching as wildfires continued to scorch the Southern Plains this week.

CNN's Jeanne Meserve is on that story next from Texas.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: CNN is on the story.

High winds and heat are a difficult match for firefighters in Texas and Oklahoma. Fires have charred hundreds of thousands of acres there, destroying homes, uprooting families.

CNN's Jeanne Meserve is on that story.

Let's look at her Reporter's Notebook.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: To get the big picture, you first go and talk to the officials who are in charge. And we chose a community they said was most active. We went there and then you start talking to the local officials and the citizens who you meet.

Officials here say it's so dry that the slightest thing can start fires, like, for instance, getting a flat tire and creating a spark on a roadway. And once they start, boy, are they moving fast.

The most moving interview that we've conducted so far was with a family by the name of Wafford (ph). They had 500 acres, 495 acres of their land had been burned. They'd lost their house and they told us about how their son had died last summer. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On a scale from one to 10, compared to the loss of our son Stewart (ph), this is a zero, you know? This is replaceable.

MESERVE: One of the reasons that people here have been so welcoming to us is that they realize that they need to get some publicity for their situation in order to get some help. And they want people elsewhere, particularly in Washington, D.C. to get the message that they're in trouble here and they do need some assistance.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

VELSHI: CNN's Jeanne Meserve is joining us now from Dallas -- Jeanne, Suzanne and Ed Henry are with me.

And Ed wants to kick it off -- Ed.

HENRY: Jeanne, normally you're in Washington covering this big picture, as you said. And what's it like to be on the ground? You obviously were such a critical part of our coverage in Katrina and seeing the heroic efforts by so many people trying to save lives.

What about these volunteer firefighters now, who are saving -- trying to save lives and homes in such a difficult job?

MESERVE: Well, I was startled to find out that 80 percent of Texas is covered by volunteer fire departments. And there's been a lot of development in some of these formerly very rural communities. And there just aren't enough firefighters to cover. And these are guys who have regular jobs.

So when a call goes out, sometimes you can only get four or five people to respond. So some of the communities have told me they've got automatic systems to send out mutual aid requests in order to bring in enough people to respond.

They don't have modern equipment. We've seen some pretty antique engines out there. They don't have a lot of money. They have trouble raising it. One firefighter said to me today there are only so many bowls of chili that you can cook, a reference to the sort of fundraisers they conduct.

And they are exhausted right now. These fires have really been raging now. Over 600,000 acres in Texas and Oklahoma have been burned. They are very tired and they have a long way to go.

MALVEAUX: And, Jeanne, why is it so bad in that particular area? Is it the drought or the conditions? Describe to us what is actually happening in that region.

MESERVE: Well, the drought started last April. It's really been persistent. And to walk on the ground here is quite amazing. You hear the grass crunching beneath your feet and you look down and it's turned to dust. There's simply no moisture at all.

In addition, they've had some high winds. They've had very low humidity. Put it all together and it's just been a tinderbox.

VELSHI: Jeanne, we've got a number of questions.

We've got one in the audience to start with.

You do have a question, right, because you're looking at me like I'm coming to the wrong person?

Why don't you come and tell us your name and where you're from.

MOLLY: My name is Molly and I'm from Salem College.

My question deals with you've done some work reporting on the Office of Homeland Security. And I was wondering, when you deal with an office like that, which is surrounded with a lot of secrecy and some classified information, how do you decide between what the public needs to know and what the government should keep to itself for security purposes?

MESERVE: Well, you know, it's a constant balancing act. It really is. There have been a number of situations we've been aware of and we've really thought about if we put this on television, are we giving a road map to terrorists? We talk about it. We talk about it with our bosses. And we make some kind of value judgments.

Most of the time, the information we go forward with on the air is information that already is available in the public domain somewhere. It is not the kind of thing that we think, in and of itself, by being reported by CNN, gives a tool to terrorists.

ROB WASHINGTON: Rob Washington, Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia, Arkansas.

I was just wondering from all of you guys, is there ever any humor in any of the stories you cover? Because I just want to laugh.

MESERVE: I'll give you a case. I thought this was funny. We were talking to some volunteer firefighters this week. They've been trying to enforce a burn ban, which is in effect here in Texas. And they talked about a couple of weeks ago being sent to a guy's house because he was burning some trash outside. And when they got there, he set his dogs on them, his pit bulls on them. And these guys were terrified, clearly, by what had happened to them, but also they found a great deal of humor in it, were laughing about this guy, what he likely was up to and so forth.

So, yes, you find moments like that where you do find a moment to chuckle. I'm sure the others have other stories.

VELSHI: You kind of have to, don't you?

MESERVE: Yes.

VELSHI: Because it can get a little bit depressing if you don't.

It's a good question. Thanks so much.

And, Jeanne, thank you so much.

Jeanne Meserve joining us from Dallas.

Coming up next, our panel looks ahead. What's on the story for them next week?

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Keep yourself on the story at cnn.com. Our Web site tells us about the panel, the topics and how to get tickets to join our audience.

Well, let's take a look ahead on the story.

Suzanne, what are you working on this coming week?

MALVEAUX: Of course, the White House is keeping a close eye on developments in Israel and the Alito hearings will be right around the corner. They'll be pushing really hard. But expect a couple of announcements, war on terror speeches by the president. Also, he's going back to New Orleans, once again, to the Katrina site.

HENRY: I'll be in "THE SITUATION ROOM" watching the Alito hearings minute by minute. And I think right now it looks like the Democrats are going to have a hard time trying to filibuster this. And Alito does look like he's in good shape, like Suzanne said. But you never know. These things can turn on a dime.

VELSHI: And we have had the first week of January with stock markets seeing their highest levels in almost five years. And we'll be following that and the price of oil pretty closely.

Thank you to our colleagues and our audience here at the George Washington University.

You guys have been terrific.

Thank you for watching ON THE STORY.

We're back each week, Saturday night and Sunday afternoon.

Straight ahead, a check on what's making news right now.

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