American Morning
Senator: U.S. can safely house terror detainees
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/05/21/intv.durbin.art.jpg caption= "Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin tells CNN's John Roberts he believes the U.S. can safely house terror detainees."]
President Obama's plan to shut down the detainee camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba hit a major road block yesterday. The Senate voted 90-6 on a measure that would stop detainees from being transferred to the United States. It also voted Tuesday to withhold funds to close down the facility. Meanwhile, the president will lay out his plan to close Gitmo in a major national security speech today.
Majority Whip Senator Dick Durbin voted against blocking the funds. He spoke to John Roberts on CNN’s “American Morning” Thursday.
John Roberts: You voted against blocking the funds although you do share some of the concerns of many of your colleagues. Why did you decide to vote against it and what do you think about those concerns? Are they valid?
Dick Durbin: There are two provisions. One of them blocked the funds and I could have voted for that because the president's plan has not been presented to us. There’s no need to appropriate the money at this point until we have his plan for the future of Guantanamo. The second provision, though, the one that troubled me, said we couldn't have any of these Guantanamo detainees brought to the United States to be held in a security facility. You can't try a person for a crime in the United States without holding them in a security facility. So, some of those who could be prosecuted – even successfully prosecuted – couldn't be prosecuted under the language of that amendment.
Roberts: So that puts you at odds with Senate Leader Harry Reid who said yesterday he didn't want the transfer of any detainees to the United States?
Durbin: We have a different point of view. I happen to believe if they're brought here to be put on trial, they obviously need to be held in a secure facility during the course of the trial and perhaps incarcerated afterwards. Presently today, we have 348 convicted terrorists in the prisons of the United States of America, and a large percentage of them are from overseas. They're being held safely and securely with no threat to the American people. I do believe we have to look at the bottom line here. The president is right in saying Guantanamo is more than a detention facility. It's become a symbol. And sadly, it’s become an organizing tool around the world for terrorism. The sooner that we bring Guantanamo to a close, the better.
Does Michael Vick deserve a second chance?
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/05/21/vick.getty.art.jpg caption="Michael Vick was released from a federal prison on Wednesday. File photo."]
From CNN's Carol Costello and Ronni Berke
Does Michael Vick deserve a second chance? The former Atlanta Falcons quarterback's agent says the National Football League could reinstate Vick by September - but NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has said the NFL won't do that until Vick shows "genuine remorse."
The problem is no one knows what that means. And the NFL isn't saying.
But there are some who say Vick has already paid his dues, and deserves another shot at a 140-million dollar contract. Others say even humiliation, prison, and 3.7 million dollars-plus in legal fees are not nearly enough.
At Atlanta's sports radio "790 The Zone," football fans who once revered Vick called in to say he's paid his dues. After all, they say, the quarterback did show remorse before he went to prison for 21 months.
In August, 2007, Vick appeared at a press conference and announced "...I want to apologize for all things that I've done."
But for the animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals - or PETA – Vick's apologies don't add up to "genuine remorse." PETA wants Vick to undergo a brain scan–to see if he's capable of remorse.
PETA spokesperson Dan Shannon says his group believes Vick "has lost the privilege of having his remorse, if he does choose to express it, taken at face value and we feel that we do need to see some evidence that he's capable of it and that he's genuine before it can be taken seriously."
What's on tap – Thursday May 21, 2009
Hello everyone,
We're following several developing stories right now. We'll break them down for you this morning.
Former Powell aide: CIA has history of lying
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/05/20/wilkerson.art.jpg caption="Colin Powell's former chief of staff says CIA leadership has a history of not telling Congress the whole truth."]
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is still under fire for her words that the Central Intelligence Agency misled her about enhanced interrogation techniques. Many responded with surprise and some with outrage at the claim, but should we really expect America’s chief spy agency, known for its covert operations and layers of secrecy, to tell Congress everything?
Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson says not necessarily. He was the Chief of Staff for former Secretary of State Colin Powell. He spoke to Kiran Chetry on CNN’s “American Morning” Wednesday.
Chetry: You say it’s a common practice for the CIA not to tell Congress everything they’re doing. It might not be policy, but you say it happens all the time. Give us some examples.
Wilkerson: Well, it does happen. And let me say right off the bat - let me just say something about my bona fides, as opposed to Michael Gerson’s, for example, writing on the op-ed page of the "Washington Post" this morning. The "Post" continues to stun me with what they allow to appear on their op-ed pages, lambasting the Democratic and others who might as he calls it "attack the CIA."
Well, Michael Gerson has no bona fides. I’ve got 35 years of bona fides. I have used tactical, operational, strategic intelligence from the agency for 35 years from Vietnam all the way forward to Iraq. I’ve studied it as an academic. I know about its origins in the OSS during World War II. I know about its institution in the 1947 National Security Act. And I know the crimes and the ravages that have been perpetrated in the name of the American people, the blood and the treasure that's been expended by the CIA over that half century. Plus, I also know the successes that it’s achieved. So, it's a mixed bag.
But to answer your question directly – the CIA does not have the leadership, not the good people in the ranks of the CIA, but the leadership of the CIA does not have a stellar record about telling the full and unequivocal truth about its covert operations.
About this Show
Welcome to the American Morning blog where you can get daily news updates from American Morning's reporters and producers. Join us for "the most news in the morning," weekdays from 6-9 a.m. ET, only on CNN.
On Twitter
