Guests: Pat Brown, Samiha Khanna, Adriana Gardella, Bobby Schindler, Suzanne Schindler Vitadamo, Robert Schindler, Mary Schindler, John Trasvina, Dina Sansing, Mark Henkel, Megan Basham
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: Right now in “Scarborough Country,” gang rape in one of America‘s most elite campuses.
Tonight, an entire Duke University sports team suspended with their season on the brink as charges of gang rape rock that campus.
And one year after Terry Schiavo‘s death and the release of her husband‘s blistering book, her family joins me live to fight back.
Welcome to “Scarborough Country,” no passport required and only common sense allowed.
Hey, thanks so much for being with me tonight. We‘re going to get into those stories in a minute.
Plus, new immigration protests. Is Americans considering whether legal immigrants should be given amnesty and be able to stay in America? That‘s going to be tonight‘s hot “Scarborough Country” showdown.
Then, it‘s called big love, but it‘s causing big trouble. Is a new show paving the way for acceptance of multi-partner marriages? Polygamy. We‘ll get into that later.
But first, accusations of gang rape rocking the campus of Duke University tonight.
Duke‘s nationally ranked lacrosse team has suspended play indefinitely as police await the results of DNA testing on 46 team members.
For more on this story, which starts at a party that got way out of control, let‘s go live to NBC‘s Donna Gregory. She‘s on the campus of Duke University.
And, Donna, we know something very bad happened there. Do we know exactly what went on in that party room where Duke‘s lacrosse team was living?
DONNA GREGORY, CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Joe, this was at an off-campus house that was rented by three team members of the Duke lacrosse team. We don‘t know exactly what happened, but we do have very serious allegations from two women, who are exotic dancers, hired to perform at that party.
If those allegations of gang rape are true, Duke University says it will take the strongest disciplinary measures possible.
Keep in mind, Duke is not conducting its own investigation. They are leaving that to police. But the allegations have outraged the community surrounding Duke University.
Now, there have already been tensions between Durham and Duke University. But, I have to tell you, Joe, I have not seen anything—in the 20 years I‘ve lived in this area—anything to compare to this. People have taken to the streets to protest what these women say happened.
And this is what they say. Back on March 13, two women hired to perform at what they thought was a bachelor party for five guys. Turns out there were dozens more young men at this party. Again, an off-campus house.
These women say they were threatened. They were sexual harassed there. Racial epitaphs were screamed at them. They left the party but were convinced to come back. Only one woman actually went back inside.
She claims she was take to a bathroom and gang raped by three men. She said this last for 30 minutes. She says she was strangled. She said they physically assaulted her, sodomized her. She said she endured this as long as 30 minutes, as I mentioned. Then she left the house, called police.
The District Attorney, Joe, says that after interviewing the woman and seeing her demeanor, he does believe that a rape occurred. Forty-six team members were asked to give samples. All 46 cooperated. Those DNA test results expected next week.
And the DA expects charges to be filed later next week. He says they could include kidnapping, first degree sexual assault, first degree rape, even common law robbery because the woman says that her money was taken as well.
Police went back to the house after warrants were issued. They found four fingernails allegedly belonging to the alleged victim. They also found her cell phone and her ID and a wallet containing $160 worth of $20 bills, Joe. She said those guys paid her in $20 bills.
SCARBOROUGH: They paid her, again, the second she went in. She knew something was wrong. I mean, again, you‘ve been talking about the problems on this campus for some time now between a very elite university and a fairly small country town.
What do you see happening in the coming days and weeks and months? Do you think there will be more and more pressure from the community there? Is Duke University going to have to be much more aggressive in handling this case than they have? As you said, are they just going to wash their hands of it and said it‘s not our job to investigate?
GREGORY: Duke says, Joe, it will investigate once the police investigation shows whether or not these guys are guilty of the allegations. Duke says it will take the strongest measure possible. But there has been conflict between town and gown for years in this area, as you see in many college towns. There are rowdy parties off campus.
Duke University actually bought the house that the team captains lived in. Duke owns the house where this alleged gang rape occurred. They tried to buy several houses in the community and sell them to single families, who would agree to fix up the houses and live in the community so that the other residents in the community wouldn‘t have to continuously call police about drunken parties and all kinds of disorderly conduct.
I should mention to you, Joe, too that 15 of these 46 lacrosse players have been charged in the past with misdemeanors, most of them involving alcohol, some vandalism, public drunkenness, that sort of thing. So there have been charges filed against some of these players in the past.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. Thank you so much, NBC‘s Donna Gregory. We greatly appreciate that report.
And let‘s bring in now our panel. We‘ve got Samiha Khanna, she‘s a reporter with the News & Observer in Durham. We also have Pat Brown. She‘s a criminal profiler and the author of “Killing for Sport.” And Adriana Gardella is a former prosecutor, now with Justice magazine.
Pat Brown, it took them a little while to get the physical evidence together. Do you believe that, in any way, is going to hamper this investigation?
PAT BROWN, AUTHOR AND CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, they need to have some strong physical evidence. Because, right away when you go to court, there‘s going to be an issue of why the girl went back in the house if she knew something was wrong. She had been already been essentially emotionally attacked and words were already slung at her. And she already felt unsafe. Why was she going back in?
In a sense you‘ve got two sides of it. You have both sides acting badly and stupidly. Duke ought to look at why they allow their players to act this way. Most college campuses have problems with a high rate of date rape because of the power and the fact that they‘re able to get away with a lot because they‘re athletes.
SCARBOROUGH: Here‘s the thing, Pat. And this is really where Duke has dropped the ball. It‘s disgusting. We understand that one-third of these athletes have already been arrested for previous crimes. It certainly appears like it‘s a sports team, if not an institution that‘s out of control.
BROWN: It is, exactly, Joe. This is the problem, the student enters are not there to be educated. If they are on a team, they should consider somebody who must uphold the honor of the school. And for any of those things, they should be tossed off.
But what happens is it escalates and escalates so they think that they can get away with anything and have big groups like this acting badly. And whether this girl is telling a totally true story or not, I don‘t know. And that‘s where the DA has to figure out the physical evidence of did she have—is there physical evidence of rape and assault? Or did something else happen and she got angry? But that has to be up to the prosecutor to prove.
SCARBOROUGH: You are right, Pat, it does sound like this is an institution that‘s out of control that allows a lot of these pampered athletes to get away with so much. It reminds me of a Tom Wolf novel that just came out last year, I think it was, called “Charlotte Simons.” And the fictitious university was supposedly based after Duke.
Now, according to court documents, the dancers arrived and were immediately threatened by a guy waving a broomstick. Then, quote, “When the woman and another dancer began their routines one of men watching held up a broomstick and threatened to sexually assault the women. They left but were followed out by a man who persuaded them to return. That‘s when three men pushed here into a bathroom and began the assault, which she said lasted for 30 minutes.”
So, Mia, you actually talked to one of the women who is claiming to have been gang raped by this Duke sports team. What did she tell you?
SAMIHA KHANNA, REPORTER, THE NEWS & OBSERVER: She told me that she had been working for the agency for approximately two months. She is a full time student and has two small children.
She said it wasn‘t the greatest job, but this is what she was doing at the time.
She got a call about 8:30 the night of the alleged attack, and was to report to this address at about 11:30. She, as we‘ve heard earlier, was told there was going to be a small group of men, five people, maybe a bachelor party and arrived to find something different than what she was lead to believe.
She said that she was uncomfortable from the get go, just because of the size of the crowd that was gathered at this house. She wasn‘t sure if she wanted to carry out this.
Upon starting her performance obligation, she did recall hearing epitaphs, terms that were derogatory towards her as a woman and an African American. She said she was very scared. She started to cry and that she wanted to leave. She and the other dancer did proceed to leave. But, as you heard, something caused her to go back into the house.
A neighbor that I‘ve actually interviewed has said that he was outside on his porch during this time. He actually heard some of the altercation that occurred outside of the house and seems to remember there might have been some belongings that this woman left in the house that she was going to retrieve at the time she decided to go back in.
SCARBOROUGH: Adriana, this sports team—this lacrosse team is number two in the nation. They are very powerful on the Duke campus. Does this present a problem for the investigation, an obstacle for investigators who are trying to get information about what happened that night?
ADRIANA GARDELLA, JUSTICE MAGAZINE: Well, I‘ve certainly read accounts that that has been the case. But I think that the problem is broader than just Duke.
When I heard the facts of this case, as horrifying as the allegations are, I‘m afraid to say that I wasn‘t surprised. And it struck me as, yet, another of these cases where you have student athletes who have this incredible sense of entitlement. I don‘t think it‘s just Duke.
And I think at this point, the investigations seem to be proceeding. But there do seem to be some reports that there‘s not the cooperation you expect to have. And that, again, doesn‘t surprise me.
SCARBOROUGH: And that‘s what I was going to say. I mean, here you have a serious situation where obviously very bad things happened, possibly a gang rape, an assault; you can also talk about possible hate crimes when you talk about the racial element that‘s brought into this.
And Adriana, 46 members of this lacrosse team had to be tested for DNA because nobody is cooperating.
GARDELLA: Yes. There had to be—a judge had to order them to do so. I guess I am, again, looking at the misdemeanors that they‘ve had in the past. And just early past...
SCARBOROUGH: One-third of the team. And if we have this...
GARDELLA: Right. That‘s not a small number.
SCARBOROUGH: I think we have this graphic up. Let‘s put up the graphic that over the past few years one-third of the Duke lacrosse team have been arrested for drunken and disruptive behavior, under-age alcohol possession, open container violations, and the loud noise complaints and public urination. It goes on and on and on.
And Adriana, despite that fact, this team is allowed to continue to go back on the field. You just wonder—I will throw this question out to you and also to Pat—is it possible that Duke could possibly be liable for allowing this type of behavior to continue?
GREGORY: We would like colleges to be liable, but I think what‘s happening in colleges, they have a lot of power. They sweep a lot of things under the rug because they want all those new students to come in. And they done want this kind of information out there. So they have good publicity people that quash all of this.
But I do want to say one more thing, Joe, which is also important, which is what‘s going to affect the prosecution as well. A lot of exotic dancers are also prosecutes regardless of the fact they claim they are not. So it is entirely possibility there was an initial consensual part of it.
And that‘s what who...
SCARBOROUGH: Adriana, how does that impact this case?
GARDELLA: You know, I see there‘s a subtext here that somehow this -
assuming this woman was a victim—again, we don‘t know. But assuming she was, that if she were an exotic dancer, she‘s somehow not worthy enough a victim. And I think that‘s a really offensive notion.
BROWN: No, no. I wasn‘t saying that.
GARDELLA: No, no. I‘m not saying you are.
BROWN: Yes. But the problem is...
GARDELLA: Yes, it‘s that subtext.
BROWN: Right. When you go into a court of law, what happens is, when you realize that many dancers are prosecutes, then this can be an issue of whether she accepted money for sex or whether she was truly raped. And that can be an issue when it goes into the court of law.
SCARBOROUGH: Even if that‘s the case, though...
BROWN: It‘s very difficult.
SCARBOROUGH: Even if that‘s the case, though, that doesn‘t justify these lacrosse players allegedly beating her, pushing her in a bathroom, ripping her fingernails off.
BROWN: If that‘s proven. That‘s why I say the physical evidence—we‘ll come down to the physical evident in the case, that there is absolute proof of a violent assault. If that‘s there, then they‘ve got these guys nailed and they should do as they can to put them away.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. Thanks so much. I appreciate my panelists being with me tonight.
And still to come, their private pain turned into a national battle.
The family of Terri Schiavo is now telling their side of the story. They‘re here to talk live about Terri and about new blistering accusations made in Michael Schiavo‘s book. He said some very, very nasty things about them.
And later, the immigration battle. Is amnesty for illegal immigrants the right policy for America right now? The Senate says yes. We‘ll debate it.
SCARBOROUGH: It was one year ago that millions of Americans watched the drama of Terry Schiavo‘s final days. This Friday marks the one-year anniversary of Terri‘s death.
Today, both sides are telling their stories. Michael Schiavo is remarried and out with a blistering book telling his version of events. Terri‘s family is out with their own book, “A Life that Matters: The Legacy of Terri Schiavo.”
With me now, we‘ve got Terri‘s mother, Mary; her father, Robert; her brother, Bobby; and her sister, Suzanne.
Thank you all for being with us.
Obviously, you‘ve got to know that Michael, with his book and also with his interviews, is out attacking all of you. There have been some very explosive charges out there.
I want to ask you all, first of all, Bobby; we‘ll start with you. How do you all respond to these attacks?
BOBBY SCHINDLER, TERRI SCHIAVO‘S BROTHER: Really, it doesn‘t matter what Michael says about our family. It doesn‘t change the fact or justify or rationalize what he did to my sister. And I think it‘s really just a distraction trying to take the focus on what he did to my sister, and that was brutally starving and dehydrating her to death.
My sister was only being survived by ordinary means by food and water. But, yet, as we saw, she was refused food and water and slowly died over a 14-day period.
SCARBOROUGH: And, you know, Michael has been out, he‘s talked to Matt Lower. He was on last night with MSNBC‘s Keith Olbermann, and had some very harsh criticism for your family. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL SCHIAVO, TERRI SCHIAVO‘S HUSBAND: I believe they have sold their souls to these people. I do believe that her mother understands. I do belief that her mother knew that this was Terri‘s wish. But her mother was kind of controlled. So as far as the rest of the Schindlers, I mean, if you look at her sister and brother, you know, before the media showed up, I think I can count on one hand in the last ten years that Bobby ever visited Terri. Susan, you know, I don‘t think she‘s ever visited Terri.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: Suzanne, very harsh comments. He‘s claiming that you were only interested in your sister because camera were there. How do you respond to that?
SUZANNE SCHINDLER VITADAMO, TERRI SCHIAVO‘S SISTER: Right. At this point, again, I‘m not going to really respond to what Michael has to say. He‘s going to make accusations to our family. But really, we have no connection to Michael anymore. Terri brought that connection to the family. And now she‘s not with us any more so we‘re just going to move on. We‘re going to focus on our new foundation and try to make some good come out of this tragedy.
SCARBOROUGH: And Robert, Michael also had some harsh comments to say about you. He claims that you were greedy. That you were only interested if this case primarily because of the lawsuit. How do you respond to that?
ROBERT SCHINDLER, TERRI SCHIAVO‘S FATHER: I was interested in seeing that Terri got her rehabilitation. And I confronted Michael Schiavo when he received money was a malpractice award that was designated for Terri‘s rehabilitation, and decided not to use it for that. And that‘s where the money issue came into the facts. So it‘s kind of been distorted.
SCARBOROUGH: You know, the results—I know a lot of Americans were surprise about this. That he actually had Terri‘s tombstone take on a political statement basically, where he said on that tombstone on her grave, “I kept my promise.”
Let me ask all of you, when you first heard about that, what was your reaction to it?
B. SCHINDLER: Well, personally just Michael continuing to be vindictive and continuing to cause hurt. Michael already did this to my sister and then he continues to try and inflict pain on my parents. So, it doesn‘t shock us.
You know, Mr. Scarborough, anybody that would starve a human being to death, you know, we‘re really not surprised or shocked at anything that he does and what he has done. So this doesn‘t come at a surprise to us or a shock to us. And that‘s why we are really just trying to move on. Our issue with Michael is over.
And we want to do what we can to try to protect those, from what happened to Terri, and be a voice for the disability community. So something like this won‘t happen to other families.
SCARBOROUGH: And, Bobby, of course, there has been some harsh back and forth over the past year between you all and Schiavo. You still believe, do you not that he was responsible for your sister going into a coma in the first place? What evidence do you and the rest of your family have that, in fact, that was his fault?
B. SCHINDLER: Well, we just don‘t know. There‘s never been a proper investigation. The IME who did the autopsy has left the case open in case any new evidence does surface.
But over the years, we did start to collect some circumstantial evidence. And if you connect the dots, it really paints a picture, or suggests strongly, that Michael could have been involved in her collapse.
SCARBOROUGH: In what way? You said, if you connect the dots. What dots are you connecting?
B. SCHINDLER: Well, it wasn‘t until recently that an ex-girlfriend came forward and testified how controlling and how violent Michael was. There‘s episodes that we have in our book that go into detail on how Michael was violent with Suzanne and myself.
So it‘s instances like this. There was bruises that were noticed on Terri. And it was one of those things were...
SCARBOROUGH: But why didn‘t the investigators ever pick that up?
And I think a lot of viewers probably didn‘t realize that Jeb Bush, after your sister‘s death, actually called for an investigation of Michael.
B. SCHINDLER: And there never was one. The only one that did and investigation was Mark Fuhrman. And Mark Fuhrman, what he found, without any subpoena power, was very troubled by what he found, particularly the night Terri collapsed.
It‘s been 15 years later, and that‘s the problem we‘re having to deal with. Fifteen years after the collapse, so to back and look at Terri‘s collapse without any type of subpoena power, without Michael being questioned, it‘s very difficult.
And the only thing we can hope for now is a special prosecutor or something happening, new evidence, to compel somebody to open up the investigation.
SCARBOROUGH: Mary, let‘s talk about the foundation. You are setting up a foundation to try to help other people that are in your position. How do you think you can make a difference?
VITADAMO: We can help people that they e-mail or they‘ll call us. They have no—they don‘t know what to do about their loved ones. Some are in the condition that Terri was, some are just, you know, handicapped. And they need help. They need a voice to speak for them, the handicapped and the disabled need a voice to speak for them. And they don‘t have a voice to speak for them.
SCARBOROUGH: Did that surprise you that so many politicians were willing to really vote down party lines on this issue and so many on one side of the aisle almost reflexively said that your daughter should be allowed to die.
VITADAMO: Well, Bobby can answer that better. He spent a lot more time in Washington than I did.
B. SCHINDLER: The thing is, Mr. Scarborough, right now as the law stands, there is more protection for those on death row than there are for people that are disabled. And our foundation, what we like to do—you know, Congress did what they could to save Terri. But they didn‘t go far enough, we believe. And we need policy change to protect those that are disabled. Because, if people on death row have more rights than the disabled community, there‘s something that‘s wrong and it needs to be changed.
SCARBOROUGH: All right.
No doubt about it. I‘ll tell you what. During this tragedy that was unfolding before all of us on national television, I commented more than once that it seemed that a lot of protesters out there were more interested in the rights of animals than they were of your daughter and your sister. And it was just a disgrace.
I appreciate what you all are doing out there now with this foundation. I appreciate you being with us. Mary, Robert and Suzanne and Bobby Schindler, I greatly appreciate it.
All right, and when we come back, there are an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in America. Should they be allowed to stay here legally? Well, the United States Senate says yes. The United States House says no. There‘s a battle there and raging across America. They‘re taking it to the streets, from the East Coast to the West Coast. We‘ll talk about it.
And later, why is the youth of France so angry? We‘ll see what set emotions boiling over tonight when “Scarborough Country” returns.
SCARBOROUGH: HBO‘s big new hit, “Big Love” makes polygamy seem, well, normal. It sparked a big debate. The question is will it spark protests in the coming years for polygamist rights. We‘ll talk about that and the controversial new series when “Scarborough Country” returns.
But first, here‘s the latest news you and your family need to know.
SCARBOROUGH: The new show, “Big Love.” It‘s a controversial look at the world of polygamy. And some are saying it‘s a good thing that it‘s getting out in the open. We‘re going to talk to somebody who support polygamy and knows about the lifestyle.
And then things turn ugly in the streets of Paris. We‘ll see what happened and find out why the youth of France are so angry. We‘ll come back to SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY. Those stories in just minutes wait. France isn‘t in Scarborough Country. But it sure is nice watching all the violence in the streets over there.
Anyway first, more protests sweeping the country with some violence in our streets over the immigration reform plan. In Dallas, students rushed city hall protesting the proposed crackdowns on illegal immigrants. This while battle lines are being drawn in the looming showdowns at our nation‘s capital.
For the very latest, let‘s go now to MSNBC‘s Chief Washington Correspondent, Norah O‘Donnell. Norah? Obviously a big battle raging on Capitol Hill. Give us the very latest.
NORAH O‘DONNELL, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Well good evening Joe. Today, the issue of immigration reform was sort of put on simmer with the resignation of Andy Card. But it is sure to boil over tomorrow in the United States Senate. Tonight a senior Republican aide said the Senate will take up Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist‘s bill tomorrow. Now, that is the bill that is very much like the very tough House bill, which only addresses border security issues.
So this big debate is going to explode over proposals that would allow the 11 to 12 million undocumented workers in this country remain here in the United States and work here in the United States. Now, we know that the Senate Judiciary Committee has already passed a bill that includes this guest worker program. And it would also offer new work visas to thousands to new immigrants each year.
Now, as you can expect, House republicans are furious. They are calling this Senate bill amnesty. They want a 700-mile border, a wall along the border. But already I‘m hearing from those up on Capitol Hill that they think that this Senate Judiciary Committee bill could pass the whole Senate.
So, the other thing that‘s coming up now is that there‘s a concern that this debate that‘s going to be coming up possesses very deep political risks for the divided Republican Party—that it could wipe out the gains that the Republican Party has made among Hispanics. Former RNC chairman Ed Gillespie has warned of a backlash. In fact, he told the Federalist Society that he thinks that this anti-immigration rhetoric is a political siren song. He says republicans must resist its lure. And he‘s also saying that the Republican Party has already, “rested to heavily on white voters.”
So, even some of the top thinkers in the Republican Party are saying, whoa, let‘s have a civil debate as the President said. Because they are worried there‘s going to be a backlash.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. Thank you so much, Norah. Greatly appreciate that report.
And there is going to be a backlash. And the backlash right now apparently, if you talk to political operatives out in the field—at least they‘re telling me that the base, the same base that was upset with George Bush because of the port deal, is now upset because they believe he is granting what many Americans are calling amnesty.
So let‘s bring in right now investigative reporter Sara Carter. We also have MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan, and John Trasvina from the Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund. I want to thank all of you for being with us tonight.
Sara, let‘s start with you. You‘ve actually been reporting right now on these protests. But let‘s talk about what the border patrol is saying. What‘s happening along that border? Is the word starting to filter down to Mexico that America is passing an amnesty program? And are they noticing an actual...
SARA CARTER, MSNBC INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: That‘s exactly...
SCARBOROUGH: ... increase in illegal immigrants coming across the border now?
CARTER: That‘s exactly what‘s happening Joe. I‘ve been calling border patrol agents all week. And they‘ve noticed an increase in illegal immigrants coming across the border and migrants. And they just can‘t stop it. It‘s actually been building up over the past month. Because many Mexicans believe that amnesty had already been passed. But now that they know it‘s going to pass, they say they can‘t control it. You know, a lot of people aren‘t just angry about the guest worker program. What law enforcement officials are angry about, and residents along the southwest border, is that the Senate has completely forgotten about national security issues and the border. I mean, the issue boils down...
SCARBOROUGH: Well, well, and Sara, you know, again, you‘ve always connected the dots here with your investigations. And again, you see these pictures of these people out in the streets. Let‘s show the protesters again. And I just—you know, it‘s stunning to me that people are going out in the streets protesting like this in support of an illegal activity, but you actually have got national security documents from our Homeland Security Department talking about the national security threats that this type of illegal immigration presents. Talk about that.
CARTER: Well, absolutely. What we have is not an issue of just Mexican migrant workers. I mean, obviously, that‘s an issue that‘s in debate right now across the nation. But we have an issue where other than Mexicans is what they call them, OTMs, migrants from all around the world are using the border as a way to get into our nation. These are people from Pakistan, from Iraq, from Afghanistan, from China, from Korea. And, you know, what it is, is we‘re looking at an open border with a serious national security risk.
SCARBOROUGH: You know...
CARTER: And if we‘re not only looking—go ahead.
SCARBOROUGH: No, I‘m sorry. I want to go to John for a second. Because again, you look at some of these pictures, you look at the flags that they‘re waving, John. A lot of these people, I guess most of these people, are saying they want to become American citizens.
But I don‘t see a lot of American flags out there. I see a lot of anger, a lot of resentment, a lot of anti-American feelings. What‘s going on in these protests?
JOHN TRASVINA, MEXICAN-AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: You know, if you are out there seeing the protests as I was on Saturday, at the heart and soul of these marches is organized efforts to become Americans. People want to work here and be here, but be here legally. And that‘s what the Senate Judiciary Committee did yesterday. Bipartisanship has broken out in Washington, D.C. That‘s the big story here. People have come together. The experts in the U.S. Senate, the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, the Judiciary Committee have worked out a compromise. Not everything in there are things that (inaudible) likes. But there‘s a good proposal to deal with both the enforcement as well as the legalization aspects and the United States labor needs going forward with a guest worker program.
SCARBOROUGH: Pat Buchanan, this President lost his base with the port deal. It looks like he‘s going to lose his base with this illegal immigrant amnesty plan? There‘s a lot of—his Republic friends think this is. What‘s going on at the White House? And more importantly, what‘s going to be the long-term impact for this country. Let‘s say 10, 11, 12 million illegal immigrants are granted amnesty in the coming years. How many family members come because of that?
PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, two or three per illegal alien. So you‘re going to have 20 or 30 million more people here, and basically be given blanket amnesty...
SCARBOROUGH: Wait, now, explain to me Pat. I want to know. Why does the President of the United States support that?
BUCHANAN: I think—I don‘t know why President Bush does. I believe it‘s very ideological with him. I think he‘s bought into the whole globalization thing.
But Joe, ask yourself. You know those border patrol guys. They‘ve had rocks thrown at them. Some have been killed. They put their lives on the line. They sweat it out in these gullies and canyons. And they wake up one morning and they find the President of the United States, who‘s supposed to enforce the law and defend us against invasion, has announced a blanket amnesty for everybody that got by them. Everybody that got by them is in safe, in secure, on his way to citizenship with a blanket amnesty. They‘ve been stupid fools to risk their lives.
What do you think is going to happen to morale in the border patrol?
As your other guest, Ms. Carter, said, OTMs are other than Mexicans. They‘re coming, Joe, from all over the world. Their numbers have tripled on the southern border in three years. They know it‘s wide open -- 2,000 miles. Joe, this in my judgment, the border will never be controlled if it‘s not controlled now. And to me, quite frankly, that is the end of the United States as a country, as a nation, and as a people.
TRASVINA: We‘ve heard these scare tactics for generations, Pat. But they were against your ancestors, my ancestors and Asian ancestors before.
BUCHANAN: My ancestors came legally, and they didn‘t march around under foreign flags and invade city halls. If we did that in Mexico City...
TRASVINA: Well we still see a lot of Irish flags on St. Patrick‘s Day, and we‘re proud of it...
BUCHANAN: Yes, but if you go right into...
TRASVINA: ... But we‘ve mistreated immigrants in the past.
BUCHANAN: Are you ...
TRASVINA: Immigrants want to come for opportunities. That‘s why they come to the U.S.
CARTER: Yes, but you see the...
BUCHANAN: Go ahead. Go ahead, Ms. Carter.
CARTER: But you see the issue is about national security. We are living in a post-September 11 America. The borders are wide open. And I mean if—like I said, I‘ve been down there before. If I can get to areas where I know I can go back and forth without anyone noticing, wouldn‘t a terrorist or anyone else be able to do the same thing? I mean, they have the money, they have the capability, the borders are basically run by narcotics traffickers who are basically a bottomless pit of money. They can purchase weapons...
SCARBOROUGH: And let me ask Pat Buchanan. Pat, you‘ve worked at the White House. Why isn‘t the President concerned about that?
BUCHANA: Look, I don‘t know what‘s the matter with the President. He went down himself to Tucson. And he said, during the first five years of this century, four and a half million people were stopped at the border, and one in every 12, some 375,000, had criminal records. Now, four million made it. You have got about 350,000 illegal aliens with criminal records walking around the United States, because George Bush will not do his duty, Joe, which is written in the Constitution. The government of the United States shall defend the states from invasion. This isn‘t immigration. This is an invasion.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. John, I‘ll give you the last word.
TRASVINA: Well, there are the national security issues, and this bill will help national security. It‘s in the national interest to know who is coming across and who is here. And they‘re able to do that in a legal way. There has been a lot of scare tactics over immigration in the past. A lot of the rhetoric today is the same. But we have seen the experts in the Senate come together on a bipartisan basis like they never have before to address immigration on a comprehensive basis. We want to see that bill go forward and be enacted in some form or another.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. Thank you so much. Thank you Sara, thank you Pat, and thank you John. Greatly appreciate you being with us.
I‘m joined now by Tucker Carlson. He the host of “THE SITUATION,” Tucker Carlson. Tucker, what‘s the situation tonight.
TUCKER CARLSON, MSNBC HOST OF “THE SITUATION”: Joe, I just agree with every word Pat Buchanan ever utters. I‘ll admit it.
We have Tom Tancredo, congressman from Colorado on tonight, who makes the obvious point, why don‘t we just penalize employers who are hiring illegal immigrants? We‘d end the problem in about 20 minutes. Then we‘re going to have on a man who represents the asexual lobby. That‘s right. Every sexuality under the sun has its own lobby. Now people with no sexuality at all have theirs. Asexuals, you‘ll meet them.
SCARBOROUGH: That‘s very exciting, Tucker. Very exciting...
CARLSON: It‘s not exciting. But because it‘s not exciting, it is kind of exciting. You know what I mean?
SCARBOROUGH: Yes, it is—strange sort of not exciting sort of way. I can‘t wait to see it. Tucker, thank you, and make sure you tune in to “THE SITUATION” coming up next at 11:00 o‘clock.
And when we come back, it‘s a controversial new TV show that celebrates polygamy. Does HBO think it‘s sending the right message. Then apparently more bad guys caught in an undercover sex sting. We‘ll explain.
SCARBOROUGH: The latest HBO show, “Big Love” is pushing the envelope. Once again, this time the cable giant is taking on polygamy. The new show is about a suburban Salt Lake City man with three wives. The show is drawing both criticism and praise from real-life polygamists. But is it just entertainment, or is it going to actually change the way America views polygamy?
With me now to talk about it, we‘ve got polygamy advocate, Mark Henkel. We also have Megan Basham. She‘s a columnist for Town Hall dot com. And also “US Weekly”‘s Dina Sansing. Dina, Hollywood appears to be normalizing polygamy. Why?
DINA SANSING, U.S. WEEKLY: You know, this is just the latest step with HBO. They like to push the boundaries with these things. We‘ve seen it before with the “Sopranos.” You know, they‘re just showing a new, you know, form of entertainment, really.
SCARBOROUGH: Are you surprised that the show has caught on?
SANSING: No. I mean I think it‘s being talked about, which is the first step to having a successful show. People are enjoying it. You know, it‘s a fun show. But, you know, that‘s really just what it is. It‘s, you know, not making a big statement. They are just trying to, you know, show good entertainment.
SCARBOROUGH: Mark, you think this good entertainment actually helps the cause of polygamy. And as somebody that‘s started an advocacy group to support polygamy, I would guess you think that‘s a pretty good thing, don‘t you?
MARK HENKEL, POLYGAMY ADVOCATE: It has its pluses and its minuses.
SCARBOROUGH: Talk about it.
HENKEL: Well, it certainly does get it out there. I would say, however, it is not being sold to conservative Christians or the Mormon polygamists, for example. That‘s a Mormon polygamist example in the show. It‘s certainly not going to the conservative element. For example, I had never watched HBO until I got it just to watch it for this.
However, it does present it to another audience that is HBO-oriented and gives them an opportunity to see some stereotypes dispelled, such as the foolish idea that it‘s a fantasy of sexual escapades for a husband. If anything, it shows it can be a pain in the neck for the man.
SCARBOROUGH: Talk about, though, how this may actually mainstream—you believe and other people that support polygamy believe that this may lead mainstream Americans to be less hostile towards polygamy as a way of life.
HENKEL: Well it does help overcome a lot of the false propaganda that is always stated about it, such as the ridiculous sexual fantasy, such as the idea that normal people that believe in consenting adult polygamy somehow are associated to other crimes, that all us normal pro-polygamists have always been against these other crimes. So it provides that opportunity for people to realize that we‘re just normal family values. If anything, we are the ultra-family. We are true family, truly dedicated to family.
SCARBOROUGH: Megan, there are those words put together—consenting adults. Does it suggest to you that maybe in five, ten years, we may see protests for polygamists‘ rights on Capitol Hill?
MEGAN BASHAM, COLUMNIST, “TOWN HALL”: Well I think definitely we‘re going to see that. And I think that the show‘s creators don‘t see this as just sort of a fun, you know, night of watching television on HBO. I mean, they see this as an enter into a cultural debate, and they have made that very clear in interviews. And, if anything, it‘s presenting a really fictional idea of what happens with polygamy communities. You know, I‘m from Arizona. And you look in Colorado City and some of the polygamy communities in Utah, and there is rampant abuse and poverty...
HENKEL: See here?
BASHAM: ... and incest. And I mean, it‘s really ridiculous to say that this is just a happy family, typical family values. It‘s not true.
HENKEL: What we have here is an example of propaganda constantly trying to suggest that the lone example...
BASHAM: That‘s not propaganda. That‘s factual. Those are documented cases.
HENKEL: ... It is lone examples—You know what? I‘m the national polygamy advocate. The world is larger than the Mormon land bubble of Arizona and Utah. And there are numerous people that have no basis...
BASHAM: But those are the largest of communities...
BASHAM: ...examples to look at.
HENKEL: ...are coming from Evangelical conservative Christians. And we have no premise of Mormonism or the groups that you particularly mention. But you continue to propagandize that those lone ...
BASHAM: Well, they‘re not Mormon. The Mormon Church doesn‘t claim those groups.
HENKEL: ... examples are typical. They are not. The Mormon institution, regardless—If it uses the book of Mormon, it is Mormon polygamy.
BASHAM: No, they‘re not Mormon. You‘re right. But they are the largest polygamist group, so it‘s best to look at them and see what‘s going on in their community.
BUCHANAN: Yes, we are going to have to do one at a time.
Dina, I‘ll give you the last word. Obviously HBO knew what it was doing. It‘s got a controversial issue out there. Somebody‘s talking. I‘ve got to admit. I‘ve seen a couple episodes of it. In 15 seconds, is this show going to be a success?
SANSING: I think it is. You know, it‘s sparking a great debate. You‘re seeing it here today. And that‘s all they really want. You know, they have to back it up with a good show.
HENKEL: And they will expose the propaganda.
SANSING: People will turn in to it, because they want to see what all the fuss is about. But ultimately, if it‘s not a great show, people aren‘t going to keep watching.
SCARBOROUGH: All right. We‘ll leave it there. Thanks so much for being with us. We‘ll be right back with more “SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.”
SCARBOROUGH: It‘s time for another flyover of “SCARBOROUGH COUNTRY.” First stop, Greenville, Ohio where “DATELINE NBC” helped about 17 men between the ages of 19 and 47 of charges of wanting to have sex with kids. “DATELINE” once again worked with the group Perverted Justice, set up hidden cameras and caught these guys when they showed up at a house thinking they were going to find kids that they met on the Internet. You know what so shocking to me is how many men continue to get caught trying to prey on kids, despite the fact they‘ve all seen it on “DATELINE.”
And finally to St. Paul, Minnesota where you may remember us telling you about the Easter Bunny being banned from city hall in order to avoid offending non-Christians. Well, the good people of St. Paul are fighting back without saying a peep. Instead, they‘re buying boxes of little marshmallow peeps and piling them up on the steps of the city hall in protest. Christian or not, you‘ve got to love the pluck of the good citizens of St. Paul.
And one more thing to show you. The streets of Paris where police are using water cannons and tear gas to break up massive protests and rioting. Over a million people marched in cities across France Friday. They protest the government‘s new Jobs Law which makes it easier for employees to fire workers. Riders threw bottles today, Molotov cocktails at police, who were forced to close the Eiffel Tower to tourists. The government says it has no intention of changing the law.
We‘ll be right back. And don‘t forget “THE SITUATION” with Tucker Carlson is now. Just minutes away.
SCARBOROUGH: And finally tonight, Joe‘s Schmoe. Tonight is San Francisco. You know, this weekend, more than 25,000 young people turned out in this city by the bay, for an event promoting Christian values over pop culture and promiscuity.
So how did the city respond? Well, a San Francisco assemblyman called the group, “loud, obnoxious and disgusting.” Counter-protesters showed up, and the city council went one step further, condemning the event as quote, “an act of provocation,” “anti-gay” and “anti-choice.” It wasn‘t.
But it‘s funny, isn‘t it, that when the far left wants to protest, they expect to have this run of the city anywhere they want to go. But when conservative kids come out to talk about their values, they‘re attacked. Come on. San Francisco, you‘re Joe‘s Schmoe tonight and every night.
That‘s all the time we have for tonight. Stick around, because “THE SITUATION” with Tucker Carlson starts right now.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
Copy: Content and programming copyright 2006 MSNBC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2006 Voxant, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material other than for research. User may not reproduce or redistribute the material except for user‘s personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon MSNBC and Voxant, Inc.‘s copyright or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.