Guest: Raul Hinojosa, Duncan Hunter, Mark Foley, Dee Dee Myers, Joe Wilson, Tommy Turner, Anthony Weiner, Beth Holloway Twitty
JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: Right now in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, get our troops out of Iraq, that‘s what‘s one powerful politician is calling for today in Washington. And a lot of people are paying attention. We are going to ask, is that good for our troops? Is it good for the military? Is it good for America? It‘s today SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY showdown.
Then, could Natalee Holloway still be alive? Her mother says yes. And she went on the Dr. Phil show today and made some very interesting comments about a phone call she received from October. Beth Holloway Twitty will be here to talk about it.
Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY, no passport required, only common sense allowed.
ANNOUNCER: From the press room, to the courtroom, to the halls of Congress, Joe Scarborough has seen it all. Welcome to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.
SCARBOROUGH: Hey, thanks a lot for being with me. I really appreciate it. Now, we‘re going to have those stories in just a minute.
Plus, new information on that amazing “Dateline NBC” investigation that went into online sex predators. We are going to tell you what local law enforcement officers are telling us about those men caught on tape. And, friends, I got to tell you, we‘re making progress in this case.
Plus, the new “Harry Potter” movie opens tonight. And it‘s going to be a thrill to millions. So, why are some saying that the movies and the books are dangerous for your children? We will get into that one, too.
But, first, big drama here today in Washington. A powerful Democrat -
and I will tell you what, this guy is one of the most powerful people in the House of Representatives when you come to military issues. He‘s calling tonight for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. This is what Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha had to say today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOHN MURTHA (D), PENNSYLVANIA: Our military is suffering. The future of our country is at risk. We cannot continue on the present course. It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf region.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: Now, let me tell you something about Congressman Murtha. This is a tough guy. He‘s not a liberal Democrat. He‘s one of the most respected voices on either side of the aisle when it comes to military issues.
That is why this is such a significant statement today. I want to bring in my all-star panel right now to talk about it.
Let‘s bring in Republican Representative Joe Wilson and Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner.
Anthony, let me begin with you.
A lot of people out there are going to be saying, if we‘re chased out of Iraq by Muslim radicals, aren‘t we allowing them to win?
REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: Well, the real question is, what is in our best interests?
And, you know, someone like Jack Murtha, as you well know, he is respected on both sides of the aisle as assessing what‘s good for our military, what‘s good for our country. We have to reach the decision point at some point when we have done all that we can do, when we have achieved our military goal. And there are political goals that we can pursue in other ways.
When Jack Murtha stands up—he was one of the people that persuaded me to vote in favor of the war. When he stands up and says we have reached the point that now we should allow our military to leave with honor, I agree with him. I think that we have reached a sea change in that part of the world.
SCARBOROUGH: But, you know, though, Congressman, it seems like our enemy‘s strategy is basically limited to blowing themselves up. Is the United States military so weak that it can‘t confront these suicide bombers?
WEINER: You know, it wasn‘t the—it wasn‘t Iraqi militants who said that our presence there was adding to the insurrection. It was our military in testifying before Congress said on more than one occasion one of the ways you eliminate the violence is by reducing our troop presence there.
That‘s something that‘s virtual consensus now, that it‘s creating a lot of problems, our occupation of that region. We need to start thinking about when the military objective has been achieved and how we achieve the political objective. I think the military there is frankly a two-edged sword right now.
SCARBOROUGH: Congressman Wilson, let me bring you in here. You were so angry by the statements today made by Congressman Murtha, you called your own press conference.
But a lot of Americans out there are asking tonight, why should our kids, from Birmingham to Boston, be getting killed in Iraq, when you have got people in Basra and Baghdad that don‘t seem to be engaged in this war? Why not let their troops die, instead of ours? It‘s their country, isn‘t it?
REP. JOE WILSON ®, SOUTH CAROLINA: And, Joe, they are.
And it‘s really impressive to me that we have trained nearly 200,000 troops and police officers. In fact, when you read the number of Iraqi military casualties are extraordinarily high, and the reason they are is because they have become effective. The terrorists, al Qaeda, are going after them because they are effective.
And so I know firsthand. I served 31 years in the Army National Guard. I had (AUDIO GAP)
SCARBOROUGH: I actually—I think we lost his microphone for a second. Let‘s go back to him in a bit.
My staff spent the day poring over old speeches. I want you to take a look at what Democrats said before and after the war. These are Democrats from Massachusetts. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein.
As I said more than a year ago, knowing what we know now, I would not have chosen to go to war in Iraq.
SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.
One hundred and fifty-thousand American troops are bogged down in a quagmire in Iraq because the Bush administration misrepresented and distorted the intelligence to justify a war that America never should have fought.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: All right, Congressman, forget about the David Bowie music in the background.
It‘s what you‘re hearing Dick Cheney and George Bush, a lot of Republicans, saying, that Democrats said one thing before the war, said the same thing that George Bush said with the intel that they saw. And, now that things are going badly, they have changed their mind. What do you say to that charge?
WEINER: Well, frankly, you know, you could have added a tape of me on the floor of House of Representatives talking about the information I had been shown.
Just about every single thing I was shown and told as a matter of near fact by the administration turned out to have been wrong. And it wasn‘t just me. It was Colin Powell as well. It was so many world leaders. Frankly, now is the time that the administration, rather than hanging on and digging in with their teeth, the way Dick Cheney did yesterday, to the idea that everything is just fine, and rather than pointing at their opponents, they should think about the ways that we can protect our troops overseas and protect our dignity, and, frankly, allow our objectives to be achieved.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Congressman Wilson, though, let me ask you this, though.
I want to go back to the befores and afters that we showed.
The thing is, you said that you got information from the administration. It‘s not like George Bush was cooking the books and giving you and other people on Capitol Hill this information. George Tenet, you remember that part of the Woodward book where Bush said, “Is this all we have?” And George Tenet, the CIA director, stands up, waves his arms, and says, “Mr. President, it‘s a slam-dunk.”
If you were duped, wasn‘t the president also duped?
WEINER: Well, you know, Joe, here‘s the problem.
You do a great job on your show of saying people should take accountability and responsibility for what happens. The Bush administration has done the opposite of that. First, they deny that anything was wrong. Then, when it was—became they were dead to rights that the facts clearly were wrong, now they are pointing at their opponents and saying, oh, yes, well, the information we had, you had as well. Let‘s get past that. Let‘s talk about the idea...
SCARBOROUGH: But that‘s right, though, isn‘t it? I just want to nail that down first.
And I agree with you. There has to be accountability. This administration screwed up since April 9 of ‘03, when they took over. But, again, just on this point that Washington is at war over right now, it seems that everybody got bad intel, right?
WEINER: Well, the executive branch, and, in this case, they oversee the largest single intelligence infrastructure the world has ever seen, either got it wrong or, in some cases, as it turns out with Vice President Cheney, were saying things that they knew at the time were dubious, things about the tubes being used for nuclear weapons.
Later on, it learned out they knew at the time that that was wrong. So, there are many cases where, OK, you can parse whether it was intentional or everyone got it wrong. The executive branch of this country desperately got something wrong that now thousands of Americans are dying for. Well, what do we do? According to Jack Murtha and so many others today, the answer is get out and allow the Iraqis to defend themselves.
SCARBOROUGH: Let me bring in Dee Dee Myers. She‘s former press secretary to President Clinton, of course.
Dee Dee, obviously, this administration has waited a long time to fight back. Did they wait too long to make these charges, to bring up these quotes that Democrats made in 2003?
DEE DEE MYERS, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I think, in many ways, they did wait too long, because I think they have lost so much credibility.
And I think a lot of the Democrats, including former President Clinton, have answered back and said you have taken my quotes out of content. And the administration quite frankly isn‘t all that credible at this point.
Their strategy for most of the last five years has been to hunker down, don‘t explain, don‘t defend, just plow ahead. And all that has caught up with them. And they are in a very tough situation, in terms of convincing the country that what they are saying is in fact credible.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, Dee Dee, you talk about President Clinton.
I was always, always impressed by the fact that, when he went overseas, especially into Arab areas, Middle East, he would always say that he supported the efforts of the troops, he supported the president‘s decision to go in after Saddam Hussein. And yet he made a speech yesterday. He got a standing ovation where he said going in was a mistake.
Why do you think the president is saying that? And I say the president, President Clinton, the man you worked for.
MYERS: Well, I don‘t know. I haven‘t spoken to him about that. I think he does think that the war was a mistake.
He clearly defended the administration‘s early policy, which was his policy, which was regime change. It‘s time to get rid of Saddam Hussein. But there were a lot of avenues to do that, Joe. And there was a lot of debate at the time about whether not only was invading the right thing to do, but was invading at the time the right thing to do.
And I think President Clinton certainly hinted at the time that he thought that diplomacy should have been given more of an opportunity to work. I think there‘s also the question that a lot of people who knew the region were warning at that time, at the time of the invasion, that putting Iraq back together was going to be a very difficult proposition.
And the administration sort of pooh-poohed that notion and said we‘re going to go in there. We are going to bring democracy. We will be in and out of there in 90 days. And, if you recall, at one point, Secretary Rumsfeld said that.
And so I think from this vantage point a lot of people feel like they were ignored, that their advice wasn‘t taken, that there should have been a more thoughtful discussion. There‘s plenty of people to blame for the lack of a more thoughtful discussion, by the way. But here we are, and the question is—and I think the conversation that you have been having is, where do we go from here?
SCARBOROUGH: Exactly.
WEINER: Well, and, Joe, President Clinton I think speaks for an overwhelming consensus in this country among people who thought based on what they were told it was a good idea to go in at the time, now learn that just about everything we were told turned out to be wrong, agree that it‘s messed up there and something needs to change.
If Dick Cheney would not be attacking his opponents and President Bush wouldn‘t be digging in every day with the same exact speech, but do what Dee Dee Myers says, say, listen, let‘s take a step back, let‘s figure out how we make this thing work—Jack Murtha and others have come to the conclusion—and he is, as you know, a hawkish guy.
SCARBOROUGH: He is.
WEINER: Come to the conclusion, the way we make this work is by saying to those 220,000-some-odd troops that have now been stood up, Iraqi soldiers, you start to do the work to defending yourself. Maybe the way we get peace in that region is also by saving American lives, which means bringing the troops home.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. All right. Thank you so much. Greatly appreciate it, Congressman Weiner, Congressman Wilson, and Dee Dee Myers.
And you know what? All I can say is this. There are a lot of Americans right now that have turned against this war. They have turned against the war I believe because the administration didn‘t get out forcefully enough early on. They are getting out there now.
The question is, as Dee Dee Myers said—and she made a great point -
the question is, have they waited too late? Is their credibility now too low with the American people? We will wait and see.
But I have got to tell you again, personally—and this is just my opinion—personally, I don‘t think we can cut and run and get out of Iraq. If we do, we send a terrible message to terrorists across the world that all you have to do is blow yourself up and the United States military will retreat.
Now, you have seen the incredible video, suspected predators caught on tape. So, the question is, why haven‘t they even been arrested yet? Is anybody listened to our outrage? Well, we are going to have new details for you tonight that you are going to want to hear.
Plus, this:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: I hear what to me is a very subdued vocal utterance from Natalee. It‘s almost as if it‘s, “Hi, mom.”
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: Beth Holloway Twitty talks for the first time about a chilling phone call. Could it be a new clue in the search for her daughter Natalee? Beth is here tonight to give us the very latest.
We have got a busy night in SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: An explosive NBC report on sex predators in America. We‘re going to have the man who‘s behind that report, plus a congressman who is ready to fight back—that and much more when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Caught on tape. “Dateline NBC”‘s hidden cameras catch alleged sex predators trying to meet boys and girls.
Here to talk about that incredible investigation and what‘s being done to put these guys behind bars are Florida Congressman Mark Foley. And we have “Dateline NBC”‘s Chris Hansen, who brought us that report.
We are going to talk about the case in just a minute.
But, first, we want to show you some more of that shocking “Dateline” report. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRIS HANSEN, NBC CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Once a predator has made it clear he wants sex with a minor, and makes a date for the liaison, the crime has already been committed. He doesn‘t even have to show up. But will he?
DEL HARVEY, PERVERTED JUSTICE: Hello?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Knock, knock.
HANSEN: The answer is yes. But this man, once he sees me and not a teen, realizes he‘s made a big mistake, and runs for the door.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ah.
HANSEN (on camera): Why don‘t you come—hey, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Hey, you‘re not going to want to do that, I don‘t think.
(voice-over): Here‘s another guy who doesn‘t stay long.
(on camera): Hey, how are you?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good. How about yourself?
HANSEN: Good. Why don‘t you have a seat right over here?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, thank you.
HANSEN: I‘d like to ask you some questions.
(voice-over): He makes a beeline out the garage, barely touches the stairs, and, with his arms flailing, runs down the driveway and down the street. Clearly, this man knows he‘s done something wrong.
Men from all over Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C., arrived at this house after chatting about sex, thinking they were meeting a 12-, 13-, or 14-year-old who was home alone, nineteen men in three days, from the down and out, to pillars of the community.
(on camera): What classes do you teach?
STEVEN BENNOF, TEACHER: Special education.
HANSEN (voice-over): As the men approached our undercover house, hidden cameras rolled and kept rolling, as I startled them and started asking questions. Just about every one of them gave me the same story:
(on camera): So, this is the first time?
BENNOF: Mm-hmm.
HANSEN: You know, I hear a lot of that.
BENNOF: Yeah, well, it‘s true.
DR. JEFFREY BECK: I‘ve never visited a teenage boy before in my life.
ALADDIN: First time in my life that this happen.
HANSEN: First time?
ALADDIN: Yes, sir.
JOHN KENNELLY: I‘ve never done this before.
HANSEN (voice-over): And some came up with more creative excuses.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She said she was 13. That‘s why I was concerned she‘s going to be by herself. So, I was just going to stop and talk to her for a while.
HANSEN (on camera): So, you were just being a good samaritan?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.
HANSEN: Because there was a 13-year-old girl...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be by herself.
HANSEN: ... home alone.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
HANSEN: Right.
And, so out of the goodness of your heart, you were going to stop
by...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, it could have been anybody.
HANSEN: ... and—and baby-sit her? Is that the deal?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, sort of, I guess. We can order some pizza and we can watch a movie or something.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCARBOROUGH: You know, Chris, I have never seen anything quite like this report.
I was shocked by what I saw. How surprised were you, not only at the number of men that came in, but also who they were, I mean, leaders of the community, teachers, rabbis, doctors? I mean, it had to be startling for you.
HANSEN: It was startling, Joe.
I mean, we had done a story similar to this about a year ago and saw just how many people would, in fact, come to a home where this sort of a situation was set up. But we were not prepared for a doctor, a rabbi, a teacher, people with security clearances, people who are defense contractors. I mean, you just never think you are going to see people who would seem to be pillars of the community walk into a situation like this.
SCARBOROUGH: And it looked like the rabbi was coming after you.
I got to tell you the truth. I have been saying to everybody I have talked to about this report, I could not believe how calmly you reacted under pressure. I mean, you had to be concerned that one of these guys was going to fly off the handle at you.
HANSEN: Well, we were prepared for that.
When we start out on stories like this, we try to think through every scenario. We had security present, so we knew that, if something did flair up, we can handle it. I think what the rabbi was reacting to at that point, besides knowing that he was going to be on television, was that he had sent, apparently, some pornographic pictures of himself to someone he thought was a 13-year-old boy.
I showed him some of those pictures. He knew that I had them. He knew that I had the transcripts from his Internet conversation. And, at that point he just, you know, went off.
SCARBOROUGH: Chris, I want to ask you later on what kind of training you get to prepare you to do this type of thing.
But I want to show our audience and the congressman some more of your “Dateline” investigation. And watch what happens when these guys find out that Chris is with that—with “Dateline,” and it‘s a journalistic ambush.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HANSEN (voice-over): Whatever power they thought they had, it‘s lost as soon as they see me, and now they‘re about to learn I‘m not a parent or the police.
First, the rabbi.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Could you please show me who—tell me who you are?
HANSEN (on camera): I‘m more than happy to tell you who I am. I‘m Chris Hansen with “Dateline NBC.” And we‘re doing a story on computer predators.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, come on, guy.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don‘t want to—you don‘t want to...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You want to...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have got to stop this.
HANSEN: Sit down. Sit down.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don‘t have any right to...
(CROSSTALK)
HANSEN: You‘re free to leave any time.
(voice-over): Now they knew this was all being taped on the record and for broadcast on “Dateline.”
The doctor.
(on camera): But if there‘s anything else you want to say?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nothing.
HANSEN (voice-over): The teacher.
(on camera): And if there‘s anything else you would like to say, we would like to hear it.
(voice-over): And the man who stood naked in our kitchen.
KENNELLY: Thank you. I don‘t have anything else to say.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCARBOROUGH: Chris, what shocked you the most?
HANSEN: Well, that a man would walk in naked into a home in suburban Virginia.
(LAUGHTER)
SCARBOROUGH: That‘s a good place to start, yes.
HANSEN: I mean, we had some indication it could happen, Joe.
I mean, we follow the conversations between the decoy and the potential predator as they go along. So, I had all those in front of me and then study before he was set to show up. But, obviously, I could see what was going on in the garage. We have a monitor. But to watch him actually do this and walk in, and the decoy says, OK, sit down, close to your eyes, count to 20 and you will get your surprise.
Well, he gets to about 12 and I walk in. And, you know, you saw the towel was on the refrigerator, which we had put there just in case. But we didn‘t think he was really going to do it.
SCARBOROUGH: And he did it.
Congressman, the thing that surprised me most about Chris‘ report is just how brazen these people were, again, pillars of the community. They come in here. You have the naked guy comes in. Chris nails him the next day at a McDonald‘s, right?
This guy is a sex predator. He‘s hunting for young children. And yet when we first talked to the Fairfax County Police Department, they said there‘s nothing they could do about it. Does the federal government need to step in and make sure that when something is uncovered—because, like Chris said, they have already committed a crime.
REP. MARK FOLEY ®, FLORIDA: Well, I think their concern was journalistic ambushing, which is not acceptable. They should be wanting to investigate these crimes.
SCARBOROUGH: You say it‘s not acceptable. It‘s not acceptable...
FOLEY: Well, they were worried about, how do you take it to court based on an NBC “Dateline” piece?
SCARBOROUGH: Don‘t you think really, Mark, they are more concerned about the fact that “Dateline” uncovered this happening in their backyard?
FOLEY: Well, that‘s probably true.
SCARBOROUGH: And they didn‘t uncover it.
FOLEY: That‘s true. And that‘s why the federal government is trying to tighten crimes on the Internet, these kinds of crimes against children. We‘re trying to work with the National Center For Missing and Exploited Children.
We got a bill in the Senate today hopefully will get voted on that will toughen these crimes.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: We have got to toughen the crimes.
But, you know, we talked about all these child predators and the young girls that were killed, the horrible things that happened in Florida six months ago. Congress is coming into session. We have this “Dateline” report. It‘s like an exclamation point on all of this. And yet, what‘s happening behind us on Capitol Hill? Why are people dragging their feet?
FOLEY: We have been trying to get this bill—we got it out of the House. It‘s in the Senate.
SCARBOROUGH: Who is blocking it? Who is blocking it?
FOLEY: Well, there are just some issues they are trying to work out.
There‘s a number of other things.
But this is a priority. This should indicate, like you said, an exclamation point. It‘s a priority to pass. We shouldn‘t go home before the holidays without enacting this legislation. And it‘s the work product of a lot of members of Congress.
SCARBOROUGH: So, what do we do, Mark? There are a lot of people out there that saw Chris‘ report, that read in the paper every day that—I mean, these creeps, these are the ones that we know about. They are all over America.
What can be done? Who do we need to call to make sure that these Internet predators are thrown in jail? If local governments can‘t do it, what do we need to do to have our federal government step in?
FOLEY: Well, SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY has helped before.
You helped rally the bill in the House. It passed overwhelmingly in the House. You could now urge the Senate to adopt this legislation. And that would be helpful, if your callers, your viewers would call in, call in the Internet, write letters to the senators, urging them to adopt this now. It‘s critical. It‘s a crisis.
SCARBOROUGH: It‘s a way we can get it done.
Chris, were you surprised that Fairfax County dragged their feet after your investigation came out and originally said there was nothing they could do about it? Now I think because of the pressure they are starting to move. But do you think it may have had more to do with the fact that you uncovered something that they didn‘t even know was happening in their backyard?
HANSEN: See, I can‘t say that, Joe.
I think it‘s easy to be outraged when you see this shocking video. But, if you will recall, during the “Dateline” hour that aired, we interviewed Lieutenant Jake Jacoby with the Fairfax County Police Department. And he heads up this division.
And he said, look, we‘re looking into some of these cases. I think, after that, a public information officer said, we may not be able to go after these guys because of a jurisdiction problem. In other words, not all the decoys who were posing as kids on the Internet were in the house we were working in. Some were in different states. And that posed a complication.
So, you also have to understand that, OK, there‘s Fairfax County Police. They have got this information that‘s been given to them by Perverted Justice. They have got the chat logs and some information on the men. I don‘t know this, but I‘m sure they wanted to wait and see what was going to be on video. And now they have to weigh, OK, which one of these cases, which of these cases can be prosecuted?
They can‘t just run out and arrest these guys the next day.
SCARBOROUGH: Right.
HANSEN: It‘s only been two weeks.
Now, I‘m not defending anybody here.
SCARBOROUGH: Sure.
HANSEN: But the reality is, we can put them on TV. These men have not been tried or convicted. Each one of these men has a story that we have to respect, no matter what the video shows. They claim that they weren‘t going to do anything. They claim this was the first time they had done anything.
Everybody can watch the video and make up their own minds.
SCARBOROUGH: Right.
HANSEN: However, in a court of law, it‘s a little different. The police have to figure out what kind of a case they have. Then they have to go to the prosecutor to get a warrant. And it goes on from there.
SCARBOROUGH: All right.
HANSEN: I can tell you that, as we speak, there are a number of things happening behind the scenes, both at the local and federal level. And, in the next few weeks, we expect to be able to report some developments.
SCARBOROUGH: All right, Chris, we are going to be watching it and look forward to you coming back to get us up to date on it.
Thanks a lot, Congressman.
FOLEY: Thank you, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: I appreciate it, as always.
And we are going to have our people call you and everybody else and get information on how we move this bill through the Senate and protect our children from what we just saw on TV.
FOLEY: It would be a big help, Joe. Thanks. Thanks.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. Appreciate it.
Coming up, a new twist in the case of Natalee Holloway. You‘re not going to believe this. Natalee‘s mom, Beth, is here to talk about a chilling phone call she received from—and also her push for a boycott in Aruba. She believes that Natalee could still be alive.
And “Harry Potter” in the middle of a religious battle in America—why some are saying keep your kids away from the new “Potter” movie. That‘s bad news for my boys, because I think they are going tonight.
Stay with us. SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Beth Holloway Twitty will be here to talk about chilling phone call she received in October and the latest on the investigation for the search for Natalee and justice in Aruba. That‘s coming up.
But, first, here‘s the latest news you and your family need to know.
(NEWS BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Does America need a wall to keep illegal immigrants out?
There‘s a new push to build it and people are talking about it.
Also, not everybody is wild about Harry. Is the new movie sending the wrong message to our children?
Welcome back to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY—those stories in just minutes.
But, first, is Natalee Holloway still alive? Her mother, Beth, is here. And we are going to talk to her in just a minute.
But, first, today on the Dr. Phil show, Beth Holloway Twitty revealed startling new evidence of a voice mail she received in early October that she says could have been Natalee. Let‘s watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, “DR. PHIL”)
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: The first thing that I hear on the voice mail is, it almost sounds as if it‘s a foreigner. And they say, yes. And then you hear, it‘s almost like a clank, like they are shifting the phone. And then there‘s music playing in the background. And I hear what to me is a very subdued vocal utterance from Natalee. It‘s almost—I know—it‘s almost as if it‘s, “Hi, mom.”
And, Dr. Phil, you know, I have never told anyone this. I have never disclosed this to anyone. And I‘m really pretty level-headed. But I‘m a pediatric speech pathologist. And I have done this for 22 years. This was my trained profession of hearing the utterance on this voice mail, thinking that it was her.
DR. PHIL MCGRAW, HOST: And this call came in when?
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: October the 3rd at 6:50 p.m.
MCGRAW: OK. So, that‘s about five weeks ago.
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Yes.
MCGRAW: OK. And our analysts said, you know, forget about what they talk about on television and “CSI” and that sort of think. The only person who is ever going to be able to tell if that‘s Natalee is her mother.
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Exactly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: Let‘s welcome back to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY Beth Holloway Twitty, who joins us from Birmingham, Alabama.
Beth, talk about that phone call and why you felt it was important for you to wait a while before telling America about what you heard that night.
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Well, Joe, we have been so discrete about so many of these sightings that—or leads that we have had about having Natalee alive, because, you know, we have tried to deal with the proper chain of command, contacting the FBI.
And, of course, we didn‘t want to jeopardize anything, if that happened to be Natalee. And, you know, we just have to just weigh it very carefully and just have it thoroughly evaluated before we can determine, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: What did you think, Beth, when you hear that voice that you thought could have been your daughter that you haven‘t heard from in six months now?
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Oh, I will be honest.
I mean, when I first received the voice mail, if I played it 40 times, I bet I played it 80 times. But, you know, as time goes on, and we sent it to Quantico—it‘s been analyzed. Dr. Phil has had a professional organization that has analyzed it. We begin coming, though, to the conclusion, Joe, that, you know, it‘s not. It may not have been Natalee.
And, you know, we just have to be so careful with each lead that we get. I mean, the message was so crafted in itself, not only for me to be thinking that I heard an utterance from Natalee. And, you know, Joe, it‘s just something that we have had to deal with very, very privately.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, it‘s so dangerous, too. If you start to go down that path, obviously, then you let the Aruban officials off the hook and possibly give them a reason to pull back even more on their investigation for the truth and what happened that night in Aruba. Isn‘t that case, too?
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Well, Joe, what we feel like we‘re showing is that each lead—that we are being open about. We‘re contacting the proper authorities. We‘re having it analyzed. We‘re ruling them out, Joe.
What we see is happening is, we‘re ruling out the possibility that Natalee could be alive, Joe. And it brings us full circle back to these three suspects not only raped Natalee on their island, but could have possibly murdered her that night, Joe.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Well, let‘s bring in right now former FBI profiler and MSNBC analyst Clint Van Zandt.
Clint, it‘s so important for us to remind Americans about what happened with Elizabeth Smart. The media all but buried her six months before she showed up out of nowhere. Anybody, Clint, that says they know where Natalee is and whether she‘s alive or dead, they‘re just not telling the truth, are they?
CLINT VAN ZANDT, MSNBC ANALYST: No.
I see people flapping their wings both ways. Some say she‘s absolutely dead. Why doesn‘t Beth get on with her life? I mean, how can they say that? She‘s a parent. She‘s a mother. How can you say walk away from your child?
And, yet, others will say, well, obviously, she‘s been grabbed up and she‘s been carried off in some harem. Or she‘s in some Third World crack house chained to a bed. Well, the reality is, we don‘t know. We don‘t know either one.
And, as a parent, as I just wrote in my MSNBC profiler‘s perspective, MSNBC.com, as a parent, you and I, Joe, know that until, just like Beth, until we know that our child is deceased and, in my case, until I close that coffin door, I‘m going to be looking for my child.
SCARBOROUGH: And you do whatever it takes.
In this case, if authorities decide to move on this possible phone call about what Dr. Phil has been talking about, how in the world do you try to track somebody down that could be a sex slave in Venezuela or some other country?
VAN ZANDT: You know, the terrible dirty secret in this world, Joe, is that, every year, between one and four million women, children, little girls are sold, traded, tricked, kidnapped into bondage and sex slavery all over the world.
Where is the United States? Where is the United Nations? And no matter what we see in movies, the FBI is not going to be jumping out of helicopters in Venezuela looking to rescue an American, nor is the CIA or somebody else like that. So, we‘re kind of challenged. The FBI and the other authorities are left to going to let‘s say Venezuela, going to the police and saying, we have this lead. Natalee Holloway might be here.
Venezuelan, or whoever it is, police on some island are going to say, thanks. We will take it from here.
SCARBOROUGH: Yes. Thanks a lot. Right.
VAN ZANDT: Right.
Are they going to run it down or are they just going to blow the whistle? And if, if she‘s there, is she just going to be moved to another place? The answer is, just like you started, Joe, we don‘t know. But here‘s a mother, here‘s a family, here‘s a country saying we want to know what happened to our child.
SCARBOROUGH: And Beth, there are also reports about a possible Aruban reporter that claims that he had followed Natalee around before she was taken off the island. Tell us about that.
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: Well, he claims that he was tracking an individual. Whether it was Natalee or not, it looks like we‘re coming to, Joe, that it strongly was not Natalee.
But this man, he‘s a reporter from “Diario.” He had been tracking this young female in three different moves on the island of Aruba. He didn‘t come forward to me until either the last of August or very early in September with this information, because, you know, as far as he was concerned, he did not want to jeopardize and compromise Natalee‘s position.
And we were very confidential with this information. We have just been so careful with letting this information out until we can rule it out, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: And, Beth, final question. What is the current state of that pathetic investigation in Aruba? Has it turned the corner? Do you have any reason to hope they are going to start getting more aggressive in searching for the truth?
HOLLOWAY TWITTY: No, I don‘t, Joe.
And what concerns me greatly is if they do choose to rearrest these suspects on this taped interview now from Deepak that they have all participated in a gang rape, it concerns me, with the current investigative team on board, that we will be no further along than we were on June 9, Joe.
SCARBOROUGH: It‘s so sad, Beth. Thank you so much for being with us, as always. And, as you know, our thoughts and prayers are with you. And let us know what we can do.
And, Clint, thank you also for being with us.
VAN ZANDT: Thank you.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: We want to ask everybody to go and read what you have written today on MSNBC.com.
Coming up next, there‘s a new push in Congress to build a wall to make
it harder for illegal immigrants to come to America. At the same time, a
new product designed to make it easier, wait until you see this one, when -
SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY showdown is next.
And will being a “Harry Potter” fan send your kid to the dark side, like the occult? That‘s what some people think.
We will see why when SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Should the United States government build a fence across the U.S.-Mexican border to keep illegal immigrants and terrorists out? It‘s a hot issue now and it‘s getting support.
California Congressman Duncan Hunter and two other dozen other lawmakers are proposing a fence that would run the entire 2,000-mile length of the U.S.-Mexican border, from San Diego to Brownsville, Texas.
Congressman Hunter joins me now from Capitol Hill. And UCLA Professor Raul Hinojosa, president of a group called No Borders, also joins us.
Congressman, let‘s start with you. It was on the front page of the “USA Today.” Some are saying it‘s a time—it‘s an idea whose idea has come. Why build the wall?
REP. DUNCAN HUNTER ®, CALIFORNIA: Well, first, Joe, it‘s really a double fence.
And what that means is, the smugglers have to come over the first fence that‘s right on the border, cross a Border Patrol road, and then sit down with their welding gear and cut a hole through the second fence, which is 15 feet high and has an overhang. And the reason we should build is, number one, border enforcement is no longer an immigration issue. It‘s a national security issue.
We have to know who is coming into this country and what they are bringing into the country. And, secondly, the fence works. We built 14 miles of fence—or actually 10 miles. The full Congress just voted to close the last gap in the San Diego fence at a place called Smuggler‘s Gulch.
But that 10 miles of fence that we have built has cut down the drug drive-throughs from 300 drive-throughs a month to zero. It‘s cut down the border murders from 10 a year to zero. And it‘s massively reduce the smuggling of narcotics and illegal aliens.
The fence works. And our recommendation is, let‘s build it east from San Diego.
SCARBOROUGH: But, you know, Congressman, you have got the White House that came out today and was quoted in the “USA Today” as saying this is a bad idea; it‘s too expensive; it will cost taxpayers over $8 billion. How do you respond to the White House?
HUNTER: Well, first, I gave them the $8 billion figure.
The bids that we had actually when we built our fence from the private sector initially were about a million bucks a mile, which would be about two billion miles for the entire Southwest border. But secondly the White House speaks in generalities. And what they say after they said we‘re not for the border fence all the way across, Secretary Chertoff then says, however, I am for fencing certain sections of the border off, and that‘s where the heavy smuggling flow is.
So, to some degree, they support us. And this is a little bit of a replay when we started building that first fence. And I think you were with us in those days. When the Republicans took control in 1994, we had to pass a bill on the floor of the House to mandate that the fence be built. President Clinton signed that bill. And we started to build that border fence.
And that saved, incidentally, Joe, the lives of lots of people who are here illegally.
SCARBOROUGH: But, again, Congressman, as you know, right now, the White House is very mixed in fighting illegal immigration, and despite the fact that “TIME” magazine is reporting, as you said, that terrorists are now planning to come across the border, land in Middle America and attack us.
Professor, I want to bring you in here.
What‘s wrong with building a fence that would keep illegal aliens and terrorists from the Middle East out of our country?
RAUL HINOJOSA, NO BORDERS: You know, bottom line, this is another boondoggle bridge to nowhere. It‘s fantasy out of Congress that‘s not going to be a solution to the problem.
What ever happened to those intelligent Republican leaders, like Ronald Reagan. You know what he did? He cut down undocumented illegal immigration by more than half by doing the intelligent policy of letting markets work, creating a legalization process for the workers that we need.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: And you‘re talking about, Professor—let me, for the audience—Ronald Reagan in the 1980s granted amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.
Right now, a lot of people think that‘s what the Bush administration want to do.
But, Professor, you talk about intelligence. Again, we talk about “TIME” magazine, their report earlier this year talking about how terrorists are using this porous border to come to our country and plan future attacks. Isn‘t that more serious than just talking about having a labor flow across the borders both ways?
HINOJOSA: OK. Any intelligent discussion about security says the worst use of $8 billion is to create this bridge in the middle of nowhere, this fence in the middle of nowhere. Not one terrorist has walked across the desert. They have all flown in through the airports, all right?
SCARBOROUGH: How do you know that?
HINOJOSA: You want to get serious about terrorism, look at the histories of who the 9/11 terrorists were.
SCARBOROUGH: Professor, how do you know that? How do you know that no terrorist has walked across this U.S.-Mexican border?
HINOJOSA: Because where is he? Where have they been caught once?
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Well, if I knew, I would be director of the CIA.
HINOJOSA: They haven‘t been caught once. Well, maybe, you would do a better job.
But I will tell you, right now, even the Border Patrol...
(CROSSTALK)
HINOJOSA: Even the Border Patrol, who are on the ground, the people we should be supporting, think that this is the biggest waste of money. If you really want to deal with undocumented immigration, there are much more intelligent ways to do it than this boondoggle.
(CROSSTALK)
SCARBOROUGH: Congressman, I will give you the last word.
HUNTER: Joe, let me give you some statistics.
Recently, the people included that we have caught who did not come from Mexico, but came across that border, include North Koreans. They include people from Yemen. They include people from Iran. And the professor is a nice guy, but his idea of closing off the work magnet does not work for criminal aliens and people who would be terrorists.
SCARBOROUGH: All right, we are going to keep on this.
And, Congressman Hunter, and, Professor, I hope both of you will come back. This is a critical debate.
Coming up next, people are lining up already for the latest “Harry Potter” movie, but could “Potter”-mania lead our children to dangerous behavior? We have got an expert here who says yes. We will tackle that one when we come back.
But, before we go to break, this week‘s SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY challenge:
Who was the first president to appear on a television broadcast? Take a look at the choices—the answer when we return.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Welcome back. The answer to our challenge, who was the first president to appear on TV? If you said—oh, well, if you said Franklin Roosevelt, you were right. It happened on April 30, 1939.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, “HARRY POTTER AND THE GOBLET OF FIRE”)
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: Harry Potter.
UNIDENTIFIED ACTOR: How did you do it?
DANIEL RADCLIFFE, ACTOR: I didn‘t put my name in that cup. I don‘t want eternal glory.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: “Harry Potter and the Goblet Of Fire” opens at midnight tonight. And “Muggles” are lining up already, including my younger son.
The fourth “Potter” movie in the series, rated PG-13, shows Harry competing in wizardry competitions, but some really are fearing right now that it could promote the occult to children.
With me now are Tommy Turner, a Michigan pastor who believes the “Potter” franchise is bad. And Karen Holt, she is the editor of “Publishers Weekly.”
Pastor, let‘s go to you first.
Obviously, I have got children that have watched all of these movies.
You think it‘s a bad idea. Why?
TOMMY TURNER, PASTOR: Yes, I do, Joe.
The Bible says to train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will not depart from the faith. We need to realize there is a strong delusion being sent that is deceiving the nation. And the Bible teaches us that idolater and sorcerers will have their part in a lake of fire. And we need to come alive and say I‘m not going to allow my door, the door to be opened to my child‘s heart to be deceived from this strong delusion from the enemy.
SCARBOROUGH: So, do you think if my son goes to see this movie, he will be more likely, despite the fact he goes to church and he is a Christian, do you think he will be more likely to be enticed to join a cult or to study the occult?
TURNER: Yes, Joe.
What you feed grows. Trash in, trash out. We have to build our lives on the rock Jesus. And if we‘re not building our lives on faith, whatever comes will blow us over. We need to be strong in who we are, in our character, who we believe in. And the answer is yes, because if you go to a “Harry Potter” Web site and look at all of the links that hook you up to the occult, we need to realize we are facing real spirits of the demon world, following Lucifer, (INAUDIBLE) and so on and so forth.
The spirit world is real. So, we don‘t want to teach our children that it is fun, it‘s OK. It‘s very serious and very dangerous, and we must take alert to this activity.
SCARBOROUGH: Karen Holt, is “Harry Potter” dangerous to America‘s children?
KAREN HOLT, “PUBLISHERS WEEKLY”: No. I mean, fantasy and magic have been a part of children‘s literature since there‘s been children‘s literature. I mean, we all grew up with Snow White and Cinderella. I don‘t think it turned any of us into occultists.
SCARBOROUGH: So, talk about why this movie and these books are so overwhelmingly successful, when every time a new book or new movie comes out, you hear a lot of these same criticisms, that it does go into the occult, that it studies the darker side of spirituality.
HOLT: Right.
Well, it‘s just a big target. I don‘t think there‘s anything unusual about these books, except that they‘re incredibly popular, and so it makes it a high-profile target for these groups that would actually like to eliminate, I think, anything that didn‘t fit with their religious beliefs.
SCARBOROUGH: Pastor Turner, do you agree with that?
TURNER: I would like to tell her that she is also under a strong delusion, that the word of God prophesied that all these things will come to pass.
Remember, there is a lake of fire that the unbeliever, the sorcerers and the idolaters will end up in. Do you want your children to face that or do you want to protect them from what we know is going to come to pass?
SCARBOROUGH: Karen?
HOLT: Well, as I said, I think fantasy and magic have been part of children‘s literature forever.
And, you know, I don‘t know, is there an epidemic in this country of children becoming satanists, of children turning to the occult? If there is, I don‘t know about it. What I do know is that reading is on the decline in this country. And that is a serious problem. The NEA did a study last year showing that fewer and fewer adults are reading literature.
Less than about a third of adult men actually read any sort of literature at all. So, again, I don‘t know. Maybe there is an epidemic of satanism. I don‘t see it. What we do know is that reading is in trouble and that this is one way to help.
SCARBOROUGH: All right.
TURNER: Well...
SCARBOROUGH: We‘re going to have to leave it there.
Thank you, Pastor. Thank you, Karen Holt. Greatly appreciate you being here.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCARBOROUGH: Last night, I had the opportunity in Washington, D.C., to go to Bobby Kennedy‘s memorial. It actually would have been his 80th birthday yesterday.
And a guy—he‘s a guy that showed courage, regardless of whether you are a Republican or a Democrat. And it was great to be there.
That‘s all the time we have for tonight. Stay with us, because “HARDBALL WITH CHRIS MATTHEWS” starts right now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
END