tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN October 19, 2012 4:00am-5:00am EDT
good evening, everyone. we begin with breaking news. a short time ago, president obama and mitt romney spoke at the annual al smith dinner hosted by the catholic archdiocese of new york. the event, part roast, part standup routine, both got up some good lines, both got off some good lines. >> a campaign can require a lot of wardrobe changes. blue jeans in the morning perhaps, suits for a lunch fund-raiser, sportcoat for dinner, but nice to finally relax and wear what ann and i wear around the house. i was actually hoping the president would bring joe biden along this evening, because he'll laugh at anything. >> this is the third time
governor romney and i have met recently. some of you may have notice, i had a lot more energy in the second debate. i felt really well rested after the nice, long nap i had in the first debate. of course, world affairs are a challenge for every candidate. some of you remember, after my foreign trip in 2008, i was attacked as a celebrity. because i was so popular with our allies overseas. and i have to say, i'm impressed with how well governor romney has avoided that problem. >> just two nights ago, head to head in a town hall debate. tonight was a much lighter tone. they did take some jabs at each other. we have jim acosta and jessica yellin and mark katz, former speechwriter for bill clinton and founder of the sound bite institute. jim, you cover governor romney. a lot of us that have heard president obama's humor before, governor romney's not so much.
got some good lines in there. do you think tonight would help him with likability numbers? do they look at this? >> i think so. i think the headlines tomorrow, might be governor romney, what about your laughs? he was pretty funny tonight. he some good zingers. i talked to a senior romney adviser who said in addition to doing debate prep, he was working on his material for tonight and he clearly brought his "a" game. anderson, this is also a window into mitt romney. he's a hypercompetitive individual. he had to know that the president was so well received, because little president does pretty well at white house correspondent dinners, that he needed to bring some good material tonight and he did just that. >> president obama approached the night a little differently. jessica, what stood out to you? >> well, he's -- you know, he uses self-deprecating humor as one of his not-secret weapons.
he's good at these dinners, the white house correspondent dinners because he has an ability to poke fun at himself and it's one of the things the campaign thinks is his strong suit. the likability number remains high, whether or not the unemployment number frankly remains high and something he always goes to. it's a stong strong suit he can build on. >> as a viewer, nice to see these two candidates in a different way and different sides of their personality. have you been helping candidates for a long time. what do you make of how each of them did? >> i love watching these things. great opportunities to get -- say the things that otherwise never get said in the political arena, when i watch -- on my score card, keeping track of who is making self-directed had you more and who on the offensive. according to my numbers, president making self-districted humor at a three to one margin, and governor romney was going on the offensive on a two to one
margin. you really have to establish the fact you're willing to make fun of yourself first and foremost before you acquire the right to be self-deprecating on behalf of others. >> i heard you call yourself a problem solver. not a joke teller. what does that mean? >> the name of this game, figure out the worst thing your opponent might conceivably say about you and find a way to say it yourself. >> say it ideally before they say it. >> that's right. because it is all about likability, and you like the person who does the self-directed joke. if i got off a great line about you, that joke would be better coming out of your mouth than mine. >> romney says he dresses around the house in white tie. he gets it off before president obama says something like this. >> that's right. you want to beat your opponent to the punch and disarm your opponent. there's a whole strategy involved, who gets there first.
>> jessica, the president was trying to keep things light when he taped an appearance on jon stewart's "the daily show." regarding the attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi. what did he say? >> that's right. he told jon stewart in benghazi, the administration shared information with the public as it was coming in, and as the picture is getting filled in for them, they are sharing it with the american people. the president was asked by jon stewart at one point if the administration's response to the attack was not "optimal." the president said if four americans get killed, it's not optimal. that's not an ideal way to phrase that, and the president taking some heat from that already from critics tonight. especially because this is such a hot topic under a microscope on the campaign trail and expect the phrasing to come up tomorrow from his critics. >> i already saw that online and i was surprised by his use of the word optimal.
you're saying jon stewart actually used that word in the question? >> jon stewart used that word in the question, and it was -- somewhere lower down in the president's answer. it was a rephrase, a repeat of a word jon stewart asked. but maybe one of the downsides of talking about the more serious issues on a comedy show. >> okay. jessica, appreciate that. jim, thank you very much. mark as well. interesting stuff. good to hear. ahead on the program, new polling suggests that the number one issue for women in this campaign is abortion. that surprised a lot of people, this new gallup poll out. both can dats are keenly aware of the importance of the women's vote this time around. we'll talk about it. 0ñ@ñfñ
that abortion more than 2-1 is the number one issue in this election followed by jobs, health care and the economy. this is getting a lot of attention because it's counter to what earlier polls have shown, not binders full of women, but where each candidate stands on something involving real substance and difference between two candidates. president obama is hitting this issue hard in recent days, in one case taking his opponents words out of context, mitt romney seems to be trying to downplay lis differences with the president. some of what he is saying about abortion is contradicted by statements he has made in the past, which contradicts statements made before that. take a look at this exchange at tuesday's debate. >> a major difference in this campaign is that governor romney feels comfortable having politicians in washington decide the health care choices that women are making. >> i just note that i don't believe the bureaucrats in washington should tell someone whether they can use contraceptives or not and i don't believe employers should
tell someone whether they should have contraceptives or not. >> governor romney's record said otherwise. he strongly supported federal legislation to restrict access to birth control and restated that support when it briefly came into question. >> jim heath, a reporter for a tv station in ohio just tweeted a remarkable piece of news. mitt romney told him he does not support the blunt amendment, which would empower employers and insurers to deny health coverage they find morally objectionable. what happened here? >> i didn't understand his question. of course i support the blunt amendment. >> that was back in february when he was battling for the blunt amendment. it failed but as late as august, he was still pushing the idea behind it, allowing companies to restrict insurance coverage for birth control for certain reasons. tuesday night, apparently, he did a 180. when asked yesterday whether he did flip-flop, he said, not in any way. she went on to call the issue not really the point to most women out there.
as we showed you, though, the polling suggests that it is, if you believe this poll, which may be why both campaigns have attack ads running on abortion and contraception. here is a portion of obama's ad. >> roe v. wade was overturned and congress passed a federal ban on all abortions, would you sign it? >> i would be delighted to sign that bill. >> banning all abortions? >> i would be delighted to sign that bill. >> there is a big problem with the way the obama campaign uses that clip. we will show you that shortly. i want to quickly show you a portion of the romney campaign's reply. >> it turns out romney doesn't oppose contraception at all. in fact, he thinks abortion should be an option in cases of rape, incest or to save a mother's life. >> both ads, keeping them honest. the obama ad suggests that mr. romney would immediately sign a bill to end abortion and ignores the context in which he calls such a possibility unlikely.
>> let me say it. i would be delighted to sign that bill. that's not where we are. that's not where america is today. where america is, is ready to overturn roe v. wade and return to states that authority. if the congress got there, we had that consensus in the country, terrific. >> the obama ad clearly messes with the context. the romney ad contradicts his past position and makes him sound more tolerant on abortion rights than he is. it mentions all the instances in which mr. romney does support the right to an abortion. it fails to mention that he outspokenly supports overturning the right in the first place. from his website, quote, mitt believes life begins at conception and wishes the laws of the nation reflected that view. the right next step is for the supreme court to overturn roe v. wade. governor romney has taken different positions on roe v
wade and different abortion rights. here he is running for the senate against ted kennedy in 1994. >> i believe abortion should be safe and legal in this country. i have since my mom took that position as she ran in 1970 for a senate candidate. i believe that since roe v. wade has been the law for 20 years, we should sustain and support it. i sustain and support the right of a woman to make that choice. >> in 1994 in his losing race against ted kennedy. in 2002, he also ran strongly as pro choice. years later, he talked about his pro life record while in office. >> i have consistently been pro life. every piece of legislation that dealt with life. >> even though you were effectively pro choice. >> as governor, all the decisions i've made as governor on all the bills that came to my desk, i came down on the side of life. >> that was during the republican primary in 2007. this time around, he said that he was a severely conservative governor and continued to doubt
his anti-abortion credentials. but when nominated, he began sounding a little more moderate. here he is less than two weeks ago. >> do you intend to pursue any legislation specifically regarding abortion? >> there is no legislation with regards to abortion that i am familiar with that would become part of my agenda. >> a spokesperson immediately contradicted that. a day later, here is what he said. >> i think i said time and again, i'm a pro life candidate, i'll be a pro life president. the actions i will take immediately are to remove funding for planned parenthood. that will not be part of my budget. >> so was he just misspeaking the day before? you can decide for yourself. a lot of ground to cover. let's talk with bay buchanon and democratic strategist. bay, do you buy this gallup poll that says abortion is the number win issue for women right now? >> not at all.
i saw polls again recently and have looked at them throughout the primary and the general election. the number one issue for women has always been jobs, the economy, and their concern for this future with respect to the economy. i have never seen anything that suggests anything else. >> so what do you make of this gallup poll? it's just false? >> i think it is very interesting. look at the facts out there right now. the gender gap has just collapsed. mitt romney and all the polls, certainly gallup, shows it is a dead heat with women out there. mitt romney has done a remarkable job bringing them over to his side in the last two, three weeks. why would that be, anderson? it is clear they were looking for another option. in a 90-minute debate, they took a look and they have been watching the president for four years. his policies have failed and have hurt women, have hurt children. so they have said, look, is there another option? they tuned in and saw the governor and said, my gosh, here is not only a good and decent man but somebody that offers us
a brighter future for our family and our children and they went with it. >> you're saying this poll is flat-out wrong? >> i think it cannot be accurate. let them say what they want. we have moved women into the column under mitt romney. that's the important thing. i believe it is because he offers a good and positive future for americans. >> do you buy this poll or believe this gallup poll? >> look, i don't know exactly how much abortion is playing in this election. i do think it has a higher importance to voters. i think it has a higher importance to women voters. specifically, because contraception became such a flash point, such a flash point to voters in the public dialogue and republican primary. i think a lot of women were shocked that issues like contraception were up for public debate. women are looking for these positions. that's why i think mitt romney is hiding his positions on abortion and on contraception. he is simply wrong on tuesday
night when he told the american people he is for contraception coverage by employers. that is false. that is not where he has been. that's not where he will be. he is saying that a few weeks before an election to try to do well by women voters. i think they are going to see through that. issues around choice are important. both campaigns are spending money on it. it is a problem for mitt romney that he has adopted such an extreme position on it. >> so, bay, what was mitt romney saying at that debate? if he is saying he has no problems with contraception? >> he has always taken the same position. all of what you have recorded looks as if it is confusing. since he has been governor, i am a very strong activist in the pro life movement. the pro life smovmt ex -- movement is extremely happy with his position. it has been consistent since the day he converted as governor. everything he has said has been strong pro life. >> i am talking about contraception.
>> it has never been an issue for anyone in politics for as long as i have been involved. >> what about the blunt amendment? >> the key here is, he's in the against contraception. it should be out there, and women should have access to it, but should the government fund it? that's the question. should employers be forced to fund it for their employees? if it is against their religious beliefs, obviously, they shouldn't be, because that would be a violation of the first amendment. of course, he is not for that. should they have access to it, absolutely. there is no effort by anyone i know to take that access away from them. it's the funding part that is a concern for us. >> neera, what about that? >> i think this answer really demonstrates how all over the place they have been on this. obviously, he is not going to ban contraception in america but what he will do is say that employers -- they will take away the right today, that women have today, to get coverage from their employers. that is a right that's been
established. it is one that women believe they should have. as bay is saying, mitt romney thinks that is wrong. he will take that away. when he looked into the camera on tuesday night, he didn't want to tell the american women that he would do that. so he said, i support contraception. but on this issue of policy, he supports the blunt amendment. he supports taking away this protection that president obama has provided and i think that's one of the distinctions in this election. >> you know what's interesting? the liberals would actually think that as women across this country are facing such incredibly challenging times, nearly a half a million women losing jobs in the last four years under this president, watching their children graduate from college and not be able to find jobs and to see loved ones suffering enormously under these economic policies of his that they would think the key issue is whether they should get government to fund their contraception, that is more important than getting america back to work. women have shown that is not the most important thing. they are bigger and stronger and more worried making certain
america gets back to work and can start take caring of themselves and their families. >> with all due respect, bay, there is a poll out, the gallup poll. anderson started with it. it says 38% of women care about this issue. you may think they don't have a right to care about that but i am not going to patronize women that way. what their issues and concerns are ones they should respect. they are concerned because republicans have made it an issue. republicans have said in the primary, with all due respect, republicans said in the primary, mitt romney told people he was going to overturn roe v. wade with his appointments to the supreme court. he made that pledge. he has made issues. he has said he is severely conservative president. he will be a severely conservative president. he has said on issue after issue, he will vote in line with the pro life movement.
you just said he's pro life, you're pro life. >> absolutely. >> and he has an agenda that will take away women's rights on contraception as well as reproductive health. >> that has never been an issue at all. he has never said that. he will be pro life. he has taken that position. >> you are saying it is the funding. >> it is the funding issue. >> neera is saying it is taking away access for some women. >> he wouldn't think about doing that. it has never happened. it has been out there since the 1950s. nobody is suggesting that anyone take a woman's right to access for contraception away. that is completely false. what we are talking about? who funds it and should we require employers to do so or should they do it whether they would like to or not? >> he would overturn roe v. wade. he would take away access to contraception. >> thank you very much. let us know what you think on twitter. what do you think about this new gallup poll? is this new gallup poll, is that the number one issue for women?
real politics now. a whole bunch of deadlines, the bush tax cuts expire, and spending cuts kick in. people refer to it as the fiscal cliff and the country will go over it if washington can't make a deal. they are willing to play some cliff-side hardball. the president will veto a bill that doesn't contain high tax hikes. house speaker john boehner is calling it the thelma and louise strategy. a scene from the movie. the two went over the cliff. they end up in a freeze frame hanging in mid-air. the credits rolled. the real economy might not do that. let's talk about the possibilities. dana bash, and ali velshi and gloria borger.
you say when it comes to the fiscal cliff, there is virtually nothing going on behind the scenes, not from the president or the speaker of the house or either of their staffs. >> that's right. they're not talking to each other at all. i'm told from a leadership source that the speaker hasn't talk about to the president about the issue since july, three months ago. you would think, they are not communicating at the highest levels. they are both kind of busy, especially the president. maybe they are talking at a staff level. nope. that's not happening either. there have been some white house internal meetings, contingency plans. sources have been saying there is no point. no one thinks it is worth it before the election. the dynamic of the discussions will be determined by who wins, who has the most leverage. so that's the big reason why nobody is talking about it. >> ali, what does this mean, fiscal cliff? what does it mean for average americans? >> it is very serious. number one, the payroll tax credit gets eliminated and the bush tax credits get eliminated. everybody agrees the tax credits
and payroll tax credits should be extended for middle class americans, working americans. the issue is whether or not it should be extended for the top earners in america. president obama is drawing a line in the sand saying we all agree that it should be there for 98% of americans but republicans are holding 98% of americans hostage for the 2% that they want tax credits for. he is drawing a very philosophical line in the sand. this is very, very serious. the tax burden on average americans will increase by a few thousand dollars a year. we know what a few hundred dollars a year makes. this is very serious. >> can that lead back to recession? >> absolutely could. that's the danger. we are growing at a rate of 1.3% in this economy. this is the type of thing that will tell american families, hold on, we are going to pull back and not buy a washing machine or go on a trip. that could set us back into a recession at a time when europe is recession and china is pulling back. very, very dangerous political game to be in right now. >> there is a lot of finger pointing going on over this crisis. you say there is plenty of blame
to go around. >> there is. don't forget, we were sitting here last july when a majority of congress tried to figure out how to raise that debt ceiling. what they did was a majority signed on to this scenario which created this super committee that was supposed to solve all the problems congress was not able to solve. at that time, people said, it wasn't going to work but they signed on anyway. what was contained in that was, okay f the super committee cannot come up with a deal, then you head over this fiscal cliff for fiscal armageddon, as they were calling it. so nobody is really surprised we're in this situation right now. i mean, my guess would be that at some point they might end up with some kind of a patch. you know, never underestimate congress' ability to do a patch when a real long-term solution is required. right now it doesn't look like it. >> dana, is this just bluster from both sides?
what's the chance some kind of grand bargain would be reached by the end of the year? >> i don't think the chances are very high. john boehner has said he doesn't want that. people think, at least the republicans are going to push for replacing that $110 billion that gloria was talking about for spending cuts with other cuts that may be more palatable. the republicans want to extend the bush era tax cuts. privately, what republicans are saying, if mitt romney loses the white house, they will probably have to give on their no tax increases stance and negotiations. on the democratic side, sources say they think if romney wins, there is a chance they could go off the cliff. why? republicans will want to wait until romney is in office to fix things his way. it used to be i would stand outside rooms where there were big negotiations going on. you knew at the end of the day, there would be a deal. it's just a question of how it gets done. now there isn't that certainty. it's pretty scary.
>> we heard from business leaders today, 15 business leaders from the countries biggest banks and insurance companies, sent a letter to the white house and congress calling for a bipartisan deal. they are not hiring right now because of this uncertainty. >> look, the banks don't carry a lot of sway with a lot of people in this country, because of everything they have gone through. there is a reality that business leaders understand that if you take a few thousand dollars out of everybody's pocket, that pulls demand back. everything depends on demand. why would i hire new staff or build a new factory if i think americans are going to pull back in 2013? that's the issue. decisions that could be happening now to hire people to expand in 2013 with all these companies that have all this cash may not be happening. so while there is probably a likelihood some deal will be made at some point at the last minute, it is really affecting spending decisions right now on the part of individuals and businesses. this is very dangerous. >> ali, appreciate you, dana bash and gloria borger. coming up, a "360"
exclusive. a man who hid behind the scenes goes on camera for the first time since his identity was revealed. is he sorry for the creepy and vile things he did? drew griffin's exclusive interview ahead. >> hi. >> hi. you know, i can save you 15% today if you open up a charge card account with us. >> you just read my mind. >> announcer: just one little piece of information and they can open bogus accounts, stealing your credit, your money and ruining your reputation. that's why you need lifelock to relentlessly protect what matters most... [beeping...] helping stop crooks before your identity is attacked. and now you can have the most comprehensive identity theft protection available today... lifelock ultimate. so for protection you just can't get anywhere else, get lifelock ultimate. >> i didn't know how serious identity theft was until i lost my credit and eventually i lost my home. >> announcer: credit monitoring is not enough, because it tells you after the fact, sometimes
as much as 30 days later. with lifelock, as soon as our network spots a threat to your identity, you'll get a proactive risk alert, protecting you before you become a victim. >> identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me and it's gone away because of lifelock. >> announcer: while no one can stop all identity theft, if criminals do steal your information, lifelock will help fix it, with our $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you call lifelock now to get two full months of identity theft protection risk free. that's right, 60 days risk-free. use promo code: gethelp. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you won't pay a cent. order now and also get this shredder to keep your documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 dollar value, free. get protected now. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com to try lifelock protection risk free for a full 60 days. use promo code: gethelp.
welcome back. i'm just finishing up some writing. a 360 exclusive. if you spent time online and read comment sections and websites, you have seen some vile, offensive comments written by anonymous people, saying things they would never say if their names were posted. that's free speech and people have a right to say whatever they want. often these people are referred to as trolls, we're editorial yalizing. it's internet slang for troublemaker. you are about to meet one of the biggest trolls on the internet. he is speaking out in his first television interview. if there are kids in the room, you might want to have them leave. you are going to hear a
conversation geared towards adults. this particular troll created several controversial, many would say creepy and twisted forum on reddit. one area called jail bait, which featured sexually suggestive photos of teenagers. we reported on it last year. a couple weeks later, reddit shut down the jailbait forum. there were a couple others that featured pictures of dead children and other rape jokes. you get the idea. pretty vile stuff. for years, the guy who created and moderating these forums hid behind the online screen name violent acres. >> last week the website gawker revealed who he actually is. this is michael bruch. this is what he looks like, that is who he is, a 49-year-old software programmer that lives in texas, married with kids. now, he is out of a job. he agreed to talk to drew griffin at a hotel room in ft. worth. he told drew that his employer fired him after the article.
he had another life unknown to his employer. after a long day at work, he would unwind on the internet. he was in the big league of trolls. keep in mind, reddit is a powerful online player, reporting more than 3 billion page views. a good troll helps drive traffic on a website, violent acres, aka michael brooch, was so good that he says that reddit awarded him prizes. including one for the jail bait forum. that's how popular it was. how many teens were exploited by it, that's anyone's guess. here is drew's exclusive interview. >> the problem is the kids, the teenagers, the pictures, weren't yours. >> that is correct. >> you didn't know who those kids were. >> and neither did anyone else. we did our best to maintain the anonymity of these people, without thinking, you know, about the wider repercussions. if people were to tell us, i know that person or this was me, we would remove them.
i say we would remove them. this is one of the big problems. i mentioned, you can't delete anything from reddit. >> if a teenage girl is out there and for some reason or another, a picture of her in her underwear gets posted on a site called jail bait, you would expect her to contact some guy named violent acres and ask for that picture to be removed from this website because it is very embarrassing to me? this whole thing, i have to tell you, it sounds crazy. i'm a father of a daughter. i would be very mad at you. >> i understand that. all i can say is that, you know, i'm sorry. i have made mistakes. i understand that reddit encouraged and enabled this sort of behavior and i shouldn't have been a part of it.
nobody on reddit really had anything to say about it at all. since then, i have come to understand that there are, you know, situations where things are inappropriate. i started off posting lots of porn, mostly soft core porn, pictures of naked girls, that sort of thing. as i would find porn of different types like if it was a picture of an african-american woman, i created a reddit called women of color. if it was a woman with large breasts, i created a reddit called boobies. i saw it as creating folders to file things in. i created probably 600 reddits or sub forums in the time i was on reddit. i just put things as i came across images, i put them in
these categories. there are hot button topics that you can make a comment about and just enrage people. sadly for me, i enjoyed doing that. i liked going in and making people really mad over what amounted to meaningless things. >> sadly, you say? >> well, yes. obviously, it has affected me. it has affected my family. it has -- >> some would say it caught up with you? >> well, it did. it actually did catch up with me. i treated reddit like a game. apparently, i have a gift for pushing buttons. >> did you ever think -- i mean, jailbait, rapebait, incests, pics of dead kids, choke a bitch. did you ever think these aren't normal buttons i am pushing here? >> this is how violent acres
character first started. this was my first thought. i see those pictures on my incoming image stream all the time. i could easily create a reddit for that and fill it up with some pictures. so i did. two outraged people. no idea where the pictures came from. i created back in the day i created a reddit called "r" rape for rape jokes one called "r" pregnant for pictures of pregnant women. >> are you apologizing for what you did or are you trying to make an excuse for what you did? >> i am to some degree. i was playing to an audience of college kids and, you know, when two years ago, when i was -- when all of this was at its height, the audience was appreciative and supportive of the sort of gallows humor that i put out there. >> did you get a thrill out of
that? >> honestly, the biggest thrill i got was those meaningless internet points. >> it is pretty amazing to hear. you see trolls on the internet all the time who hide behind an anonymity, to see one unmasked and see what kind of person he is. reddit gave him an award for creating this jailbait site. >> this surprised us. he was so proud of that award bobblehead, he brought it to the interview with him to show us. take a look. >> this is the reddit alien. this is actually gold plated. they only gave these out to people who made significant contributions to the site. plated in gold. >> you're kidding. this is an award you got from reddit for creating jailbait? >> anderson, as you can imagine, reddit told us it now regrets
sending that trophy. they said the award was based on what it called a community vote. >> it is interesting to me, because in that interview, he seems to be blaming reddit as if they were encouraging him. he has a mind, a free will. he can do what he wants. he clearly enjoys the attention that he got on it. he said at one point in your interview, he said, he has a gift for pushing buttons. it is not too hard to push buttons anonymously on the internet. it is a pretty easy thing to do. what about all the posts he made on the jailbait site? >> we asked reddit about it. they sent us a statement. reddit follows all the legal requirements regarding illegal content, including reporting to the proper authorities. by its nature, the moderators at reddit have complete control over the subsections they start unless they violate site rules or the law. so he was in charge of it, according to reddit, is how i
interpret that. >> i'm fascinated by this high opinion he seems to have for himself, saying he has a gift for pushing buttons. he is a guy sitting in his lonely little room typing on a keyboard and interacting with people he doesn't know who they are. you have more, specifically whether he regrets what he has done or regrets that he got caught. it sounds to me like he regrets getting caught. when he talked about the impact this has had, he wasn't talking about the impact of some young girl's pictures and the impact it might have had but the impact on his family, his job. he got fired. we are going to talk to drew coming up. we are going to have part two in just a second. the man once known as violent acres will answer more questions from drew ahead.
"360" exclusive. michael brutsch, whose identity was revealed last week by the website gawker, agreed to sit down with cnn's drew griffin for his first television interview. for years, he hid behind his online screen name, violent acres, while creating moderate controversial, twisted and sick forums on the website reddit. they have all now been shut down. now we know who is behind them. here is part two of drew's exclusive interview. >> michael, i don't understand
really why you did this at all, you you kept pushing the envelope. >> it had a reward. i'm like the monkey that pushes the button and gets the food pellet. it's addictive. why do people spend money playing wow? why do people play games like that to build up their meaningless stats? what does 300 million mite mean in kingdoms of camelot, exactly the same as 800,000 karma means on reddit. it's just -- i don't know. >> you were outed. >> yes. >> so far, it has not been good. >> and i anticipate it will get much worse. i can't see it getting any better. >> was this a huge mistake? >> if i look back on it, yes, it probably was. >> what happens now? you have lost your job. >> i have lost my job. i am going to lose my home. my health insurance is gone. my wife is disabled.
i really don't know at this point. i suspect i am going to probably move back up to arkansas with her family and i really don't see myself being able to get a job. >> anderson outed you without saying your name a year ago, right? >> right. >> you could have stopped then. >> right. >> is the only reason you are stopping is because we now know who you are? >> yes. there is really no point anymore. no one is going to buy into the violent acres mystique anymore, because it's gone. that and the fact that i have, as with the rape and pregnant reddits, i have come around over the last few months to understand that some of these things can be harmful to other people.
>> wow. >> he has come around over the last few months to understand some things can be harmful to other people. why do you think he agreed to talk to you? >> you know, his life is ruined, anderson. i think personally his life is ruined more than we even know. i know he has lost his job. he has lost his little violent acres identity. but his personal life is falling apart. i think he wanted to come on the air and truly apologize and try to explain maybe to his extended family and even his followers why he did this, why he created this character and somehow wiggle out of this to blame it on violent acres, this character, who he says made up all this stuff, trying to distance himself personally from this character. he was very nervous. we thought, david fitzpatrick, the producer and i, thought up until the last minute, he is not going to come. not only did he come, he came to that interview. he came an hour early. he was eager to get on the tv.
>> we have free speech for a reason, people are allowed to say what they want. he has supporters out there as well in the online community. >> that's exactly right. i think, you know, free speech is free speech as long as you are saying it outloud with your name under it. this guy was basically hidden away from anybody to see. anonymously posting stuff that he was just trying to tick people off. he sure did it. he got exposed. he has the right to free speech. he can say whatever he wants. we gave him that opportunity. he now realizes what he said was probably a big mistake. >> interesting stuff. drew, appreciate it. thanks very much. the ridiculist is next. scuba diving the great barrier reef with sharks, or jumping into the market, he goes with people he trusts, which is why he trades with a company that doesn't nickel and dime him with hidden fees. so he can worry about other things, like what the market is doing and being ready, no matter what happens, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense, from td ameritrade.
tonight, we have a warning. if you should ever find yourself hanging around someone's pool when it's really, really cold outside and your friends just happen to be filming as you're about to do a cannon ball into the frigid water to break through the ice, i want you to think back to what we're about to show you and reconsider. a german man found out the hard way that the cold cannon ball may not be the greatest idea anyone has ever had. >> oh, [ bleep ]. [ bleep ]. [ laughter ] >> let's take another look at the precise moment when cannon
ball became coccix slam. oh, ow. oh. all right. enough. let's see if we can try to figure out exactly what went wrong here. his form looks okay. he got a running start. the arm position was good. the knees were tucked into the chest. he had plenty of altitude. what possibly could have been the problem? i'm stumped. it looks like that was shaping up to be one humdinger of a cannon ball. maybe it will help to look at it in slow motion. oh, goodness. that still hurts every time i see it. i'm no scientist, but i'm starting to think something they have been wrong with that pool. why don't we watch it in slow motion and reverse and see if we can pick up any clues that way.