Skip to main content

tv   World Business Today  CNN  May 21, 2011 1:00am-2:00am PDT

1:00 am
aspirations. but i -- he never came off as a political guy to me. he always seemed like just a normal, smart guy, great personality. who looked like he'd be a good fit with my sister. that was how i looked at it. and it wasn't until he really started getting into politics in those first early campaigns where good evening. i'm eliot spitzer. welcome to the program. top story tonight -- sometimes a picture tells a better story than we can. take a look at this body language. two men, president barack obama, israeli prime minister, binyamin netanyahu. by most accounts they do not like each other. today that seemed clear. after a 90-minute meeting at the white house much longer than expected netanyahu slapped back at the peace plan obama laid out in his speech yesterday.
1:01 am
>> the peace based on illusions will crash on the rocks of the middle eastern reality. and the only -- only peace that will endure is one that's based on reality. on -- unshakable facts. >> a peace based on illusions. strong words indeed. i will be asking exactly what that meant and i will be asking true insider. i will have an exclusive interview with israel's ambassador to the united states mi the end of the world. >> if we don't act now it will be too late. >> some people are sure it is happening tomorrow. the guy that's predicting it said the same thing before. >> what if this guy is right? >> the story of what happened last time. and dominique strass-kahn, in america he is reviled. in france, he is a victim. >> he has been victim of
1:02 am
preemptive punishment. >> you are an embarrassment to our party. >> republicans are off and running. and tripping over their own words. >> i don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineer. >> gloria borger talks to the governor of florida. a key state. now more on our headliner story. joining me from washington, exclusive prime time interview, michael orrin. clearly we all know now when you did get details of the speech, there was a lot of back and forth between the israeli government and the white house. what was that all about? who was involved in that back and forth? >> a number of questions to answer here. first of all, keep in mind that president obama has called for the '67 borders to be -- the 'focus point or the orientation of our peace talks with the
1:03 am
palestinians. hasn't called for the actual return to the '67 borders. and it was not the focal point of the speech. the speech was about the situation in the middle southeast and a very small part of the speech. having said that, the overwhelming majority of israelis are against the return to the '67 borders. that's clear. and -- the reasons are very, very simple. those borders before 1967 were only nine miles wide. twice arab armies tried to cut us in half by crossing those borders, back is to the sea. tried to destroy us from those borders. they were not defensible borders. in the last 44 years, since 1967, over a half million israelis now live beyond those borders. so a return to the '67 borders would leave the half a million of our citizens in another country. very few israelis would recall returning to those borders. the president hasn't demanded that we return to those borders. simply saying that will be the
1:04 am
starting point for negotiations. >> just so it is clear on the issue of hamas and the united nations and what -- what hamas and the palestinians intend to do in september, you and the president are in absolute alignment and i think with 99% of the american public it is the issue of the '67 borders because -- frankly, i'm a little startled that this has caused so much consternation. i want to read to you something that was said in a joint press release when the prime minister netanyahu was here in 2010 with secretary of state hillary clinton which is identical to the language that was in the speech. it says the u.s. believes the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconcile it is palestinian independent state based upon the 1967 lines with agreed swaps. this is language that is nearly word for word what was in the speech and that's why i'm -- i'm asking you right now, why is it that the israeli government is pushing back so hard when that language '67 -- '67 lines with agreed swaps was used as the
1:05 am
template for u.s. policy in the past. what's new about it? >> i know this may sound like arcane diplomacy to you. but if you read that statement slowly you will see that the united states believed according to that statement that through good faith negotiations, the palestinian goal of an independent state based on the 1967 borders could be reconciled with israel's goal of a secure and recognized jewish state with israel. what was previously couched as a palestinian goal has now been reframed as america's position. >> i'm not sure i agree with you in terms of the syntax of that statement. i think we have to dig a little more deeply. i read the statement very carefully. the issue of swaps has been integral to what the united states has been saying for years. that's why i think everybody in the united states government is saying this is not a fundamental ship, why are you causing such a -- about something that has been integral to what we have been saying for years? >> have to give thank you same
1:06 am
answer again. what was previously a palestinian position has now been adopted as an american position. and the possibility then arises that we would be asked in some way to go back to the '67 borders which we regard as indefensible and borders that have invited wars in the past and haven't prevented wars. borders that would leave very large numbers of our citizens beyond our borders. >> let me ask you this question then. even if there was this possible analysis would say it is different the thrust of the president's speech where he said with great clarity that the fatah, hamas alignment made it unacceptable to expect israel to negotiate with palestinian authority. where he rejected the palestinian effort to go to the united nations and seek recognition at the current moment. all of those were hugely important things the president said on behalf of israeli security, why not embrace those and say thank you, mr. president, this is why you are our single most important ally
1:07 am
in the world. >> i think that's just what i said. we welcomed and appreciated the president's position on the pact between hamas and the palestinian authority. it is clear that everything we are talking about in terms of negotiations, whether, you know about the '67 borders or any other aspect of the negotiation is now couched in hypothetical terms. because the ball is very much in the palestinian's court. they have to make a decision. whether they stick with this pact with the terrorist organization that just -- only a few weeks ago fired a missile at a -- school bus along the israeli border, killed 16-year-old child, an organization that condemned america's action against bin laden and -- hailed him as an islamic holier warrior, this is -- this is hamas. the palestinian authority has to make a choice between a pact with that terrorist organization or negotiating peace with us. this is a position which is a very strongly held one by the obama administration and we
1:08 am
share it and we appreciate it. >> mr. ambassador, that's exactly right. i ask you then just as a matter of raw politics, why not have those issues which you just articulated so well be the single focus of the public discourse rather than a very arcane potential disagreement about whether the '67 borders with swaps had or had not been embraced as the foundation of negotiations, it seems to me what you have done is overwhelmed so much in that speech critically important for israel's security and brought us back to a focus on the area of disagreement between two incredibly close allies. >> well, i think -- it is -- it may seem arcane to you. but for us it is a matter of national security. i live in southern jerusalem with my family, we live in an area part of pre-1967 israel. but -- the army beyond what was the jordanian boarder in 1967 begins 50 yards down our street. we won't be just in rocket range. we will be within pistol sxraeng for us, that -- arcane issue, as
1:09 am
you stated, a matter of the life and death of our families. and -- it is not justice real made it a big deal of it. you look at the headlines of all the major papers today, "wall street journal" and "washington post," "new york times," they all headline the 1967 border change. it is not just us. but having said that, again, there are parts of the speech we very much appreciated and i think that the -- tenor of the discussion between prime minister netanyahu and president obama today showed the degree that these two leaders cooperate, they -- discussion went on twice as long was supposed to. private lunch between the president and prime minister. they -- spoke on the white house lawn for about a half an hour afterward. i was there when the -- president threw his arm around binyamin netanyahu and said good-bye, my friend. the tenor was not what -- much depicted in the press. >> i -- i agroo with that and i hope that's the case. i would also say you have to acknowledge and i don't say that the issue of what land is returned is arcane. syntax of the sentences is arcane. every agreement negotiated has
1:10 am
taken as a premise that the '67 boundaries with necessary adjustments for security would be the framework for the negotiated resolution. two-state resolution to everybody acknowledges is necessary. i think that is the critical agreement here which we should focus on. let's move on. >> i have to respond to that. agreement since 1993 as preceded on the assumption we were not going back to the '67 border. that was the frame of reference. >> no, no. '67 borders with adjustments. thank you so much for joining us this evening. >> always a pleasure. on monday i will be speaking to former plo representative sari nusseibeh gloria, so glad to have you in the arena tonight. >> i have been working on this interview with governor rick scott of florida. as you know, it is always florida, florida, florida in presidential races. we have a great republican primary shaping up. i was talking to him about
1:11 am
presidential politics, about the early primary there florida and, of course, what's going to happen to jewish voters in that state. now that president obama has come out with some controversial comments on going back to the 1967 lines as a starting point for peace talks. >> gloria, you are so right. florida is one of those swing states that determines the outcome unless of course, it is the supreme court that does it for us. all right. gloria, i look forward to that interview. when we come back, i will be talking to the french writer who the s making a lot of people angry.
1:12 am
1:13 am
any questions? no. you know... ♪ we're not magicians ♪ we can't read your mind ♪ ♪ read your mind ♪ we need your questions ♪ each and every kind ♪ every kind ♪ will this react with my other medicine? ♪ ♪ hey, what are all these tests even for? ♪ ♪ questions are the answer
1:14 am
♪ yeah ♪ oh dominique strass-kahn is now free on bail. former head of the international monetary fund is now out. said to be staying at a rented apartment in downtown manhattan somewhere near ground zero. meanwhile, the french continue to have a strong reaction to the strauss-kahn arrest and it is far different from the american response. in france, the former imf chief is seen as a victim. perhaps strauss-kahn's biggest defender is french writer bernard. thank you for joining us thank you.
1:15 am
>> you gave a full-throated defense to dominique strass-kahn earlier this week. a lot has happened since then. he has been indicted by a grand jury based upon a pretty full record, we understand. does any of that shake your confidence in your defense of him that you have articulated -- you know, far and wide somewhat to the consternation of many people? >> no. i did not change my mind. maybe he is guilty. the grand jury will appreciate that. they will decide if he is guilty or not. but for the moment, the way he was treated means that he's also a victim and he has been victim of punishment. no one knows if he is guilty or not. nobody knows what happened in his room. we will know when the people, the -- the people of the trial, the grand jury will investigate and decide.
1:16 am
according to the american principle, this is unbearable. i'm not defending a friend. i'm defending the principle on which the bill of rights, the spirit of america, are built. >> you know, let me quibble with you a little bit. obviously i have been a prosecutor and i believe deeply in the presumption of innocence. it is an accord, foundation of our judicial system. but there is a difference between the presumption of innocence that attends to a criminal proceeding and the common sense judgments that are made by people out in the general public who see the evidence and make their determinations as a case unfolds. nobody has ever said to the public you must withhold all judgment until a jury speaks. they are the -- entitled, are they not to judge the voracity and credibility of this maid and make their own judgments even
1:17 am
before a criminal case has been prosecuted? >> number one, there is a contradiction between the principle of the presumption of innocence and the perp walk. this perp walk, dominique strass-kahn, or any guy walking with all the cruelty and humiliation which is involved in front of camera, photographers, hunting him, it is a contradiction. can you not say that you hold human rights and accept the perp walk. this is one point. the second point is that if the crime has been committed, it is an unforgivable crime. the rape is a crime. imagine what -- what will happen if it is proved that the crime has not been committed?
1:18 am
i do not know. you do not know. "the new york post" does not know. the judge is not "the new york post." the grand jury is not the daily news. they are not alone to make -- to pronounce, to tell what is right, fair, or not. they are not the judge. >> you have said that dominique strass-kahn was a womanizer. he does not deny that himself. is it possible in your understanding of him that he misunderstood the issue of consent? somehow he does got -- got lost and did not realize this was not consent? >> i am not one of the 21 or 23 wise women and men who will have to decide on that. so i cannot know and i do not want to reply to this question. i just say that this flood of images showing the humiliation of the man who may be guilty or
1:19 am
who may be innocent makes him a victim. and i say that america, who is so careful with images, is not careful in this case. just think one thing. just please think of one point. america decided not to show th images of bin laden dead. not to offend the muslims. so right. but we show the images of dominique strass-kahn without any consideration of the question to know if it offends his kids, his family, himself and so on. when you deal with images, you cannot be double standard. can you not on one side say that images will offend and you will retain them. probably right. i think it was a wise decision.
1:20 am
flood of images of the man who may be innocent all over the world. this is a problem of today. i'm confident in the american justice, i'm confident in the decision which will be taken by the -- by the people of manhattan. but -- i'm not confident in this preemptive strike, preemptive punishment, decided by some newspapers or tabloid newspapers. same in france. problem is the same. what i'm telling you i say also to the french tv. >> look, it is always a pleasure to chat with you. bewhelm. we will continue this conversation and see where this takes us. thank you for joining us. >> thank you. up next, bernie madoff ran the biggest ponzi scheme ever. but never told a story of how he did it until now. just ahead, we talked to a writer who went behind bars with madoff.
1:21 am
1:22 am
1:23 am
1:24 am
make no mistake about it. the 2012 presidential election is under way. politicians on both sides of the aisle are keenly aware of what the big issue is. that's jobs, jobs, jobs. one of the key players in all of this will be the governor of the vital swing state of florida. whenever the election of -- the election of 2000, bush v. gore, florida, florida florida. joining me is the republican governor of that state rick scott. i think he could become a kingmaker. welcome. >> nice to be here. >> this has been quite a wild week in republican politics. we have had donald trump getting out of the race. mike huckabee getting out of the race. newt gingrich making some mistakes. we hear tim pawlenty is getting
1:25 am
in on monday. you are the governor of this important swing state. so tell me, are you planning to endorse a candidate at some point? >> i haven't decide whether i will endorse. i can tell you what, it is all going to be about jobs. whatever candidate -- whoever it is that can explain to the american public how they are going to get our economy going again, that's who will get elected. >> you are not going to come out and tell us who your favorite candidate is at this point? >> no. i think -- we all ought to be watching these candidates. we ought to listen what they say. have them tell us how they are going to get the economy going again. i ran -- >> are they doing that -- do you think republican candidates are doing that? they got kind of sidetracked with donald trump and the birth certificate. those kinds of issues. are republicans doing a good job of that right now? >> i think everybody can do a better job. i think we -- our biggest issue in this -- in this -- in the country is jobs.
1:26 am
i think everybody that's running for office could do a better job explaining how we could get this economy going again. all the decisions we are making, how we get each individual to give them the opportunity to get back to work. >> we had -- an interesting flack this week with newt gingrich that came out and has since apologized for it but criticized congressman ryan's budget plan. specifically the medicare proposal in that plan that would eventually turn medicare into a voucher program. did -- did newt gingrich make a mistake? could that actually help him in a state like florida? >> well, i think we have to be very careful what happen was medicare. as you know in florida, we have a lot of senior citizens of florida. we have to fix medicare. they also know that -- for our entire economy to be able to control -- have the money to pay for medicare we have to get the economy going again. that will be the key.
1:27 am
who has the right, you know, who has the right story? who has -- people believe about how they will get the economy going again. >> when your voters say to you governor, what do you think about that ryan plan that's being proposed in washington that was approved by the house of representatives, what do you tell your voters in florida? >> what i tell them is we have to have -- honest debate about what happens with medicare. we want to make sure that, you know, our senior citizens are relying on medicare and they can continue to rely on medicare. and the other issue we are dealing with our state is medicaid. the unbelievable cost of medicaid and one thing is part of paul ryan's plan is the -- doing a block grant for medicaid. which is what we need in our state and i you this most states need because we know what we need in our state. we can spend the money better. >> sounds to me like you are not endorsing that part of the ryan plan, though. >> well, i -- i -- first off with medicaid we need to
1:28 am
absolutely get block grants. we have to do those for the -- for our state. with regard to medicare, we have -- i think -- he has a plan we have to review. our -- senior citizens care about making sure they have health care for the rest of their life. they paid into this program. so i think it is very important to have this debate. and make sure we fix it long term. not short term. >> because your formerly in the health care industry and know a lot more about this than most people. i guess the question is how much would a $6,000 voycher get you? which is sort of part of the -- ryan plan, right? >> well -- i think -- here is what people -- want to make sure. then want to make sure that they pay into the plan and make sure they continue to be able to get medicare. they relied on this. it is only fair. at the same time we also have to go through the process of thinking long term how do we afford medicare. so -- we are going to -- this is going to get fixed. medicare has to get fixed. medicaid has to get fixed.
1:29 am
this campaign in the end will come down to jobs. who in this country has the plan, has the blueprint for getting our country back to work. >> again, you are in the -- the governor of the state of florida. let me just take a turn for a moment to foreign policy. i mean, yesterday -- the president talked about negative -- negotiations going back to the 1967 borders and -- the israeli prime minister was not too happy about it. i have a question for you which is could the president have hurt himself with the jewish voters in your state? >> well -- you know, i have already heard from a lot of jewish voters and other supporters of israel they are concerned about that path. they -- we all know we have to come up with a long-term strategy for the middle east. we can't continue to have these problems. we can't continue to have the problem with access to oil. and so -- i think -- it was interesting that it came out the day before he was meeting with -- netanyahu.
1:30 am
so -- but the -- you know, in my case, what i'm focused on is -- getting our state back to work. we had a great day today. unemployment continued to go downpour the fourth month in a row. it is -- when i'm focused on is jobs. >> i gather. i have been hearing that. let me ask you about the primary and -- in your state because -- some people in new hampshire, iowa are not so happy that you are very important primary -- now looks like it could be the ends of january. can you tell us -- whether indeed your primary is going to get moved up? >> well -- look, we -- you know, we are clearly a swing state. we are a very important state and very important that we have -- our own date for primary. we need to have it before the so-called super tuesday. whether we do tonight january -- january, whether we do it in fifth, we need to be independent of the others. so we are working with the party. we are not -- we don't want to lose any delegates. we -- it is not fair to us to lose delegates.
1:31 am
we immediate to have a day, whether it is in january or it is -- in fifth in line, we need to have to have a day for our primary. >> when do you want it? all the candidates are listening, governor. when do you want it? >> well, we are going to also have a straw poll in september. in the -- september 22nd, 24th, having a straw poll event. we are going to make sure that -- our -- everybody in florida knows about our candidates, republican candidates. i'm going to do everything i can along with all the republicans in the state to make sure the -- republican nominee wins this state and hopefully wins -- the -- election next year. so we can help get our country back to work. >> governor rick scott, thank you so much for being with us today. we appreciate your coming on and we will be right back.
1:32 am
1:33 am
1:34 am
1:35 am
for a segment we call "the clash." here is what we know about the president's speech yesterday. president obama made so many last-minimum changes that the white house kept the world waiting for more than half an hour while he finished writing it. we also know the israeli government was given a heads-up about the content of the speech and argued forcefully with secretary of state clinton unsuccessfully to change the language on the israeli/palestinian peace process. listen new to the passage that was the focus of such heated attention. >> the united states believe negotiations should result in two states with permanent palestinian borders, with
1:36 am
israel, jordan and egypt, and permanent israeli borders with palestine. we believe the borders of israel and palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps. >> in the flurry of last-minute changes did the president lose control of the message of his speech? joining me now two of washington's leading speech writers and political strategists, robert shrum worked with progressive candidates from ted kennedy to john kerry. former speechwriter for george w. bush, mr. frum. welcome to both of you. david, let me begin with you. was it standard practice or is this is your prying to you that the israeli government knew the precise content of the speech before it was delivered and was given a chance to push back? >> it is standard practice to share a speech with all important stakeholders. clearly the administration felt
1:37 am
the israelis were an important stakeholder here. it is surprising to me they allowed it to go so long and i think they thought they were going to spring something on the israelis by showing them at the lass minute and got them -- to pushback. you put your finger in your -- opening statement on the key point about all of this, though. which is -- they -- was this the news the president wanted to make in his speech about the arab? 80% of the speech is about the arab, ball rain and syria. what's the headline that he got? about the '67 borders. is that what he wanted? find that hard to believe. if so, that's kind of -- that's a failure in and a disappointment for the administration. >> what david said is what has been bothering me all day. this was billed in the drumbeat beading up to this almost for a week was finally the magnum opus we will understand and all we are talking about is the 1967 borders. is this a massive miscommunication failure? >> i don't think you can speak to the arab spring and world persuasively without speaking
1:38 am
about the palestinian/israeli conflict. >> i think netanyahu made a big mistake if he thought calling up and yelling at secretary clinton was going to get the president to change what he was going to say. it was not going to happen. >> i agree. at that point it was both too late and also there had been too many internal debates within the white house about the precise wording of the language. i want to come back to the question i asked you and then get david to weigh in as well. everybody wanted to understand and maybe you can't square the circle. understand how it made sense to do what we are doing in libya and yet what we are not doing in syria and how that squared with egypt. and to be distracted as i see it by the -- necessary failure of -- the peace process between its real and palestinians and takes away from the president's capacity to speak to the larger issue of the arab. >> i teach at nyu and go over there a number of times a year. it is clear to me from talking to people there the united states and the president can't credibly address all of these new issues in the arab world without addressing the
1:39 am
israeli/palestinian crisis. there was a sense, i think, that was beginning to spread through the arab world that the israelis were going to be able to back off any meaningful peace process. the united states wasn't going to do anything or say anything about it. and i suspect that to get a hearing, the president had to say this and that was the reason they made that calculation. >> fascinating point. what i hear you saying, bob, is the president in order to be viewed seriously and taken seriously by the arab leadership needed to push hardback against its real and that was his way of saying to the arab leadership see now, i'm being even-handed and take me seriously about what i'm saying. i'm with you. the american public doesn't have any idea about why we are doing or what the next steps are in syria, libya, or egypt. am i right about that? >> yeah. were they protesting with israel whether they went into the streets in tunisia and egypt? we lived through a period in which we have seen that this myth that the palestinian issue is the driver of the arab world rather than say economic failure and stagnation and the
1:40 am
disappointment of college graduates that can't get work. that's so refuted. you would think you would want to stay out of it. the united states is at war in libya. at war for three months. war is not going well. how oftens that president talked to the country about what his plan is to get the war in better shape. i think that there is in washington, among the allies, a chance to talk to foreign diplomat about this and in -- country that played major role in this and -- there is great concern about the progress of this war. meanwhile, in syria today, how many dead? two dozen? bloodiest day of clashes between opposition and government. and what's the -- what did we all discuss? what's the headline the president has got for himself? >> you want to jump in. >> barack ten years ago told me that the -- deal that was done at camp david basically what the president was talking about yesterday was the only way you would ever get to peace agreement. the tragedy of that was that barack was ready to agree,
1:41 am
israelis ready, clinton brokered it and arafat wouldn't sign it. it is still the deal. >> still won't sign it. >> you know what i do, put it the table every week. every friday and say sign it. >> this was what i forget who to give credit for the great quote, palestinians never pass up an opportunity to pass up an opportunity. great wore smith of all time. thank you. >> thank you. >> up next, gloria borger talks to the governor of the state that put george bush in the white house in 2000. what will it take to win the white house this time around. :2v
1:42 am
1:43 am
1:44 am
you were the last to be born in a family of 7 brothers. that's why you had to sleep on the seventh bunk bed and you developed vertigo, and that's why you couldn't become a pilot and you had to study engineering. you patented 367 inventions, but only 3 made it to market. that's why you don't have an apartment on the 16th floor and you have it on the fifth, but that's where you met carmen. with her, you had 3 children. the fourth ended up being a dog. numbers change your life. that's why you should take control of your credit score by paying your bills on time. for more tips, visit
1:45 am
>> moenchlgts of hose responsible important the 2008 economic meltdown have gotten away with their crimes except for one. bernie madoff. after his $65 billion ponzi scam. they dissect the tale in "the wizard of lies." we spoke recently. diana, thank you so much for joining me. you spent more time with bernie madoff than any other journalist. first question has to be has he come to grips emotionally with the magnitude of what he did? swamps every other ponzi scheme in history. does he realize that? >> i don't think so. i really don't. what i sensed was this enormous denial. when he talks about the crime, he gets into this terminology of dollars and cents, arithmetic, how much it will be raised in the bankruptcy court, how much will victims get. all of this cerebral stuff.
1:46 am
he actually told me in the first visit in august that he thought his victims would ultimately be pretty close to whole. i just was stunned when you think of the human pain and the human wreckage that flowed out of this crime. you can't put that back together. >> maybe that's what's missing with the guy. read thing book you get the sense of somebody who is antiseptic and didn't relate to people emotionally. >> either that or was so well defended against his emotions. there was one occasion where he broke down and started to cry. i think it is genuine because he's a man that takes pride in such iron control. it was when he was talking about his wife, ruth. and her decision to stay with him after his arrest. >> against the advice of everybody else. >> her friends, everyone said -- get out. he said you know, even i told her -- you know, ruth, you can leave. he broke down then. i think that there is an emotional man inside there
1:47 am
somewhere. >> which raises then -- you mentioned his wife, rest of the family. the question that's been -- so many of us have been asking, did the other members of his family know about this? >> i started out from the position of -- let's see if there is any evidence. honestly i could not find any evidence. not just any credible evidence. could not find any evidence that they knew and there were very compelling reasons to think that they did not know. >> there were other guilty parties. bernie madoff pointed the fingers at the banks. do you buy that? >> bernie did not originally point his finger at the banks. when i spoke with him in august i specifically said -- question number two, who else knew? question number one was when did it start? i don't think he answered either of those questions. >> a good ten years earlier than he said. >> who else knew? at that time he said well, maybe jeffrey, palm beach investor, secretive private man. he might have known. he had to know.
1:48 am
he did not say oh, well, all the banks must have known. when i met with him in february, that was his story, the banks had to know. >> we are talking -- putting names to it. primarily chase at this point? >> chase, of course, is the target of one of the largest lawsuits the bankruptcy trustee filed. allegations in the civil suit which they vehemently deny. absolutely saying they will fight this to the death in court. >> which means they will settle next week. >> i don't know. i think this might -- as a -- i'm hoping it goes to court. i can't wait to cover that trial. you will enjoy it, too. they were not only involved in the derivatives deals, servicing the feeder funds, that were invested with madoff, they were madoff's own banker. every ponzi scheme has a banker. i think what will come out of this case against jpmorganchase is a better answer about how -- how -- how you hold bankers
1:49 am
accountable for their customers do through the facility of their bank account. ponzi scheme is a liar with bank account. that's all it is. the traditional ponzi scheme you know it as well as i. exploits people's greed. you know, 50% of the month -- i can make you rich overnight. and -- so when a ponzi scheme blows up, tendency is to say -- blame the victim. >> 50%. >> how could they not know? >> madoff, madoff scheme, if you will, exploits not people's greed but their fears. their fear of volatility and their fear of complexity. their fear of all of these crazy markets. >> certainty of a 10% return. >> there were many years during this fraud when you could have made more monday in the magellan fund. >> he gave people confidence. what's your theory about why when you look at enormous scope of what happened in our capital markets over the past couple of years? virtually nobody else has been prosecuted.
1:50 am
>> the root really is that we didn't make the right things illegal. you know -- if -- if you don't -- if you don't specify what the rules are, don't come along later and blame somebody for stepping over the line. you know. dogs bark. wall street firms try to make money. it is just the way they are. that's what they are built to do. if you want them to live by some kind of self-imposed honor code, then -- you are naive. you have to tell them where the limits are. and -- we didn't. we became far too willing to let wall street operate as an honor code. we really do need to trust. this is why it is so die bol -- i can create a world where there is no ponzi scheme. you don't want to liver in it because there is no trust either. if there is enough trust to conduct modern commerce, there
1:51 am
is enough trust for ponzi scheme and so we have to see trust as a two-edged sword. and appreciate what it gives us and what it can cost us. we just are unwilling to do that. >> we have to appreciate how sharp both edges are. >> yes, indeed. >> thank you so much for being here. >> thank you. >> spectacular book. >> thank you. >> you probably heard tomorrow is the day the world will end. at least that's what some people believe. up next, we will get the facts and figure out if we should be worried. e. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything. in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you from paying up to thousands of dollars...
1:52 am
out of your own pocket. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... with all you need to enroll. put their trust in aarp medicare supplement insurance. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. the prices are competitive. i can keep my own doctor. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. call now to get a free information kit. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. and the advantages don't end there. choose from a range of medicare supplement plans... that are all competitively priced. we have a plan for almost everyone, so you can find one that fits your needs and budget. with all medicare supplement plans, there are virtually no claim forms to fill out. plus you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare. and best of all, these plans are... the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. when they told me these plans were endorsed by aarp...
1:53 am
i had only one thing to say... sign me up. call the number on your screen now... and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan. you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, to help you choose the plan that's right for you. as with all medicare supplement plans, you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare, get help paying for what medicare doesn't... and save up to thousands of dollars. call this toll-free number now.
1:54 am
in case you haven't heard, the world is ending tomorrow. may 21, at 6:00 precisely. we know this because it is on billboards, t-shirts, subway
1:55 am
ads, ticket signs and all over the internet. all because of the predictions of one man, head of the christian network known as family radio. author of the very upbeat book "time has an end." >> from everything we know in the bible, on may 21, 2011, it is going to start with a huge earthquake. the bible describes it is an earthquake that's way bigger than anything that has ever been. >> a lot of people are making doomsday jokes including folks around here. but not everyone is laughing. when camping made the same prediction in 1994, it struck fear into the heart of a 13-year-old steve, luckily steve now an editor and regular contribute dwror our show survived to tell the story. welcome, steve. and -- i have to ask you, are we going to make it lou this n. >> i think we have a few hours left so let's enjoy it.
1:56 am
>> look, i don't mean to be completely frivolous about this. when you were 13, what possibly persuaded you that the apocalypse was coming? >> it wouldn't be gash. >> you look normal by the way. >> i learned how to compartmentalize. i wasn't completely convinced it was going to happen. i was an anxiety-prone 13-year-old. the world is a little different then in terms of the internet we now know it didn't exist. i was on this primitive online thing called prodigy. it had a bunch of message boards. i was sitting there and saw a message basically harold himself put it there laying out his case for why september 6, 1994, the world would end. >> and persuaded a 13-year-old -- he has an engineering degree. he is not a complete kook. he has some educational training. he persuade ad 13 year old and ruined your life in a way for two years. >> yeah. he didn't persuade me but put the thought in my mind what if this guy is right? what do we know about the world?
1:57 am
what do we know about the universe? what if it is if this guy figured it out. >> the night before the date it was supposed to happen. what did you do? you tell the story. >> i spent two years trying go through -- i tried to find religion and found -- well, i want want to believe but i kind of have doubt. i was hoping for the best. at the end, monday, september 5, it was labor day. i'm sitting there and started to think about the logistics of it. wait a minute. it is like -- >> logistics rules the world. >> 11:00 p.m. here in massachusetts. on september 5, wait a minute. there's 24 time zones in the world. somewhere in the world it is probably almost september -- >> you were then 15 to figure out the flaw in this argument. this time he thought about it and said 6:00 in every different time zone. >> that's -- if i had known that. you will have a great earthquake in each of the 24 time zones at precisely 6:00.
1:58 am
>> here is what amazes me. apparently rational people who buy into this stuff. have you spoken to any of them this time around? >> i haven't. i have seen a couple of guys at the subway station. my story is -- when i was, you know, kid going through this, there was a -- student in my class that was religious and ran it by him. he said the bible has a passage says the time of the end is known only to the lord. no human being could know it. i thought well, that's wonderful. i was in boston and saw one of theeps end of the world guys. ran the theory by him. he gave me this confident -- gobbleygook. >> will he reset the date again? >> he is 89 years old. i don't know how much he can keep this up. we sent a reporter out to his head quarters in oakland yesterday. he talks to one of the staffers
1:59 am
who does the mail there. the guy pulled him aside and said between you and me, 09% of the staff doesn't believe this. we are just here. >> they did tell you what he think he will be doing it is a hour approaches. >> yes. apparently -- from my colleague, he plans to be with his family cnn. >> we know where the best is. >> if there is big news like the end of the world, cnn has a reputation. >> i'm not sure we want to use him as the poster child for our viewing audience but was there any particular reason he was picking us? >> i have no idea. my colleague told me that. >> has he improved on his argument this time around? clearly didn't work in 1994. >> what he said -- i didn't know all the details back then. what he said is in 1994 he framed it as a hypothetical. he thought it would be but it might not be. this time he is certain. as a 13, 14-year-old i did not get the might be part back in '94. i only got it is happen. >> we better put on our seat belts and brace ourselves for whatever cataclysm is come.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on