tv Erin Burnett Out Front CNN June 28, 2012 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
next, president obama takes a victory lap on health care. mitt romney sees a republican rally cry. but do you know who really won? we do. for the first time in history, sitting attorney general charged with contempt of congress. he called it political. so, why did 17 democrats vote for it? one of them "outfront." and this man found guilty of child rape but is going to be receiving a big sum of money
from penn state university. that doesn't add up. let's go "outfront." good evening, everyone. i'm erin burnett. "outfront" tonight, party time. both sides spinning the health care verdict. the president celebrating his individual mandate ruling at the supreme court. >> today, i'm as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now or ten years from now or 20 years from now, we'll be better off because we have the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward. >> and republicans seeing a way to rally the base. after all, this is now a fight for the underdog. hey, the supreme court failed to repeal what republicans see as a hated health care act. a big overreach of big government. but if you like mitt romney, he is going to slay the health care dragon.
>> what the court did not do on its last day in session, i will do on my first day if elected president of the united states. >> well, that was pretty loud and clear. both sides were celebrating. partying it up. like guys at a bachelor party. but the problem is no one was a winner today. and soon they're going to wake up feeling pretty hung over. in fact, just like how the party ended in, well, "the hangover." >> you okay, buddy? >> no, i am in so much pain right now. look at this place. >> i know. phil, they have my credit card downstairs. i am so screwed. >> how does a tiger get in the bathroom? he almost killed me. >> yeah, we just woke up with a tiger in america's bathroom. in all seriousness, the point is this, we're all losers. why? because even if you love what this health care bill does, things like covering pre-existing conditions, you
have to hate what it does not do. because it does not deal with surging health care costs in america. as we've been saying, in our country where we spend the most on health care per person than any developed country on earth, we rank number 27 in life expectancy. more people are covered, thanks to the supreme court ruling? which may be a great thing. but under the so-called affordable health care act. health care analyst dan rip says premiums will rise 7.5% a year. four times more than the inflation rate. and the spending is getting worse. according to the centers for medicare and medicaid services, health spending in 2010 grew about 3.9% from the year before. but in 2014, when the president's health care law takes full effect, spending will jump 7.4%. that is a massive fail. nick gillespie is editor-in-chef of reason tv and reason.com. ben smith is buzz feed editor in chief. roland martin is political analyst at cnn.
erick erickson is also. but also the editor of red state.com. great to have you with us. ben, let me start with you. obviously, quick to have victory laps going on both sides. republicans are trying to say, oh, look the supreme court gets you off, obama, only because you're raising taxes on the middle class. will that stick? >> no, this isn't an issue mitt romney can fight and win. he passed a very similar law in massachusetts. i think both he and the president are going to want to stop talking about this after the holiday weekend. the winner is john roberts. who really set up the court and set up himself for this much increased stature. i think the political campaign is going to move away from this fast. >> erick, it may be that roberts was the only real winner today. >> oh, i think roberts was probably the only real winner today. the republicans are going to make the democrats own this. let's not forget the big issue here isn't just going to be presidential races but ballot races in the house and the senate where the democrats still have more seats at stake in the senate. most of them don't like raising taxes. you can bet the republicans will make them want to vote again on
the biggest health tax increase -- >> you think this will motivate the republican base more than a victory which would have sort of, you know, eliminated the big, hey, if i get an office, i'm going to repeal it, argument? >> oh, yes, absolutely. it has taken the supreme court off the table for the left. it's made it an issue for the right. mitt romney's raised $2 million before sunset today just on this issue. >> start's. and roland, ting latest number is $2.5 million from the mitt romney campaign. i just got an e-mail here. the obama administration is saying -- say you're with me on affordable care. they're trying to raise money. who do you think will benefit more when it comes to fund-raising off this? the winner barack obama or the seeming loser mitt romney? >> i know we love to go right to the heart of the political issue. but, again, i will say the very people out there, the millions of people who are now covered, the folks with pre-existing conditions, the folks who are sitting there, if you're a young person on your parents' health care -- let me tell you something, erin. look, i know how this feels, okay.
2000, covering the democratic national convention. my appendix ruptured. five days in a hospital in l.a. $100,000. no health insurance. had to file for bankruptcy. house almost foreclosed on. i know what it feels like not to have health insurance. and so we can get caught up in the political arena. but the reality is, we now have to deal with people who now can be protected. and so now, how do you fortify this? how do you make it better? how do you bring down costs? this is a start. this is not the end. this is the beginning of a real discussion and real national health care plan. >> nick, the problem is this seems to fall in that category of it's great more people are covered and you want that outcome, but this was done without dealing with the costs. we're looking at costs rising 4% in 2009. 7.4% under this law. costs are going to rise more under this law than they were before. >> if the -- the health care costs are going to be jacked up even more. the government, whether it's
state, local or federal, already spends almost 50 cents out of every health care dollar and prices have been going up astronomically, far above the rate of inflation. you bring the government even more into the matter and the prices are only going to spiral up more. then the government will say, well, we got to subsidize rates more. that will jack it up the next time. i think the question for roland to ask -- and i say this, i'm not a republican, i'm not a democrat. my book, which is out in paperback is "the declaration of independence." why would it cost 100 grand to fix your appendix? you know, it's partly because of the heavy subsidies and the government involvement already. to go back to the republicans, mitt romney's the last person you want to be arguing in a world where obamacare has just passed constitutional muster. he has no plan to counter what was just -- you know, what he did at the state level, at the federal level. it's a real problem. >> let's not sit here and we talk about costs going up. but somehow it's only because of
the affordable care act. one of the reasons costs are going up in this country. >> that isn't what i said. >> no, i'm not saying you said it. one of the reasons we're seeing rising health care as well is because our nation also is becoming more obese. we also don't want to confront when it comes to wellness. when you begin to deal with the issue of wellness, when you begin to have folks who have regular check-ups, when you begin to have folks where you're able to catch something earlier as opposed to late in the game, then you're dealing with that. so i say you have to deal with the cost. this is simply the beginning of a process. it's not the end. >> then you're getting issues of saying, okay, look, if we're going to deal with obesity, that means people who weigh more will have to pay more. that is something that just doesn't seem to have muster in this country. >> they can be taxed -- >> learning in the first round of this thing is that any attempts for the government to impose cost controls. death panels so called were the outstanding instance of that. the obama administration backed off very fast. people don't like the idea of the government saying this treatment is cheaper. so we're only going to pay for that. right or wrong. >> erick -- >> there were never death
panels. where is that coming from? >> they weren't death panels. they were a small step in that direction -- >> they were imposed to restrain the cost of health care. going forward, i get what roland's saying. when i hear democratic pollsters say that people like individual pieces of health care, that's fine. but the roberts decision means the democrats are going to have to fight on the gop turf on this which is full repeal. 60% of americans in some of the worst polling on obamacare, 60% of americans still don't like the bill overall. they don't like tax increases. we're going to november with the democrats being forced to fight on this republican battlefield. the republicans may need a plan. but right now, their best plan is just to say "repeal it." >> if you're a democrat, erick, you should go to those states with the worst health care and when it comes to the folks in worst condition, mississippi, alabama, louisiana, arkansas, texas, west virginia. you talk about health care. go to those states that are red states. >> the real problem, why health care costs are going up, and roland is right, this was
happening long before the affordable health care act was passed. that's going to pour gas on the fire. it's because of increasing government involvement. we all know when the government becomes the main provider of something, costs go up because costs will never be accounted for properly. that's the big issue. get the government out of health care and you'll start to see prices come down. romney can't sell that. the republicans have had plenty of time to do it. the last time they controlled the federal government what did they do? they gave us the prescription drug plan for medica which is the most egregious handout to relatively wealthy seniors. it gives free or reduced price plans. this is why americans are moving away from the democrats and the republicans. because you hear chatter. it's a red team. it's a blue team thing. and the american people, erin, like you said at the beginning, the american people are the losers. because we're stuck with the bill but we're not going to get the access to care that everybody seems to be after. >> a democrat or a republican will be president. >> that is true, but of course we want to eat what we want and drink what we want and then we want to make sure we have care. we don't want to pay more for
it. i mean, there's a big problem. by the way, there's specific reasons health care costs are surging in this country. we're going to talk about it more in just a couple of moments. next, today's vote to hold eric holder in contempt. he says it was all political. the white house says it was all political. why did 17 democrats vote for it? one of them who did next. plus, a number of reasons why ebay has the best car for you. stick shift as you know, that's important. and the loss stemming from the jpmorgan london whale was $3 billion. no, it wasn't $3 billion. it could be multiples of that. [ male announcer ] this was how my day began.
a little bird told me about a band... ♪ an old man shared some fish stories... ♪ oooh, my turn. ♪ she was in paris, but we talked for hours... everyone else buzzed about the band. there's a wireless mind inside all of us. so, where to next? ♪ [ music plays, record skips ] hi, i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein.
twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge! in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. it doesn't look risky. i mean, phil, does this look risky to you? nancy? fred? no. well it is. in a high-risk area, there's a 1-in-4 chance homes like us will flood. i'm glad i got flood insurance. fred, you should look into it. i'm a risk-taker. [ female announcer ] only flood insurance covers floods. visit floodsmart.gov/risk to learn your risk.
our second story "outfront." an historic day on capitol hill by a vote of 255-67, the house today for the first time held a sitting attorney general in contempt of congress. this stems from the fast and furious operation, where the government sold about 2,000 guns to drug runners hoping that would lead to breaking up cartels. critics say the attorney general failed to hand over documents related to the operation. all but two republicans voted in favor of contempt. and about 100 democrats didn't even vote. they walked out in protest. but here's the thing. 17 democrats voted in favor of contempt.
congressman jason altymyer of pennsylvania was one of them. congressman, good to see you. >> hi, erin, good to be here. >> why did you go against your party? the white house called this vote a political stunt. you voted in favor of contempt. why? >> there were two issues. one is i couldn't get around the fact i'm a member of the house. the house has asked for documents related to the investigation. i understand the attorney general holder doesn't want to give them. he has reasons why he doesn't feel he's obligated to provide them. but the fact is he didn't provide them. and when there's a vote on contempt, that's something you have to consider. we asked for the documents. they were not provided. i hope that the documents will show nothing was inappropriate or wrong regarding the operation or the attorney general's involvement in that. i have no reason to believe that in any way they're going to show anything that we wouldn't want it to show. but he was asked for the documents and he didn't provide them. the second reason is i was here in the congress in 2008 when we
had a very similar vote during the bush administration. and the democratic controlled congress had two members, high ranking officials in the bush administration, that we held in contempt under very similar circumstances relating to an issue. and as a result, i had the vote in contempt for that. so i just couldn't reconcile the issue being different just because the political party in power's different. >> well, all right so fair point. you made the bipartisan point. let me ask you about this conspiracy theory. nra has a theory -- national rifle association about fast and furious. they say the obama administration allowed these guns to be sold knowing they'd go into mexico, knowing they'd be used in violent crimes. that would cause bad headlines and allow the government to impose more strict gun regulations here in the united states. do you believe that theory? >> i don't. and that has nothing to do with -- i've heard it. that has nothing to do with the reason i voted the way i did. i cast a similar vote in 2008.
it's consistent with the vote i cast today. as a member of the house, i believe we do have the power of the investigation and oversight over the executive branch. we asked for documents that were not provided. because the vote was held on the floor, i voted to hold the attorney general in contempt because he did not comply with our request. >> okay. so the national rifle association. they said today's vote, they're going to look at it when giving letter grades. i know you got an "a" on the last scorecard. i know they've given you about $19,350 over the last four years. i also know you're not running for election. but the nra's support, letter grade, had to matter to you. >> well, as you said, i'm not on the ballot in the fall election. so i don't know how anyone can make the claim that that had anything to do with the vote that i cast today. you have every right to bring that up. but it wasn't part of the reason i voted the way i did. >> you might run again one day, right? >> i have no plans to run again.
that had nothing to do with the vote that i cast. i cast again because i want to be consistent with the vote i cast four years ago when president bush was in power. >> look, we applaud the saying, you know, i'm not going to just go with my party, i want to be bipartisan. so i want to make that clear. but i wanted to ask you sort of a personal question. because, you know, when i was looking at your vote, i know a lot people would say, how can you be a democrat and care so much about the nra? how can you be a democrat and want to have a gun? it's the same thing a lot of people say, how could you be gay and be a republican. people just don't understand how those things can go together. does that frustrate you? >> the way you articulated it, if that is a criticism that's being levied, yeah that would concern me. but i haven't heard that in response to the vote. the district that i represent is overwhelmingly in support of the second amendment. i believe there are more nra members per capita in the 100 mile radius surrounding the district that i represent than anywhere else in the country.
so i'm just representing my district when i cast votes that the nra would support. again, in this case, i voted that way for consistency and because i believe that it was the right thing to do based on the vote we cast and the issue that's at hand. >> right, no, no, i understand that. i'm just wondering, it was presumably near your district when the president when he was running last time around made the comment about guns and bibles. >> well, i represent western pennsylvania. i believe that that was one of the regions that was part of that articulation. >> yeah, but it must have -- i guess what i'm getting at, does it upset you people want to say negative things about people who have guns? or say if you're a democrat, you can't be for guns. clearly, you're a democrat and they're for guns. >> yeah, again, i was elected as a democrat three times. i had the support of the nra two of those times. and i'm not running for re-election. so that wasn't part of my consideration this time when i cast the vote today.
>> all right. well, thank you very much. i really appreciate your taking the time, sir. still "outfront," the decisions made by the obama administration make the surge in afghanistan ineffective. and cost lives and dollars. our guest was there. he tells us why he thinks so. and the number tonight, cars, money, stick shifts. and ferris bueller. [ alarm buzzes ] [ female announcer ] wake up time, but not for your eyes. they're still so tired looking. with olay challenge that, with regenerist anti-aging eye roller. its hydrating formula with caffeine conditioning complex, perks up the look of eyes. it works in the blink of an eye.
the teacher that comes to mind for me is my high school math teacher, dr. gilmore. i mean he could teach. he was there for us, even if we needed him in college. you could call him, you had his phone number. he was just focused on making sure we were gonna be successful. he would never give up on any of us.
of any small business credit card! how does this thing work? oh, i like it! [ garth ] sven's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! woo-hoo!!! so that's ten security gators, right? put them on my spark card! why settle for less? testing hot tar... great businesses deserve the most rewards! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet? here's your invoice. so, the clock is ticking right now. today through monday, ebay and autonation are partnering. they're going to sell 10 to 14 brand-new cars every day. the way they're doing it is they're going to cut the price of the cars by about $500 an hour. so this is really tricky because
you can actually bid at any time. you know, it keeps falling. if you wait too long, someone else will swoop in and beat you to the car. interesting little method to get people interested. ebay's become an accepted place to buy cars. there are over 90,000 cars and trucks on ebay at this moment. i remember almost ten years ago a friend sold a car on ebay. it was such a new concept at the time that getting the money from the buyer and giving the keys was done at new york's busiest train station so both parties felt if the other pulled out a knife or something, tried to steal the car or something, somebody would intervene. i actually think they would keep walking. but you get the point. we've come a long way. and that brings me to our number tonight. $3.26 million. that's the cost of the 1959 ferrari 250 gt california spider. the most expensive car ever sold on ebay. many of you would probably recognize is from "ferris bueller's day off."
of course, that ferrari is a manual and that driver didn't know how to drive it. so are 8,800 other cars for sale on ebay. they have manuals. maybe we should check it out. all right, "outfront," the president says it's time to move over on health care. our next guest, a powerful member of congress, says he's going to do everything in his power to stop it. what is he going to do about our biggest concern? how to pay for it. and does this add up? jerry sandusky may be collecting a big fat paycheck right now from penn state. and getting it the rest of his life. matically filter just the right amount of light. so you see everything the way it's meant to be seen. experience life well lit, ask for transitions adaptive lenses. i have to know the weather patterns.
i upgraded to the new sprint direct connect. so i can get three times the coverage. [ chirp ] [ manager 2 ] it's like working in a giant sandbox with all these huge toys. and with the fastest push-to-talk... i can keep track of them all. [ chirp ] [ chirp ] [ male announcer ] upgrade to the new "done." with access to the fastest push-to-talk and three times the coverage. now when you buy one kyocera duracore rugged phone, for $49.99, you'll get four free. visit a sprint store, or call 855-878-4biz. [ chirp ] a farewell long awaited.
goodnight, stuffy. goodnight, outdated. goodnight old luxury and all of your wares. goodnight bygones everywhere. [ engine turns over ] good morning, illumination. good morning, innovation. good morning unequaled inspiration. [ male announcer ] the audi a8, chosen by car & driver as the best luxury sedan in a recent comparison test. trouble with a car insurance claim. [ voice of dennis ] switch to allstate. their claim service is so good, now it's guaranteed. [ normal voice ] so i can trust 'em. unlike randy. are you in good hands?
all right, welcome back to the second half of "outfront." we start the second half with stories we care about, where we focus on our own reporting from the front lines. finally, a break for firefighters in colorado. cooler temperatures and lighter winds helping in the fight against wildfires raging across the state. the u.s. forest service officials say it could still be mid-july before the fires are under control. more than 36,000 people have been forced to leave their homes. the mayor of colorado springs says 347 homes have been destroyed. the fbi tells "outfront" that its investigation into the cause of the wildfires is now under way. well, the united states has
decided to look the other way when it comes to china and singapore buying oil from iran. first, china's the biggest buyer of iran oil. so if the u.s. looks the other way on china, what are we doing? u.s. sanctions set to take effect today are supposed to cut countries off from the american financial system if they're importing iranian oil. united states says the pass for china is a reward for the country voluntarily crop dropping its imports by nearly 40%. the sanctions are designed to force iran to stop its nuclear program. inside sources quoted by "the new york times" say the trading loss that jamie diamond trading loss that jamie dimon took on the chin isn't the $3 billion initially reported. it could be closer to $9 billion. that sent the stock price down 2.5% today. we called fbr banking analyst paul miller. and he actually ran the most important number. he said jpmorgan would have to lose more than $20 billion to
have a major impact on the company's bottom line. that's important because $9 billion, almost halfway there. also said there has been harm to the bank's reputation. there's a plane for sale as is. do you remember this day? i do. polish airline lot. that boeing 767, you remember its landing gear broke? as it was landing it had to land in soap and on the runway. it was an incredible moment. the plane is not allowed to fly again. but it's for sale. who wants a plane that can't fly? we called and got some answers from an aviation consultant. he says one engine on that 767 is worth about $7 million. the five computers on board are worth $750,000 each. that's a grand total of about $4 million. and apparently 40% of that fuselage is recoverable aluminum so scrap dealers and maintenance operators for other airlines worldwide can line up to buy it. that means part of that doomed
plane can end up on your next flight. it's been 329 days since the united states lost its top credit rating. what are we doing to get it back? this isn't going to help. the economy grew at 1.9% in the first quarter. that's an annual rate. it was the final estimate. here's what you need to know. at 2% or higher, you can create enough jobs to put a hole in the jobless situation in this country. below 2%, you can't. now our third story "outfront." unworkable. unpopular and unaffordable. that's how this senator described the president's health care law. but tonight, he can no longer say it's unconstitutional. the supreme court decision today flies in the face of what senator barrasso has been vowing to do since january of 2011. that's repeal and replace the health care law. >> nothing should come between you and your doctor. not a government bureaucrat. not an insurance company bureaucrat. nothing. republicans will fight to repeal this job destroying law and
replace it with patient centered reforms. >> what exactly are those reforms he's talking about? senator barrasso is "outfront" tonight. senator, good to see you. appreciate it. i know you've been talking about repealing and replacing this health care law for quite some time. obviously you're going to vote in favor of the -- you would, you're in the senate, but they're going to be repealing it in the house in a couple of weeks. let me just ask you where you stand on some of the provisions that americans love. you can't discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. young people can stay on their parents' plans until they're 26. there are subsidies for lower income households. small businesses get tax credits. would you keep all those things? >> you know, my wife is a breast cancer survivor. she's been through three operations. chemotherapy twice. i know how important it is for people with pre-existing conditions to be able to get coverage and to get care. and there are a lot of ways we can do it in a way that is actually more cost effective than happens through this health care bill.
the same thing with those under the age of 26. you're talking about fewer than 1% of all people in this country where -- are covered that way. so there are things we can do to lower the cost of care and help everyone. under this health care law, though, you look at the president, so many of his promises that have been broken. he said under the law that insurance premiums would drop $2,500 per family that first year. instead what we've seen is premium have gone up $2,400 a family. this law, it was a bad law yesterday. and in spite of the supreme court's decision today, it's still a bad law tonight. >> all right. so let me -- just a couple things you said there i want to clarify. first of all, you're saying that, yes, you would pay for it. but you would keep things like young people can stay on their parents' insurance, coverage for pre-existing conditions, right? that would be part of a good health care bill in your view? >> well, i think it is. i said that on cnn two years ago, the day of the white house summit where we were discussing -- i think someone from cnn asked me, what could we pass today that people agree on, and
that was one of those things. i think there's some benefits for that. fundamentally, we have a health care law that gives people fewer choices and increased costs and fewer control of their own life and their own health care. and i think it's still a bad law and should be repealed and replaced. >> okay. so let's get to this issue of cost. you've raised something we've been talking about. premiums are going to rise. estimates are 7.5% under this. that is still more than any raises americans are get. it's four times the rate of inflation. that's really bad. but this president tried to fight that. he went out to the doctors and said, i want to cut what you guys are getting. i don't want so many tests. and he got fought back by them, by democrat, by republicans. nobody wanted to take the political heat for paying for it. would you tell doctors, forget it, guys, stop with all those tests?
>> as somebody who practiced medicine for 25 years, i can tell you that doctors worry about the lawsuit abuse that exists out there, which caused them to order many expensive tests. it's called defensive medicine. it's when a doctor orders a test more to treat the doctor than the patient because they don't
want to miss that 1 in 1,000 or 1 in 10,000 cases that's going to end up for them to be in the courtroom rather than in the operating room -- >> fair point but they also order those tests, those machines -- >> -- expensive tests -- >> okay, that's true but they also order those expensive test machines and put them in their office because they know they can get reimbursed by insurance for a lot of money by putting those tests through. that's why doctors keep going in practices and ordering those machines. that's been proved in study after study to be true. >> it's an interesting concept about just how much money is wasted in health care that's not really being used to help the patient get better. but the physicians i have worked with over the years, it is driven by the concern about getting sued. defensive medicine is a huge part of the cost of care. and some physicians do put the machines to order these tests in their own offices for the convenience of the patient but it is driven by the defensive medicine that's been practiced and the president has essentially ignored this, refused to admit how much this contributes to the cost of care. the american people need health care reform and the reason they need it is because of the cost of care. that's what this whole thing was supposed to be about from the beginning. making sure patients could get the care they need from the doctor they choose. not that the government chooses or some insurance company chooses at lower cost. and this health care law has failed on all of those accounts. >> okay. but let's look at the biggest cost -- things that account for costs in america. you've got hospitals. you've got these tests that come from doctors. you've got prescription drugs. obviously, a big part of that came from the prescription drug plan under george w. bush. so are you going to go to those hospitals, to those doctors, to
those drug companies and tell them, we're just not going to do this anymore? i mean, you know, you have to admit, the president did dry. it was democrats and republicans both who were afraid to go ahead and fight the costs. >> i think the president basically misled the american people. he said the negotiations would be covered on c-span. things would be all open. these were all closed door negotiations. it was one party making all of the decisions. bipartisan ideas were not accepted. the patient refused to listen to republican ideas aimed at lowering the cost of care, bringing more competition into this, allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, giving individual incentives for people who take efforts to
actually lower their cost of care by losing weight, by taking more control and prevention in their own lives. the president ignored item after item and came out with a one-size-fits-all. which has really driven up the cost of care faster, report show us, than if the law had never been passed in the first place. >> senator, thank you. appreciate your time. now, our fourth story "outfront." he's been convicted of 45 child molestation charges, but former penn state football coach jerry sandusky will likely keep collecting his $59,000 a year pension behind bars. state pension rules include a list of crimes that would disqualify a person from getting his or her pension. but these are crimes related to breach of duty, forgery, theft and bribery. felony child molestation is not on that list. paul callan is "outfront" tonight. obviously, this has a lot of people outraged. pedophiles, murderers can collect their pension. >> it's crazy. but the list of offenses doesn't include child abuse for which you forfeit a pension. it's really shocking. i've got a theory, though, that we can take this money away from him. >> how?
>> which i'll talk about later. >> tell me now. >> there's one section that says if you intimidate a witness or a victim, that's an offense that can be utilized. i say that he intimidated these victims in what he did to them. there's a second one that has to do with fabricating or tampering with physical evidence. the big problem is a lot of the offenses occurred after he resigned in the football program at penn state. remember this takes place from '94 to 2009, the indictment. and he resigns in 1999. all we have to do is get one offense before 1999 -- >> you think it would -- >> clearly, he intimidated these victims because he threatened them if they would have reported it. some of the kids testified to that. >> it doesn't say threat of what. even though we're talking about forgery and bribery. let's lay out the amount of money that jerry sandusky is going to get. he got $148,271 when he retired in 1999. he's been getting $4,908 per month for life.
50% would go to his surviving beneficiary after death. first of all, that is an incredible pension, by any stretch of imagination. the only way to change this law would be to change the constitution for the state of pennsylvania, right? >> and even that might not be enough. there's a doctrine called the ex-post facto doctrine of the u.s. constitution that says you can't pass a law that retroactively changes the rules of the game. >> you could change it but it wouldn't apply? >> usually applies going forward but not going back. sometimes if you're careful about the way you do the law, the court will let it slide but that law's a hard one to get around. i don't think they're going to get away with changing the law and getting him. >> assume that you're right and they find a way though within the existing law to take it
[ male announcer ] when diarrhea hits, kaopectate stops it fast. powerful liquid relief speeds to the source. fast. [ male announcer ] stop the uh-oh fast with kaopectate. we're back with tonight's outer circle. we reach out to our sources around the world. tonight, we go to singapore. because that's where a pastor was charged with stealing $18 million of his flock's donations. the pastor is accused of using the money to jump-start his wife's singing career. she is dubbed as asia's answer
to madonna. now, in singapore outside the church. >> reporter: you could call this the case of the pastor and the pop star. the founder of this massively popular church is accused of siphoning millions in church funds into an elaborate investment scheme and putting $18 million of that into his wife's singing career. his wife is an internationally known pop star. she hasn't been charged in this case. ♪ one of her best known videos is this one for a song called "china wine." the pastor and his wife have said her pop music is a way of attracting more people to the church's message. despite the allegations, the church donation website remains open. the church asked the public not to prejudge. next to egypt, a british student revealed on her blog that she had been sexually assaulted by a mob in tahrir square this week. she recounted how an ambulance sent to help her was chased away by her attackers. she said hospitals refused to treat her. dan rivers is in cairo tonight.
she's an incredibly brave young woman who's decided to go public, to highlight the fact that this is happening all the time to egyptian women. a lot of times it doesn't get reported to the police. we've spoken to women's rights campaigners here who say because of the lack of security since the revolution, men on the streets, these packs of men who are in tahrir square and elsewhere around the city feel emboldened and feel they can get away with doing almost anything they like. did infighting within the obama administration cost american lives in afghanistan. did fighting in the president's white house cause the country to pay a steeper price in money and lives than we should have? we went into afghanistan with the troops during the surge. his new book is called "little
america." you spent a lot of time in afghanistan and all these war zones. people are saying that infighting within the obama administration caused real problems. what happened? >> so you had two camps in washington. you had the white house team. you had a state department team. at the state department, you had their pointman for afghanistan, the veteran diplomat, richard holbrooke who died a year and a half ago. he was in charge of trying to manage the overall diplomatic strategy but to try to push toward getting toward negotiations with the taliban, a very difficult challenge. but this is a guy who ended fighting in the balkans, who tried to end the iraq war. but there were senior officials in obama's white house what didn't like him. it was a personal, acrimonious fight. their infighting essentially stalled american policy in trying to come up with a plan to get to negotiations. it wasn't like the taliban were sitting on the other end of the table. but this was what they were seeking to do. and what i detail in this book is the real nasty infighting that got very personal, excluding holbrooke from meetings, forbidding him from using government plains. trying to slip talking points to the president of the united states after excusing holbrooke from a meeting after a meeting with president karzai.
childish and petty stuff. >> that came at a stiff price? >> yes, we had soldiers dying trying to beat back the taliban and trying to get to peace talks. however difficult and elusive they were was a key part of what president obama wanted. this was something that the president wanted and, in fact, both sides in this fight wanted the same goal. they were just caught up in a personality clash. >> and you're also saying that we wasted a year in afghanistan during which time we spent money, american troops lost their lives because of the surge strategy itself. >> yes. so you would think when the president authorizes more troop, we'd be sending those troops to the places that are the most critical parts of afghanistan, that are the most important to
beat back the taliban to protect the country. instead, the first -- the majority of the first wave of forces authorized by president obama in 2009 were sent to a relatively sparsely populated part of the country because of tribal infighting at the pentagon, not in afghanistan. because the u.s. marine corps wanted to have its own patch of the sandbox, a place where it could fly its own helicopter, bring in its own -- >> you have to be kidding me? >> i'm serious. this dates back to world war ii -- >> they'd rather go someplace where they weren't even needed, other americans die in another place because they wanted their own territory? >> what it meant was that kandahar, the spiritual homeland for the taliban, we were a year late in trying to do meaningful security operations there because we were off in the desert in places that had far fewer people and were far less important to afghanistan's overall security. >> so infighting between the state department and the white house, infighting in the pentagon cost american lives. at the same time, 30,000 troops went over in that surge. civilians went in to do all sorts of reconstruction projects, another thing you said that did not work. >> that's right. there was this civilian surge that was supposed to unfold in tandem with the military surge. lots of those people, unfortunately wound up staying in kabul in the capital, in the vast embassy compound. there were lots of parties, lots of meetings to go through. >> you also reported that there
was a lot of partying and a lot of people having fun. >> they were doing a lot of work. but they weren't getting out into the field, to the places where the troops were, the most important places where they needed to be. and we didn't get the right people out there. after years of operations in iraq and earlier in afghanistan, the diplomatic corps was exhausted. so they return to retirees and volunteers instead of scouring the country for the people with the best skills to do this. so you often had people who weren't good fits, who didn't have the necessary know-how to do what was necessary to take the sacrifices made by the troops and turn it into something more sustainable, trying to bring afghanistan government down there, trying to create an environment that the afghans would be able to then take charge of everything that was being done for them by the additional troops. >> thanks very much. pretty incredible reporting. takes a lot of courage to say the things he said. check out his book and also the book he wrote after spending time in iraq during the war. it's said that music brings people together.
but apparently only if they can get the right visas. this is a pretty amazing story. it's next. [ male announcer ] this... is the at&t network. a living, breathing intelligence teaching data how to do more for business. [ beeping ] in here, data knows what to do. because the network finds it india and pakistan have nukes pointed at each other. so anytime they work together, it's exciting. and they actually are. there's a movie called "cocktail." not the tom cruise one. it's a new "cocktail." it's a romantic comedy produced by an indian company. what makes a sleep number store different? you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those. if you want a soft bed you can lie on one of those." we provide the exact individualization that
your body needs. welcome to the lowest prices of the season, not just on ordinary beds, but on the bed that can change your life. the sleep number bed. this is your body there. you can see a little more pressure in the hips. take it up one notch. oh gosh, yes. when you're playing around with that remote, you get that moment where you go, "oh yeah" ... oh, yeah! ... and it's perfect. they had no idea that when they came to a sleep number store, we were going to diagnose their problems and help them sleep better. and don't miss our special financing now through july 4th only. plus enjoy the lowest prices of the season on selected bed sets once you experience it, there's no going back. wow. it's the lowest prices of the season on the amazing sleep number bed. special offer ends july 4th only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699.
it's a romantic comedy produced by an indian company. going to be released on july 13. it's got a lot popular indian models and actors in it. of course, as usual, those bollywood actors are improbably beautiful. they really are. to illustrate the excitement for this movement and the power of bollywood, the official trailer already has more than 3 million views on youtube. one of the most amazing things about the film is the soundtrack. it has indian and pakistani musicians on it.