PHILLY CRIME BOSS TRIAL / JURY SELECTION (09/19/1995)
ANGELO BRUNO FUNERAL
NDS. BARS AND TONE. VS OF THE FUNERAL OF A REPUTED PHILADELPHIA MAFIA CHIEF ANGELO BRUNO. HE WAS SLAIN WHILE SITTING IN HIS CAR, OUTSIDE HIS HOME. VS OF PEOPLE ARRIVING AT A CHURCH. CR: 204 BREAKUP. VS OF THE CASKET BEING BROUGHT INTO CHURCH. CR: 270 THE CASKET IS BROUGHT OUT OF CHURCH. CR: 290 VS OF MRS BRUNO GETTING INTO A LIMOUSINE. CR: 306 VS OF PEOPLE AT A CEMETERY. CI: FUNERALS: BRUNO, ANGELO.
HD-1 Beta SP
UNIVERSAL NEWSREELS 1929 - 1933
Famous mafia gangster Jack Diamond after being caught by the police in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Jack Diamond, a gangster, is caught by the police in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. A group of men. A ship underway at a sea. Men come out of a building. Location: Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA. Date: September 22, 1930.
Anna Paquin in The Irishman on Netflix
Télérama
1980 Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - night - rain - moving pov turn corner on city street - through windshield with wipers going - could be any Eastern U.S. city - wet streets - movpov - mafia - mob - mobster - gangster
1980 Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - night - rain - moving pov downtown alley straight ahead - windshield wipers going - signs for parking garage - storefronts - could be any Eastern U.S city - wet streets - movpov - Broad Street toward City Hall - mafia - mob - mobster - gangster
ANGELO BRUNO FUNERAL
NDS. BARS AND TONE. VS OF THE FUNERAL OF A REPUTED PHILADELPHIA MAFIA CHIEF ANGELO BRUNO. HE WAS SLAIN WHILE SITTING IN HIS CAR, OUTSIDE HIS HOME. VS OF PEOPLE ARRIVING AT A CHURCH. CR: 204 BREAKUP. VS OF THE CASKET BEING BROUGHT INTO CHURCH. CR: 270 THE CASKET IS BROUGHT OUT OF CHURCH. CR: 290 VS OF MRS BRUNO GETTING INTO A LIMOUSINE. CR: 306 VS OF PEOPLE AT A CEMETERY. CI: FUNERALS: BRUNO, ANGELO.
Drug offensive
A2 / France 2
Drug offensive
A2 / France 2
1980 Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - night - rain - moving pov straight ahead through narrow one-way street - windshield wipers going - follows taxi - parking garage signs - could be any Eastern U.S. city - wet streets - movpov - bar - neon - police car - mafia - mob - mobster - gangster
PHILADELPHIA MAYOR FRANK RIZZO
B/W AND COLOR FILM TRANSFER. CU OF A PHOTO OF THE MAYOR OF PHILADELPHIA FRANK RIZZO. VS OF A SIGN THAT READS "WELCOME TO PHILADELPHIA". VS OF FRED CALANDRA, PRESIDENT OF PHILADELPHIA NEW YEAR SHOOTERS AND MUMMERS ASSOCIATION. HE PRAISES PHILADELPHIA'S NEW YEARS PARADE. VS OF THE PARADE. VS OF MAYOR FRANK RIZZO CAMPAIGNING. VS OF PHILADELPHIA CITIZENS EXPRESSING THEIR OPINION OF FRANK RIZZO. VS OF STATE SENATOR HENRY "BUDDY" CIANFRANI FROM DISTRICT ONE IN SOUTH PHILADELPHIA. HE DETAILS THE LIFE OF MR RIZZO. VS OF AN ITALIAN MARKET. VS OF DUSTY GALE AND HIS TRIO. S OF MR GALE SINGING. VS OF POSTERS OF FRANK RIZZO. CU OF A BABY PICTURE OF RIZZO. CU OF A STREET SIGN THAT READS "RIZZO". VS OF RIZZO. VS OF CITIZENS DISCUSSING RIZZO'S ROLE AS A POLICE OFFICER. B/W STILL OF RIZZO OBSERVING A PICTURE OF HIMSELF. VS OF CITIZENS DESCRIBING RIZZO AS A STRICT DISCIPLINARIAN. VS OF MR RIZZO SAYING "I COME FROM AN ARENA WHERE I TOOK MY LUMPS AND GAVE SOME". VS OF MICHAEL PAKENHAM ASSOCIATE EDITOR OF THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER. HE SAYS "RIZZO WAS THE QUICKEST GUY TO BEAT UP A MISCREANT". VS OF B/W PHOTO OF RIZZO. VS OF SPENCER COXE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA BRANCH AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION. HE SAYS RIZZO ORDERED INTERRACIAL COUPLES TO BE ARRESTED. VS OF GREGORY HARVEY FORMER CHAIRMAN SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA CHAPTER AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION. HE SAYS RIZZO MADE HIS REPUTATION BY RAIDING COFFEE HOUSES. VS OF CHARLES BOWSER FORMER DEPUTY TO MAYOR JAMES TATE OF PHILADELPHIA. HE DESCRIBES THE FLAMBOYANT PERSONALITY OF RIZZO. VS B/W PHOTOS OF BLACK YOUTHS. VS OF ANDREA MITCHELL A RADIO AND TELEVISION REPORTER. SHE SAYS RIZZO TOLD HIS OFFICERS THAT AS POLICE COMMISSIONER HE WOULD BACK THEM UP WHETHER WHAT THEY DID WAS RIGHT OR WRONG. VS OF THATCHER LONGSTRETH MAYORAL CANDIDATE IN THE 1971 ELECTIONS. HE SAYS MUCH OF RIZZO'S ACTIONS ARE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. VS OF LARRY KANE, A TELEVISION JOURNALIST WHO SPEAKS OF RIZZO'S CELEBRITY STATUS. INTS OF A SUBWAY. VS OF A MS NATALIE WOOD SINGING. B/W PHOTO OF RIZZO DEFUSING A BOMB. VS OF A DEBATE BETWEEN LONGSTRETH AND RIZZO SHOT OFF OF A TELEVISION SCREEN. B/W PHOTO OF ANGELO BRUNO, A REPUTED MAFIA LEADER. VS OF LONGSTRETH CALLING RIZZO'S LIFE A HORATIO ALGER STORY. CI: PARADES: NEW YEARS. GOVERNMENT: CITY, PHILADELPHIA. PERSONALITIES: RIZZO, FRANK. PERSONALITIES: CALANDRA, FRED. PERSONALITIES: CIANFRANI, HENRY. PERSONALITIES: GALE, DUSTY. PERSONALITIES: PAKENHAM, MICHAEL. PERSONALITIES: COXE, SPENCER. PERSONALITIES: HARVEY, GREGORY. PERSONALITIES: LONGSTRETH, THATCHER. PERSONALITIES: KANE, LARRY. PERSONALITIES: BOWSER, CHARLES. PERSONALITIES: MITCHELL, ANDREA.
1980 Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - night - rain - moving pov straight ahead through downtown Philadelphia with windshield with wipers going - could be any Eastern U.S. city - pans back and forth from left front to right front showing stores and lights - signs: Potamkin Chevrolet, Diner, Oldsmobile - traffic by - movpov - mafia - mob - mobster - gangster
PHILADELPHIA MAYOR FRANK RIZZO
B/W AND COLOR FILM TRANSFER. CU OF A PHOTO OF THE MAYOR OF PHILADELPHIA FRANK RIZZO. VS OF A SIGN THAT READS "WELCOME TO PHILADELPHIA". VS OF FRED CALANDRA, PRESIDENT OF PHILADELPHIA NEW YEAR SHOOTERS AND MUMMERS ASSOCIATION. HE PRAISES PHILADELPHIA'S NEW YEARS PARADE. VS OF THE PARADE. VS OF MAYOR FRANK RIZZO CAMPAIGNING. VS OF PHILADELPHIA CITIZENS EXPRESSING THEIR OPINION OF FRANK RIZZO. VS OF STATE SENATOR HENRY "BUDDY" CIANFRANI FROM DISTRICT ONE IN SOUTH PHILADELPHIA. HE DETAILS THE LIFE OF MR RIZZO. VS OF AN ITALIAN MARKET. VS OF DUSTY GALE AND HIS TRIO. S OF MR GALE SINGING. VS OF POSTERS OF FRANK RIZZO. CU OF A BABY PICTURE OF RIZZO. CU OF A STREET SIGN THAT READS "RIZZO". VS OF RIZZO. VS OF CITIZENS DISCUSSING RIZZO'S ROLE AS A POLICE OFFICER. B/W STILL OF RIZZO OBSERVING A PICTURE OF HIMSELF. VS OF CITIZENS DESCRIBING RIZZO AS A STRICT DISCIPLINARIAN. VS OF MR RIZZO SAYING "I COME FROM AN ARENA WHERE I TOOK MY LUMPS AND GAVE SOME". VS OF MICHAEL PAKENHAM ASSOCIATE EDITOR OF THE PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER. HE SAYS "RIZZO WAS THE QUICKEST GUY TO BEAT UP A MISCREANT". VS OF B/W PHOTO OF RIZZO. VS OF SPENCER COXE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA BRANCH AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION. HE SAYS RIZZO ORDERED INTERRACIAL COUPLES TO BE ARRESTED. VS OF GREGORY HARVEY FORMER CHAIRMAN SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA CHAPTER AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION. HE SAYS RIZZO MADE HIS REPUTATION BY RAIDING COFFEE HOUSES. VS OF CHARLES BOWSER FORMER DEPUTY TO MAYOR JAMES TATE OF PHILADELPHIA. HE DESCRIBES THE FLAMBOYANT PERSONALITY OF RIZZO. VS B/W PHOTOS OF BLACK YOUTHS. VS OF ANDREA MITCHELL A RADIO AND TELEVISION REPORTER. SHE SAYS RIZZO TOLD HIS OFFICERS THAT AS POLICE COMMISSIONER HE WOULD BACK THEM UP WHETHER WHAT THEY DID WAS RIGHT OR WRONG. VS OF THATCHER LONGSTRETH MAYORAL CANDIDATE IN THE 1971 ELECTIONS. HE SAYS MUCH OF RIZZO'S ACTIONS ARE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. VS OF LARRY KANE, A TELEVISION JOURNALIST WHO SPEAKS OF RIZZO'S CELEBRITY STATUS. INTS OF A SUBWAY. VS OF A MS NATALIE WOOD SINGING. B/W PHOTO OF RIZZO DEFUSING A BOMB. VS OF A DEBATE BETWEEN LONGSTRETH AND RIZZO SHOT OFF OF A TELEVISION SCREEN. B/W PHOTO OF ANGELO BRUNO, A REPUTED MAFIA LEADER. VS OF LONGSTRETH CALLING RIZZO'S LIFE A HORATIO ALGER STORY. CI: PARADES: NEW YEARS. GOVERNMENT: CITY, PHILADELPHIA. PERSONALITIES: RIZZO, FRANK. PERSONALITIES: CALANDRA, FRED. PERSONALITIES: CIANFRANI, HENRY. PERSONALITIES: GALE, DUSTY. PERSONALITIES: PAKENHAM, MICHAEL. PERSONALITIES: COXE, SPENCER. PERSONALITIES: HARVEY, GREGORY. PERSONALITIES: LONGSTRETH, THATCHER. PERSONALITIES: KANE, LARRY. PERSONALITIES: BOWSER, CHARLES. PERSONALITIES: MITCHELL, ANDREA.
ABSCAM TAPES
B/W VIDEO. LS REP MICHAEL MYERS (D-PA), AND MAYOR ANGELO ERRICHETTI, OF CAMDEN, NJ IN A HOTEL ROOM W/TWO UNDERCOVER FBI AGENTS 8/22/79, MYERS TALKS ABOUT HIS INFLUENCE OVER THE PHILADELPHIA CITY COUNCIL AND TELLS THE AGENTS "MONEY TALKS, IN THIS BUSINESS AND BULLSHIT WALKS, IT GOES THE SAME WAY DOWN IN WASHINGTON" CR:113 1/24/80. LS MYERS AND ATTORNEY HOWARD CRIDEN MEET W/TWO UNDER COVER FBI AGENTS. MYERS TELLS THEM HE COULD SET THEM UP W/A LOT OF OTHER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. HE ASKS FOR $35,000 AND ALSO AN ADDITIONAL $50,000 TO WORK ON OTHER PEOPLE (CITY COUNCIL AND MAFIA). END CR:155 -CR:198. MYERS TELLS THE AGENTS HE COULD TAKE CARE OF THINGS FOR THEM CR:238. LONG VERSION 8/22/79 MYERS AND ERRICHETTI TALK W/UNDERCOVER FBI AGENTS. MYERS TELLS THEM HE HAS SOMEONE IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT. THEY TALK ABOUT TRYING TO GET A GREEN CARD FOR AN ARAB SHIEK AND SETTING UP A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS TO KEEP HIM IN THE COUNTRY. HE TRIES TO TALK THEM INTO OPENING A SHIPPING OPERATION IN PHILADELPHIA. THE FBI AGENT GIVES MYERS AN ENVELOPE W/MONEY IN IT AND TELLS HIM "SPEND IT WELL". END CR:529-CR:552. BARS. CI: GOVERNMENT: CORRUPTION, ABSCAM. PERSONALITIES: MYERS, MICHAEL. PERSONALITIES: ERRICHETTI, ANGELO.
1980 Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania - night - rain - moving pov straight ahead through downtown city street - through windshield with wipers going - storefronts - signs: Oldsmobile, Diner, Boot Bar, Potamkin Chevrolet,McDonald's - could be any Eastern U.S. city - wet streets - movpov - mafia - mob - mobster - gangster
USA: ACTIVISTS WANT MUMIA ABU-JAMAL CASE REOPENED
TAPE_NUMBER: EF00/0049 IN_TIME: 20:49:54 // 04:23:35 - 07:40:04 LENGTH: 01:30 SOURCES: APTN RESTRICTIONS: FEED: VARIOUS (THE ABOVE TIME-CODE IS TIME-OF-DAY) SCRIPT: English/Nat Civil rights activists from the U-S and abroad have again asked for a review of the case of convicted killer Mumia Abu-Jamal. They were in Washington D-C on Wednesday to appeal directly to the Justice Department for a retrial of Abu-Jamal's case. Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1981 killing of a Philadelphia policeman. The onetime Black Panther and radio reporter has always denied killing Daniel Falkner, who was shot after stopping Abu-Jamal's brother for driving the wrong way down a city street. Abu-Jamal - who was found wounded at the murder scene - contends he was framed. His jailhouse writings about the justice system have attracted worldwide attention. And on Wednesday, his supporters again called for a reopening of his case. At a news conference in Washington D-C, they played an audio tape with a statement from Abu-Jamal. SOUNDBITE: (English) "Real Mafia guys are able to afford the best lawyers that money can buy, while the poor schmuck is stuck with court appointed lawyers, hardly the craft's best. So guess who goes to death row. Death row, it seems, is the prerogative of the poor." SUPER CAPTION: Voice of Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row inmate Abu-Jamal's case has drawn interest from human rights groups abroad, especially Europe. They view his death row status as a lightening rod, helping to focus attention on their own concerns of injustice. SOUNDBITE: (English) "In the U-K they do not hang us anymore, they stopped hanging us. They lock us up for life. Over here you still hang. And we think that it is very backward to actually kill people, and that backward practice has to stop." SUPER CAPTION: Martha Osamor, coordinator People of Colour Caucus, Trade Union Congress Abu-Jamal's supporters want the Department of Justice to review the actions of Philadelphia prosecutors in the case. They say their possible misconduct could warrant a retrial. At least one European political envoy said cases like Abu-Jamal's, and of other death row inmates, helped spark a movement against the death penalty across the European continent. SOUNDBITE: (Spanish) "In the Spanish parliament, in the houses of government, both of them have adopted resolutions against this penalty." SUPER CAPTION: Manuel Camara, member of Spanish Senate Although he lost his Supreme Court appeal last October, Abu-Jamal is not likely to be executed any time soon. He can challenge his state court conviction in federal courts, a process that someday could lead back to the Supreme Court. But despite the ongoing anti-death penalty movement focussing on Abu-Jamal, police officials in Philadelphia and the dead officer's family insist that Abu-Jamal is a brutal killer. SHOTLIST: XFA Washington, D.C., January 12, 2000 / Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, August 8 and 12, 1995 Washington, D.C., January 12, 2000 1. Man at news conference holding up magazine with photo of Mumia Abu-Jamal 2. Photographers 3. UPSOUND (English) Voice of Mumia Abu-Jamal, death row inmate 4. Woman holding protest sign 5. News conference 6. Photographer 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Martha Osamor, coordinator, People of Colour Caucus, Trade Union Congress Philadelphia, August 8, 1995 8. Mumia Abu-Jamal stepping out of van and walking into building Washington, D.C., January 12, 2000 9. SOUNDBITE (Spanish) Manuel Camara, member of the Spanish Senate Philadelphia, August 12, 1995 10. Banner and demonstrators during rally for Abu-Jamal 11. Man selling books and other items 12. Book about Abu-Jamal?
APTN 1830 PRIME NEWS NORTH AMERICA
AP-APTN-1830 North America Prime News -Final Monday, 8 February 2010 North America Prime News Italy Mafia 02:34 Part No Access Italy NEW Mafia boss in court says Berlusconi has connections with the Mafia France US 03:11 AP Clients Only REPLAY US Def Sec Gates meets French Def Min Herve Morin, comment on Iran Iran Leaders 03:29 AP Clients Only REPLAY President criticises the west, Supreme Leader comment Haiti Baptists 01:19 AP Clients Only REPLAY Hearing in case of 10 US missionaries charged with kidnapping children ++Mideast Release 03:03 AP Clients Only NEW Israeli court releases Australian, Spanish peace activists US Superbowl 2 02:55 Pt No Access North America/Internet WRAP Fans go wild as New Orleans Saints triumph, vox pops US Shuttle 2 03:23 AP Clients Only WRAP Endeavour shuttle launch, NASA briefing +US Snow 2 03:05 See Script WRAP Washington digs out of snow; US government shut ADDS more B-u-l-l-e-t-i-n begins at 1830 GMT. APEX 02-08-10 1357EST -----------End of rundown----------- AP-APTN-1830: Italy Mafia Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:Italy Mafia- REPLAY Defendant tells court mafia supported birth of Berlusconi party LENGTH: 02:34 FIRST RUN: 1730 RESTRICTIONS: Part No Access Italy TYPE: Italian/Natsound SOURCE: SKY ITALIA/AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 636265 DATELINE: Palermo/Rome - 8 Feb 2010/FILE LENGTH: 02:34 AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY SKY ITALIA - NO ACCESS ITALY SHOTLIST: Sky Italia - No Access Italy Palermo - 8 February 2010 1. Wide exterior of Palermo courthouse 2. Close up of Italian and European Union flags Sky Italia - No Access Italy FILE: Palermo - 2009 (exact date unknown) 3. Massimo Ciancimino, witness in Mafia trial, walking towards armoured car, escorted by police to Palermo courthouse 4. Various of Massimo Ciancimino talking to journalists inside Palermo courthouse Sky Italia - No Access Italy Palermo - 8 February 2010 5. SOUNDBITE (Italian) Massimo Ciancimino, witness in Mafia trial: "It was a warning to fall into line, in order to not forget that (Prime Minister Silvio) Berlusconi himself, not as a person but as a political entity, was generated by these agreements." Sky Italia - No Access Italy FILE: Palermo - 2009 (exact date unknown) 6. Ciancimino talking to journalists Sky Italia - No Access Italy Palermo - 8 February 2010 7. Massimo Ciancimino, witness in mafia trial, on witness stand, listening, and speaking: UPSOUND: (Italian) Antonio Ingroia, prosecutor, reading out hand-written letter allegedly from member of Corleone family to Silvio Berlusconi "'I am ready to give you my support, that will not be little, in order to avoid this sad event from happening', can you please explain this quote?" SOUNDBITE (Italian) Massimo Ciancimino, witness in mafia trial: "It was mentioning the support that could have been given to avoid a sad event, which was an intimidating action. The victim of such action was supposed to be the son of the businessman Berlusconi." UPSOUND (Italian), Antonio Ingroia, prosecutor "Was it just a threat or a project to ...?". SOUNDBITE (Italian) Massimo Ciancimino, witness in mafia trial: "It was a plan to kill him." Sky Italia - No Access Italy FILE: Palermo - 2009 (exact date unknown) 8. Ciancimino escorted by police AP Television - AP Clients Only Rome - 8 February 2010 9. Wide shot Fabrizio Cicchitto, head of People of Freedom party in the lower house, arriving at a political meeting 10. SOUNDITE (Italian) Fabrizio Cicchitto, head of People of Freedom party in the lower house: "He is simply a fake informant, who is trying to gain the favour of the judges, and trying to save his father's money." 11. Cicchitto talking on his mobile phone 12. SOUNDITE (Italian) Fabrizio Cicchitto, head of People of Freedom party in the lower house: "There is no real evidence. This government is leading a very tough struggle against the mafia." AP Television - AP Clients Only FILE: Rome - 29 March 2009 13. Wide of People of Freedom party rally 14. Silvio Berlusconi, Italian Prime Minister, on podium 15. Berlusconi talking on screen STORYLINE: The Mafia supported the birth of Forza Italia, the first political party led by Silvio Berlusconi at the beginning of the early 90s, according to the testimony on Monday of Massimo Ciancimino, who was speaking at his trial in Palermo for money laundering. Ciancimino is himself the son of a former Palermo mayor, Vito Ciancimino, who was convicted for being a member of the Mafia. Ciancimino claimed that important bosses from the Corleone Mafia families were trying to get in touch with Marcello dell'Utri, a close Berlusconi aide, using his father Vito Ciancimino as an intermediary. Dell'Utri is currently a senator in Berlusconi's People of Freedom party, and formerly a manager with Fininvest, a company controlled by Silvio Berlusconi's family. But Berlusconi's politicial allies have denounced the accusations, saying that Massimo Ciancimino was just attempting to protect his father's wealth. Massimo Ciancimino is currently appealing a three-year, four-month sentence, after having been convicted for money laundering. Fabrizio Cicchitto, head of People of Freedom party in the lower house said that Massimo Ciancimino "is simply a fake informant, who is trying to gain the favour of the judges, and trying to save his father's money," referring to Ciancimino's ongoing trial for money laundering. According to Cicchitto, what Ciancimino testified is "pure madness", because at the time of the alleged letter from the Corleonese clan to dell'Utri, Forza Italia, Berlusconi's first party, was still far from being created. The trial at which Massimo Ciancimino was testifying involves the former domestic intelligence chief, Carabinieri General Mario Mori, who is accused of letting mafia boss Bernardo Provenzano escape in 1995. In a previous hearing at the same trial, Massimo Ciancimino also stated that Berlusconi's building company, Edilnord, funded the construction of the 'Milano 2' area in Milan, by laundering money coming from Sicilian mafia groups. Berlusconi's lawyer Niccolo' Ghedini said he would sue Ciancimino, saying that his statements on Milano 2 were devoid of all basis in fact. Senator Dell'Utri is appealing a 2004 nine-year sentence for allegedly acting as a go-between for the Mafia with politicians, businessmen and other powerful figures in Milan. At the moment, the Court of Appeal is still working on the case and a verdict is expected by the end of April. According to Ciancimino, his father was the linchpin in alleged negotiations between Italian politicians and mafia boss Toto Riina, to stop a bombing campaign that claimed the lives of anti-Mafia judges Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino in 1992. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1628EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: France US Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:France US- REPLAY US Def Sec Gates meets French Def Min Herve Morin, comment on Iran LENGTH: 03:11 FIRST RUN: 1430 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: English/French/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 636281 DATELINE: Paris - 08 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 03:11 AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY SHOTLIST 1. French Defence Minister Herve Morin welcomes U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates 2. Morin and Gates shake hands for photographers, then enter defence ministry building 3. Various of Morin and Gates posing for more pictures inside building 4. Morin and Gates walk down staircase and approach podiums 5. SOUNDBITE (French) Herve Morin, French Defence Minister: "All of us note that it will be necessary - unfortunately, I was going to say - to start an international dialogue that will lead to new sanctions if Iran doesn't stop its programmes. We are certain, we are convinced, that these programs are for military purposes." 6. Cutaway of officials watching 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Robert Gates, U.S. Defence Secretary: "All of these initiatives have been rejected, and we've heard more about that just this week, including the IAEA's (International Atomic Energy Agency) proposal for the Tehran research reactor, which I think all of us believed offered promise." 8. Wide shot of Gates and Morin 9. SOUNDBITE (English) Robert Gates, U.S. Defence Secretary: "If Iran continues and develops nuclear weapons, it almost certainly will provoke nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. This is a huge danger. The key is persuading Iranian leaders that their long-term best interests are best served by not having nuclear weapons, as opposed to having them. And so I think that an approach along these lines, as long as the international community is seen pressing vigorously to resolve this problem, my hope is that we will then be able to keep this in economic and diplomatic channels." 10. Pan from officials to Gates and Morin 11. SOUNDBITE (French) Herve Morin, French Defence Minister: "I perfectly understand that for a certain number of Eastern and Central European countries, the scars are still there, and that these countries don't forget their past, but France wants to establish a new relationship (with Russia), and this new relationship includes building new exchanges on all matters, and that is how we see things." 12. Morin and Gates shaking hands before leaving STORYLINE: French Defence Minister Herve Morin met visiting U.S. counterpart, Defence Secretary Robert Gates, in Paris on Monday for talks dominated by the issue of Iran's defiance over its nuclear programme. Gates said diplomatic pressure and sanctions should be the next step in trying to get Iran to abandon its nuclear program. Iran formally announced earlier on Monday that it would enrich uranium to the higher levels, which in theory, if true, would mean it was moving closer to being able to produce nuclear warheads. It insists the move was meant only to provide fuel for its research reactor. Iranian envoy Ali Asghar Soltanieh told The Associated Press that he had informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the decision to enrich at least some of its low-enriched uranium stockpile to 20 percent, considered the threshold value for uranium to be called highly enriched, though still falling far short of weapons-grade. Soltanieh, who represents Iran at the Vienna-based IAEA, also said that the U.N. agency's inspectors now overseeing enrichment to low levels would be able to stay on site to fully monitor the process. Although material for the fissile core of a nuclear warhead must be enriched to a level of 90 percent or more, just getting its stockpile to the 20 percent mark would be a major step for the Iran's nuclear program. While enriching to 20 percent would take about one year, using up to 2-thousand centrifuges at Tehran's underground Natanz facility, any next step - moving from 20 to 90 percent - would take only half a year and between 500 to 1-thousand centrifuges. Gates said that if Iran acquires a nuclear weapon, it would "most certainly" lead to nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. "This is a huge danger," Gates said. He said he hoped that "economic and diplomatic channels" could be used to persuade Iran's leaders "that their long-term best interests are best served by not having nuclear weapons." Morin said the two sides agreed it was necessary to start an international dialogue that would lead to new sanctions if Iran doesn't halt its nuclear program, which he said was intended for military purposes. Morin also defended France's decision to sell Moscow a Mistral assault ship, saying France wanted to "establish a new relationship" with Russia. Russian naval officials have submitted a request for three more of the advanced amphibious warships. The Mistral can anchor in coastal waters and deploy troops on land, a capacity the Russian navy now lacks. Russia's navy chief said last year that a ship like the Mistral would have allowed the Russian navy to mount a much more efficient action in the Black Sea during the Georgia-Russia war. He said the French ship would take just 40 minutes to do the job that the Russian Black Sea Fleet vessels did in 26 hours. NATO members and Russia have had some small, country-to-country technology deals in the past but this would be the first sale of a major piece of equipment by a NATO nation to Moscow. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1336EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: Iran Leaders Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:Iran Leaders- REPLAY President criticises the west, Supreme Leader comment LENGTH: 03:29 FIRST RUN: 1230 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Farsi/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/IRIB STORY NUMBER: 636262 DATELINE: Tehran - 8 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 03:29 AP TELEVISION - NO ACCESS BBC PERSIAN TV/VOA PERSIAN TV IRIB - NO ACCESS IRAN/BBC PERSIAN TV/VOA PERSIAN TV ++AP Television is adhering to Iranian law that stipulates all media are banned from providing BBC Persian or VOA Persian any coverage from Iran, and under this law if any media violate this ban the Iranian authorities can immediately shut down that organisation in Tehran.++ SHOTLIST AP TELEVISION - NO ACCESS BBC PERSIAN TV/VOA PERSIAN TV 1. Wide of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad approaching podium 2. Wide of visitors and participants listening to Ahmadinejad speech 3. SOUNDBITE (Farsi) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iranian President: "Since yesterday that the news of Iran's laser achievements was announced, they have been making hue and cry and shout about it, why? Because they are against our scientific progress." 4. Wide of Ahmadinejad speaking at podium 5. SOUNDBITE (Farsi) Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iranian President: "I want to tell them that 'you are making a mistake'. You are not able to create obstacles in the path of the Iranian nation. The martyr Dr. Ali Mohammadi was a very revered figure for our nation and his achievements were very great for our nation. The whole nation mourned for him but you should know that by taking the martyr Ali Mohammadi from our nation his path will be continued amongst our youth more vividly and more gloriously than before." 6. Wide of participants 7. Ahmadinejad presenting a certificate of honour to family of Tehran University professor Masoud Ali Mohammadi, who was killed in a bomb attack last month 8. Wide of stage 9. Zoom out from media to Ahmadinejad testing an electronic vehicle 10. Close-up of Ahmadinejad inside car talking to inventor of the vehicle IRIB - NO ACCESS IRAN/BBC PERSIAN TV/VOA PERSIAN TV 11. Zoom-out from Air Force commanders standing in front of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 12. Close of Khamenei 13. Pan of Air Force commanders 14. SOUNDBITE (Farsi) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader: ++PARTLY OVERLAID WITH AIR FORCE COMMANDERS++ "Today it has become clear that those who stood up against the greatness of the Iranian nation and the great achievement of the Iranian nation in the presidential election are not a part of the nation, they are either obvious counter-revolutionary figures or some who out of their ignorance and stubbornness act against the revolution, and they have nothing to do with the majority of people." 15. Pan of Air Force Commanders listening to Supreme Leader speech 16. SOUNDBITE (Farsi) Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader: "God willing and with the grace of God, the dignified nation of Iran will show its solidarity and unity to all the arrogant powers, the United States, Britain and the Zionists and will hit them in the mouth to surprise them as it has done before." 17. Various of crowd chanting (Allahu Akbar) "God is Great" STORYLINE Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday accused the West of creating obstacles on the country's path to achieve "scientific progress" by killing its scientists and academic figures. Speaking at the National Festival of Innovation in Tehran, Ahmadinejad said the West could not tolerate Iran's scientific achievements. "They are against our scientific progress," he said. On Sunday Ahmadinejad had visited and addressed the opening of a laser technology exhibition in the capital, Tehran. During that speech he also ordered the country's atomic agency to begin the production of higher enriched uranium. "You are not able to create obstacles in the path of the Iranian nation," he said, adding that by "taking the martyr Ali Mohammadi from our nation his path will be continued amongst our youth more vividly and more gloriously than before." Iran has repeatedly blamed the West and vowed to take revenge on Israel and the United States for the slaying last month of Tehran University physics professor, Masoud Ali Mohammadi, in a mysterious bomb attack. Iranian officials have blamed an exiled opposition group known as the People's Mujahedeen, accusing it of acting on behalf of Israel and the US. The armed opposition group and Washington have denied involvement, while Israel has not commented. It remains unclear why the 50-year-old Tehran University professor would have been a target for assassins who left a bomb-rigged motorcycle outside his home on Jan. 12. Ali Mohammadi had no prominent political voice, no published work with military relevance and no declared links to Iran's nuclear program, though his work included some aspects of nuclear theory. He was not known to have any key roles in the opposition movement, although his name appeared on a university petition pledging support for reformist candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi before last June's disputed election. Meanwhile, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei slammed the opposition by saying they don't belong to the majority of the Iranian people, who he said, were staunch supporters of the ruling system. Addressing Air Force commanders of the Iranian Army, Khamenei called on his supporters to turn out in huge numbers and foil what he called western plots against Islamic countries. "God willing and with the grace of God, the dignified nation of Iran will show its solidarity and unity to all the arrogant powers, the United States, Britain and the Zionists and will hit them in the mouth to surprise them as it did before," he said, referring to the expected state sponsored rally on Feb. 11, when Iran marks the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution that brought the country's hardline clerical establishment to power. Iran's opposition movement has also planned to participate in the rally. A display of opposition numbers on the most hallowed day in the Iranian political calendar would mark a stinging symbolic challenge to the clerical leadership. The opposition has so far used state-sponsored occasions to hold protest rallies against the government of President Ahmadinejad. It says Ahmadinejad won the June presidential election through fraud. Hundreds of thousands have poured into the streets in Iran since then on various occasions to support Ahmadinejad's main challenger, opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi. Dozens of protesters were killed in the unrest and hundreds detained since June. Iran has put on trial more then 100 political activists and figures since August. The defendants have included not only those directly involved in protests but also opposition politicians and writers - a sign that the leadership has used the turmoil as an opportunity to cast a wide net in pursuing its various opponents. More than 80 of those on trial have been sentenced to prison terms ranging from six months to 15 years. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1338EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: Haiti Baptists Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:Haiti Baptists- REPLAY Hearing in case of 10 US missionaries charged with kidnapping children LENGTH: 01:19 FIRST RUN: 1730 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 636298 DATELINE: Port au Prince - 8 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 01:19 AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY SHOTLIST: 1. Police van carrying arrested US Baptists arriving at court 2. Various of group inside car 3. Various of group leader Laura Silsby (red hair) being escorted by police into court 4. Various of group member Charisa Coulter (dark hair, dark glasses, dark top) in vehicle 5. Various of Baptist Minister Paul Thompson being taken into court, UPSOUND: (English) reporter asks him if he knew Laura Silsby did not have the correct paperwork and asks him if he feels tricked, he quotes Bible verse 6. Coulter being escorted into court 7. Steve McMullen being taken into court 8. Drew Culberth being taken into court STORYLINE: Five members of a group of US Baptists who are being held in Haiti on child kidnapping charges were brought back to court in Port-au-Prince for questioning on Monday. The group, comprising ten Americans in total, were arrested on 29 January at Haiti's border with the Dominican Republic, for trying to take 33 Haitian children out of the country without the proper documentation. A magistrate has charged them with child kidnapping and criminal association. The Americans said they were on a humanitarian mission to rescue orphans after the 12 January quake, but it turned out that at least 20 of the children have living parents. Some Haitians said they had given the children to the group because the missionaries had promised to educate them at an orphanage in the Dominican Republic and said they would allow their parents to visit. The Dominican consul in Haiti has said he had warned group leader Laura Silsby that she lacked the required papers and risked being arrested for child trafficking. There are reports of divisions amongst the jailed missionaries, with some reportedly telling NBC they'd been lied to. Reporters shouted questions at the group members as they arrived, asking if they felt deceived by Silsby. On Friday, the ten had returned to jail Friday after failing to persuade a judge to grant them provisional release pending the outcome of their case. The judge had scheduled three more days of hearings starting on Monday. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1349EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: ++Mideast Release Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:++Mideast Release- NEW Israeli court releases Australian, Spanish peace activists LENGTH: 03:03 FIRST RUN: 1830 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: English/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION STORY NUMBER: 636321 DATELINE: Ramleh, central Israel - 08 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 03:03 AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY SHOTLIST: ++NIGHT SHOTS++ 1. Exterior of prison 2. Exterior of prison gate 3. Prison gate opens and Ariadna Jove Marti, from Tarragona, Spain, and Bridgette Chappell, from Australia, come out, having been released by Israeli authorities 4. Various of friends greeting released women 5. SOUNBBITE (English) Bridgette Chappell, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: "The army came in at three in the morning, in a night raid and forcefully took us from the house. And they raided the apartment, they took a lot of things from the apartment; they obviously knew a bit about what they thought that we were doing there. After that they took us to Ofer prison and then after that they took us to Holon, outside Tel Aviv, and then they brought us here. It was a very long time before they gave us access to a lawyer or phones or gave us food, and they told us a load of lies about what they would do if we didn't sign any papers. All of the papers that they put under our nose were in Hebrew, so we couldn't have had any idea what we were signing, but we chose not to sign anything." 6. SOUNDBITE (English) Ariadna Jove Marti, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: ++NOT VERBATIM++ "It is a big victory not only for us, but to prevent the army from doing this again, to come to the area in Ramallah, to take activists who are working in a pro-Palestinian movement." 7. SOUNDBITE (English) Bridgette Chappell, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: "If they were arresting every single person in such a nature who might have outstayed their visa, then they would be having to be doing this every single night in Ramallah. It has nothing to do with that, and it's just an excuse, and one that really needs to be tackled, and for two people that have never been to Israel before, we spent the entirety of our time in the Palestinian Authority, what is Israel doing coming in to arrest us?" 8. Mid of Chappell and Marti 9. SOUNDBITE (English) Bridgette Chappell, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: "In five days there will be an appeal - it will be whether or not our arrest in Ramallah was legal or illegal." 11. SOUNDBITE (English) Ariadna Jove Marti, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: ++NOT VERBATIM++ "And the lawyers will still appeal to try and let us come back to the Palestinian territories, and to the West Bank, and today we are going to rest and eat something and make some calls." 12. SOUNDBITE (English) Bridgette Chappell, one of released members of International Solidarity Movement: "But right now we can only be in Israel, we don't have permission to go to the West Bank " 13. Marti and Chappell walking away STORYLINE: Two foreigners who were arrested by the Israeli army on Sunday night were released on Monday evening from an Israeli prison in Ramleh. The two were taken on Monday morning to a supreme court hearing to contest their arrest, claiming the Israeli immigration police who took them into custody after the arrest had no jurisdiction in the Palestinian West Bank. Israeli troops had broken down the door of an apartment in the West Bank town of Ramallah on Sunday and arrested the two pro-Palestinian activists, identified as Ariadna Jove Marti, 25, from Spain, and Bridgette Chappell, 21, from Australia. The Israeli military said the two women had overstayed their visas, but also alleged they were involved in violent protests in the West Bank. "It is a big victory, not only for us, but to prevent the army from doing this again, to come to the area in Ramallah and to take activists who are working in pro-Palestinian movement," said Marti. Their lawyer, Omer Shatz, said he believes the pair was targeted for what he described as peaceful protests against Israeli policies in the West Bank. He added in court that the Israeli army had no authority in Ramallah which is located in Area 'A' according to Oslo accords, meaning it is under the full control of the Palestinian Authority. Bridgette Chappell said: "We spent the entirety of our time in the Palestinian Authority. What is Israel doing coming in to arrest us?" The activists were taken to the Ofer camp in the West Bank and handed over to the immigration police, which Shatz says has no jurisdiction there either. The two women are members of the International Solidarity Movement, which has been active in the Palestinian territories for several years. The women's flatmate, Ryan Olander, said about a dozen Israeli soldiers broke into the apartment before dawn on Sunday and demanded to see everyone's passports. Soldiers searched the apartment, confiscated a laptop and two video cameras and told the women to pack up their things, said Olander, who is from Saint Paul, Minnesota, US. International Solidarity Movement activists show up at points of friction between Israeli troops and Palestinian demonstrators, often trying to block the soldiers. They take part in weekly protests against Israel's so-called "separation barrier", the high wall dividing Israel from the West Bank which bites into Palestinian land. At the protests, Palestinian youths routinely throw stones at soldiers, who respond with tear gas, stun grenades and sometimes live ammunition. Israel claims the barrier is meant to keep Palestinian attackers out, while Palestinians say it's a land grab. In recent months, Israel has intensified its crackdown on those involved in the barrier protests, arresting dozens of Palestinians. Sunday's raid marked only the second time troops have seized foreigners from a Palestinian-ruled area of the West Bank. In January, a Czech activist with the International Solidarity Movement was detained in Ramallah and deported. An Israeli military spokesman said the two women arrested on Sunday were involved in "riots and other acts of violence." The official spoke on condition of anonymity, in line with military regulations. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1534EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: US Superbowl 2 Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:US Superbowl 2- WRAP Fans go wild as New Orleans Saints triumph, vox pops LENGTH: 02:55 FIRST RUN: 1330 RESTRICTIONS: Pt No Access North America/Internet TYPE: English/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/ABC STORY NUMBER: 636271 DATELINE: New Orleans - 7 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 02:55 AP TELEVISION - CLIENTS ONLY ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET SHOTLIST: (FIRST RUN 1330 NEWS UPDATE - 8 FEBRUARY 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY ++NIGHT SHOTS++ 1. Crowd outside mid-town bar 2. Fans watching game and cheering 3. Fans cheering on their team The Saints 4. SOUNDBITE: (English) vox pop, Jason Barry, fan of Saints football team: "My wife's at the Super Bowl in Miami, and I choose to come down here because this is where I feel I need to be. This is where I need to express myself. Down here, in New Orleans. It's the only place to be." 5. Back door of bar with game on television 6. SOUNDBITE: (English) vox pop, Shawn Haswell, fan of Saints football team: "A new era for the city of New Orleans. We're still recovering, but I think this win would be just a boost in everybody's confidence in the future of New Orleans and just, I mean this will be a great feeling." 7. Bourbon Street sign 8. Crowd spilling out of Bourbon Street bar - pan to crowd in street 9. Various, crowd in street cheering Saints 10. Crowd chanting "who dat, who dat, who dat going to beat the Saints?" 11. Women on pick up truck 12. Three women on convertible 13. Wide shot, Canal Street in New Orleans (FIRST RUN 0530 NEWS UPDATE - 8 FEBRUARY 2010) ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET ++NIGHT SHOTS++ ++QUALITY AS INCOMING++ 14. Top shot of crowd in Bourbon Street, in historic French Quarter 15. Crowd celebrating victory of New Orleans Saints in the Super Bowl, one fan holding up placard reading (English): "Hell is Frozen" 16. Various of Saints fans celebrating in the street 17. Mid of musicians in crowd 18. More of fans celebrating 19. Various of brass band leading people in the street 20. Wide pan of fans celebrating in the street STORYLINE: Fans of American football team, the New Orleans Saints, celebrated through the night in New Orleans on Sunday after the team beat the odds to defeat the Indianapolis Colts in the US Super Bowl tournament. Saints fans hugged and kissed, as a party erupted onto the streets of New Orleans' historic French Quarter. One woman described the win as "a new era for the city of New Orleans" following the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005. One fan held up a placard with the words "Hell is Frozen", referring to the pundits who said their home team would never win the National Football League championship until "hell freezes over." The Saints beat the Colts 31-17, coming from behind to win their first ever Super Bowl trophy and cement a remarkable turnaround. Victory wasn't sealed until minutes before full time with a 74-yard (metre) sprint for a touch-down score. The annual game is the most watched sports event in the United States, with 30 second TV advertising spots during the match costing more than two (m) million US dollars. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1358EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: US Shuttle 2 Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:US Shuttle 2- WRAP Endeavour shuttle launch, NASA briefing LENGTH: 03:23 FIRST RUN: 1230 RESTRICTIONS: AP Clients Only TYPE: English/Natsound SOURCE: NASA TV STORY NUMBER: 636263 DATELINE: Cape Canaveral - 8 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 03:23 NASA TV - AP CLIENTS ONLY SHOTLIST (FIRST RUN 1030 ME EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 08 FEBRUARY 2010) +++NIGHT SHOTS+++ 1. Various of space shuttle 'Endeavour' on launch pad before launch 2. SOUNDBITE (English) Mike Leinbach, Enterprise Launch Director: (sitting on far right) "Looks like the weather came together tonight. Vehicle's is in great shape, so it's time to go fly. Wish you good luck, God speed, and we'll see you back here in about two weeks." 3. Shuttle on launch pad 4. Control room, UPSOUND: (English) George Zamka, Enterprise Commander "We'll see you in a couple of weeks. It's time to go fly." 5. SOUNDBITE (English) Mike Leinbach, Enterprise Launch Director: (sitting on right) "I'll do that, have a great ride. INAUDIBLE, you're clear to launch Endeavour." 6. Various of shuttle on launch pad getting prepared for launch, UPSOUND: (English) NASA commentary, control room exchange 7. Various of shuttle during countdown, preparations, lifting off into the sky, UPSOUND: (English) NASA commentary - countdown to lift-off 8. Various of shuttle blasting up into sky, UPSOUND: (English) NASA commentary on progress of flight (FIRST RUN 1230 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 08 FEBRUARY 2010) 9. Wide of NASA briefing 10. SOUNDBITE (English) Mike Leinbach, Enterprise Launch Director: "It was just a terrific countdown. The team was very energised going into this count, a little disappointed last night with the weather that got us, but we fought the weather last night and it was just not the right time to launch yesterday, so we stood down, got into it today and it really rewarded everybody extremely well." (FIRST RUN 1030 ME EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 08 FEBRUARY 2010) 11. Close of booster separating from shuttle, filmed by camera attached to it STORYLINE The space shuttle Endeavour finally took off early on Monday morning from Cape Canaveral in Florida, bound for the International Space Station, after delays caused by the weather. Endeavour was rocketing towards the space station on one of the shuttle program's last scheduled missions, due to arrive early on Wednesday. The pre-dawn launch with six crew was the last one in darkness if the rest of the shuttle schedule holds. Only four more shuttle flights are left. Enterprise Commander George Zamka and his crew will deliver and install Tranquility, a new room that will eventually house life support equipment, exercise machines and a toilet, as well as a seven-windowed dome. The lookout has the biggest window ever sent into space, a circle 31 inches (79 centimetres) across. Both the new room and dome - together exceeding 400 (m) million US dollars - were supplied by the European Space Agency. Three spacewalks are planned during Endeavour's flight to hook up the new station compartments, beginning on Thursday. The shuttle crew - five men and one woman, all Americans - will team up with the station residents to get the job done. Aboard the station are two Americans, two Russians and one Japanese. The weather cleared up for the launch, after Sunday morning's attempt was thwarted by thick, low clouds that returned and almost caused another delay. "Looks like the weather came together tonight," launch director Mike Leinbach told the astronauts before liftoff. "It's time to go fly." "We'll see you in a couple weeks," replied Zamka. The 13-day shuttle mission comes at one of the most agonising times for NASA. A week ago, the space agency was told that the government would not finance the back-to-the-moon Constellation program and its Ares rockets. But the space station was saved, and President Barack Obama's budget will keep the outpost flying until at least 2020, a major extension. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1401EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM ------------------- AP-APTN-1830: +US Snow 2 Monday, 8 February 2010 STORY:+US Snow 2- WRAP Washington digs out of snow; ADDS clear up, more LENGTH: 03:05 FIRST RUN: 1830 RESTRICTIONS: Part No North America/Internet TYPE: English/Natsound SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/ABC STORY NUMBER: 636318 DATELINE: Washington - 08 Feb 2010 LENGTH: 03:05 ++CLIENT NOTE - AMENDMENT TO SOURCING/RESTRICTIONS - PART NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET++ AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY ABC - NO ACCESS N AMERICA/INTERNET SHOTLIST: ++NEW AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY (FIRST RUN 1830 AMERICAS PRIME NEWS - 8 FEBRUARY 2010) Washington, DC - 8 February 2010 1. Pull out from dome of US Capitol to big snow bank on Pennsylvania Avenue 2. Various, snow plough driving along Pennsylvania Avenue 3. Another snow plough pushing snow into a big snowbank 4. US Capitol behind pile of snow 5. SOUNDBITE: (English) John Lyle, spokesman, District Department of Transportation "They're working twelve hour shifts and they've been doing that since Friday and so it's really hard work. They're doing a great job and we just ask people to be patient and be appreciative of the work that they're doing." 6. Digger taking salt from salt depot and putting it in the back of a dumper truck ABC - NO ACCESS N AMERICA/INTERNET Washington, DC - 8 February 2010 7. Wide shot of Adrian Fenty at news conference 8. SOUNDBITE: (English) Adrian Fenty, Mayor, Washington, DC "We are gearing up at the same time that we're clearing all the snow from the weekend, we are gearing up for what is expected to be a five to ten inch snow tomorrow." AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - 8 February 2010 9. Wide shot of large tree down 10. Close shot of tree on top of snow-covered car, pull out to wide shot of construction crews cutting up tree 11. Man shaking snow off tree, pan over to see neighbours shovelling sidewalks (FIRST RUN 1430 ME EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 8 FEBRUARY 2010) 12. Cars driving on snowy street 13. SOUNDBITE: (English) vox pop, Joe Green, commuter: "The district didn't really handle this very well. They didn't clean any of the streets. I haven't seen any trucks on my street." 14. Underground station sign; snow in station exit and street 15. Close of underground escalator 16. SOUNDBITE: (English) Vox Pop (no name given), commuter "Basically, I live five blocks away. I do the subway underground, so I'm good." 17. Bus driving along snowy road 18. Commuters getting on escalator 19. People crossing snowy road 20. Workers clearing snow 21. SOUNDBITE: (English) vox pop, Ned Goodwin, commuter "I'm from New Hampshire so this is nothing. But obviously there's some damage so the city has to get itself back on its feet." 22. Commuter crossing snowy street 23. Wide of Union Station surrounded by snow 24. Commuters pulling suitcases in snow 25. SOUNDBITE: (English) vox pop, Pat Thigpen, commuter "Well, I'm a native New Yorker. We certainly know how to shovel snow and where to put it in New York City." 26. Man getting out of taxi with suitcase 27. Low shot of commuters at Union Station STORYLINE: The US mid-Atlantic region, including the capital Washington, DC, continued its massive snow clearing efforts on Monday after a weekend snowstorm dumped as much as three feet (90 cm) of snow on the area. Tens of thousands remained without power and many others were still stranded inside their homes. Schools were closed throughout the region and federal workers got the day off as snow clearing crews worked around the clock, hoping to clear all major streets and thoroughfares before Tuesday, when another storm is due to hit the area. "They're working twelve hour shifts and they've been doing that since Friday and so it's really hard work. They're doing a great job and we just ask people to be patient and be appreciative of the work that they're doing," said John Lyle, a spokesman with the District Department of Transportation. Hundreds of thousands of people across the region lost power during the storm, and utility companies warned it could be days before electricity is restored to everyone. Washington, DC Mayor Adrian Fenty said work crews are doing all they can to clean up after the last blizzard and at the same time, prepare for the next one. Current predictions are for the DC area to get another five to ten inches of snow Tuesday afternoon into Wednesday. "We are gearing up at the same time that we're clearing all the snow from the weekend, we are gearing up for what is expected to be a five to ten inch snow tomorrow", Fenty said. Forecasters said for some areas north of the nation's capital - central and northern Maryland, northern Delaware and parts of New Jersey and Pennsylvania - residents might see another foot of snow during this next weather system. On Monday, federal agencies that employ 230-thousand people in the Washington area were closed, as were many local governments, businesses and school districts across the region. In the north, around 200-thousand students in Philadelphia's public and Roman Catholic schools got a snow day. However, others had to get to work with limited train and bus service. Some found the commute in Washington DC fairly easy but others were critical of the area's ability to clear off the roads. "The District didn't handle this very well," complained commuter Joe Green. "They didn't clean any of the streets. I haven't seen any trucks on my street." Another commuter took the opportunity to extol the virtues of her home city. "Well, I'm a native New Yorker. We certainly know how to shovel snow and where to put it in New York city", said Pat Thigpen. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 02-08-10 1512EST ------------------- END -- OF -- ITEM -------------------
+US Russia 2
AP-APTN-1830: +US Russia 2 Tuesday, 29 June 2010 STORY:+US Russia 2- WRAP Stills of alleged spy ADDS comment from fmr FBI member, spy museum LENGTH: 03:22 FIRST RUN: 1830 RESTRICTIONS: See Script TYPE: English/Nat SOURCE: AP TELEVISION/ABC/AP Photos STORY NUMBER: 649912 DATELINE: Various - 28/29 June 2010/Recent LENGTH: 03:22 AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET AP PHOTOS - NO ACCESS CANADA/ FOR BROADCAST USE ONLY - STRICTLY NO ACCESS ONLINE OR MOBILE ++COURT SKETCHES: COURTESY ELIZABETH WILLIAMS++ SHOTLIST: ++NEW (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - 29 June 2010 1. Wide of Peter Earnest, Former CIA Agent and Executive Director of the International Spy Museum, walking through museum 2. Zoom in to concealment devices on display in museum, including vodka bottle, packet of pills, packet of cigarettes 3. Earnest pointing out item with outside resembling a stone, tilt down, UPSOUND: (English) "A sort of concealment device that might be used to send messages or money or diamonds or gold or something to an agent." 4. SOUNDBITE (English) Peter Earnest, Former CIA Agent and Executive Director of the International Spy Museum: "It's almost as if they are collecting gossip, they are trying to meet people who are in think tanks, perhaps in government and talking about different things. You can talk to any American and they'll be happy to talk to you about, you know, Guantanamo or what happened to General McChrystal and so forth, and if that's all they are gathering it seems like an awful lot of effort and money to not get very much." (FIRST RUN 1630 EUROPE PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) AP PHOTOS - NO ACCESS CANADA/ FOR BROADCAST USE ONLY - STRICTLY NO ACCESS ONLINE OR MOBILE Unknown location, date 5. STILL image taken from a Facebook page showing a woman journalists have identified as Anna Chapman, who, along with 10 others, was arrested in the US on charges of conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government without notifying the US attorney general 6. STILL different image of woman journalists have identified as Chapman, taken from a Facebook page (FIRST RUN 0030 NEWS UPDATE - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY New York, New York - 28 June 2010 7. Various of courthouse (FIRST RUN 0030 NEWS UPDATE - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY/ COURTESY ELIZABETH WILLIAMS New York, New York - 28 June 2010 8. Court Artist Sketch: pan from left to right of suspects: Anna Chapman, Vicky Pelaez, "Richard Murphy," "Cynthia Murphy," "Juan Lazaro" 9. Court Artist Sketch of "Juan Lazaro" 10. Court Artist Sketch of Anna Chapman and Vicky Pelaez ++NEW (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - 29 June 2010 11. SOUNDBITE (English) Peter Earnest, Former CIA Agent and Executive Director of the International Spy Museum: "Some of them were involved in money laundering; getting money, transferring it and so forth. That exposes them to 20 years, now this is a little bit like going after the mafia, and getting them under tax laws right? You're really, they're gangsters. You're trying to get them because they are committing lots of crimes, but you go after them using the tax laws. Wrapping up these people, who are clearly here to commit espionage, to spy using all of the trade craft, the methodology of spying, but we are going to get them on money laundering, and not declaring themselves, it's sort of a lesser charge." (FIRST RUN 0030 NEWS UPDATE - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Alexandria, Virginia - 28 June 2010 12. Wide tilt up of courthouse 13. Various of exterior of courthouse ++NEW (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY Washington, DC - 29 June 2010 13. SOUNDBITE (English) Peter Earnest, Former CIA Agent and Executive Director of the International Spy Museum: "Rolling in and wrapping up this network, right after Medvedev has visited, you ask yourself, 'are we sending a message?' Are we saying, 'look we know all about this, let's not do this anymore, or don't you do this anymore.' I think it is interesting that this time was chosen to wrap up this network." (FIRST RUN 0030 NEWS UPDATE - 29 JUNE 2010) ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET Arlington, Virginia - 24 June 2010 14. Various of US President Barack Obama having a cheeseburger with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev ++NEW (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) AP TELEVISION - AP CLIENTS ONLY New York, New York - 29 June 2010 15. SOUNDBITE: (English) Jack Cloonan, Former FBI Agent: "The response from the Russian Federation, as you can expect, has been very muted at this point. In fact, I think they are saying that there's a lot of imprecise details, which is really code for they got caught with their pants down. And how we will use this, bilaterally speaking, is really intriguing to me." ++NEW (FIRST RUN 1830 NORTH AMERICA PRIME NEWS - 29 JUNE 2010) ABC - NO ACCESS NORTH AMERICA/INTERNET Arlington, Virginia - 24 June 2010 16. Medvedev and Obama leaving restaurant STORYLINE The White House said on Tuesday the arrests of 11 people in an alleged Russian spy ring will not affect the relationship between the United States and Russia, as Russia's Foreign Ministry acknowledged that some of the suspects were Russian citizens but said they did nothing to hurt US interests. The FBI announced the arrests of 10 suspects on Monday, and an 11th person allegedly involved in the Russian spy ring was arrested on Tuesday in Cyprus. The 11th suspect, using the name Christopher Metsos and purporting to be a Canadian citizen, was arrested at the Larnaca airport in Cyprus while trying to fly to Budapest, Hungary, police in the Mediterranean island nation said. He was later released on bail. Metsos, 54, was among those named in documents on Monday in federal court in Manhattan. Authorities in Cyprus said he will remain there for one month until extradition proceedings begin. Assistant US Attorney Michael Farbiarz on Monday called the allegations against the other 10 people, living in the Northeast, "the tip of the iceberg" of a conspiracy of Russia's intelligence service, the SVR, to collect inside US information. Each of the 10 was charged with conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government without notifying the US attorney general, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison upon conviction. Two criminal complaints outlining the charges were filed in US District Court in New York. Most of the suspects were accused of using fake names and claims of US citizenship while really being Russian. It was unclear how and where they were recruited, but court papers say the operation goes back as far as the 1990's and many of the suspects were tracked for years. The timing of the arrests was notable, given the efforts by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev to reset US-Russia relations. The two leaders met last week at the White House after Medvedev visited high-tech firms in California's Silicon Valley, and both attended the G-8 and G-20 meetings over the weekend in Canada. Intelligence on Obama's foreign policy, particularly toward Russia, appears to have been a top priority for the Russian agents, prosecutors said. Intercepted messages showed they were asked to learn about a wide range of topics, including nuclear weapons, US arms control positions, Iran, White House rumors, CIA leadership turnover, the last presidential election, Congress and the political parties, prosecutors said. The court papers allege some of the ring's members lived as husband and wife; used invisible ink, coded radio transmissions and encrypted data; and employed Hollywood methods like swapping bags in passing at a train station. In Washington, Peter Earnest, Executive Director of the International Spy Museum and a former CIA Agent says the case was unusual in that the suspects were using espionage techniques but may not have been gathering very valuable intelligence. "It seems like an awful lot of effort and money to not get very much," Earnest said. He went on to say that the timing of the arrests was interesting following Medvedev's visit to Washington, adding that it could be designed to send a message to Russia. Jack Cloonan, a former FBI agent living in New York, said he was "intrigued" to see how the United States would use this case in its bilateral relations with Russia. Russian broadcaster NTV television on Tuesday identified two of the defendants as Russian, claiming Mikhail Semenko had moved to the US in 2008 and Anna Chapman, said to have an English husband, moved to the US in February of this year. Photos of Chapman, taken from the social networking site Facebook, showed her to be a young woman believed to be in her late 20's. Semenko and Chapman were listed in a separate complaint and said to have used their real names. In spring 2009, court documents say, conspirators Richard and Cynthia Murphy, who lived in New Jersey, were asked for information about Obama's impending trip to Russia that summer, the US negotiating position on the START arms reduction treaty, Afghanistan and the approach Washington would take in dealing with Iran's suspect nuclear programme. They also were asked to send background on US officials travelling with Obama or involved in foreign policy, the documents say. The Murphys lived as husband and wife in suburban New Jersey, first Hoboken, then Montclair, with Richard Murphy carrying a fake birth certificate saying he was born in Philadelphia, authorities said. Aside from the Murphys, three other defendants also appeared in federal court in Manhattan - Pelaez and Lazaro, who were arrested at their Yonkers, New York, residence, and Chapman, arrested in Manhattan on Sunday. Pelaez was a reporter and editor for a prominent Spanish-language newspaper videotaped by the FBI contacting a Russian official in 2000 in Latin America, prosecutors said. The Murphys, Lazaro, Pelaez and Chapman were held without bail but didn't enter a plea. Another hearing was set for Thursday. Two other defendants, Michael Zottoli and Patricia Mills, were arrested at their Arlington, Virginia, residence. Also arrested at an Arlington residence was Semenko. Zottoli, Mills and Semenko appeared before US Magistrate Theresa Buchanan on Monday in Alexandria, Virginia. The hearing was closed because the case had not yet been unsealed in New York. The three did not have attorneys at the hearing, a US attorney spokesman said. Two defendants, Donald Howard Heathfield and Tracey Lee Ann Foley, were arrested at their Cambridge, Massachussets, residence on Sunday and appeared briefly in Boston federal court Monday. A detention hearing was set for Thursday. Clients are reminded: (i) to check the terms of their licence agreements for use of content outside news programming and that further advice and assistance can be obtained from the AP Archive on: Tel +44 (0) 20 7482 7482 Email: infoaparchive.com (ii) they should check with the applicable collecting society in their Territory regarding the clearance of any sound recording or performance included within the AP Television News service (iii) they have editorial responsibility for the use of all and any content included within the AP Television News service and for libel, privacy, compliance and third party rights applicable to their Territory. APTN APEX 06-29-10 1628EDT
POPE FRANCIS PLANE PRESSER (HD)
Pope plane presser - Distribution will be via CBS Washington. Shortly after takeoff, Pope Francis came to the back of the plane and answered 12 questions in Spanish and Italian, spending about an hour with the journalists. After the presser ended, he stayed for some words of farewell for Alberto Gasparri, who served 37 years at the Vatican, organizing papal trips for three pontiffs. Highlights: 1.On Donald Trump: "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not of building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt." 2.Asked whether church would consider it permissible to use contraceptives to prevent transmission of Zeka, Francis said that in some cases the "lesser of two evils" can be applied. He used the example of Paul VI, who allowed nuns in Africa to use birth control to prevent offspring from rape. Abortion, on the other hand, "is a crime, an absolute evil," whereas birth control is not an absolute evil. 3. Asked about reports that JPII had a romantic yet chaste relationship with a woman, said it was known that JPII had this friendship, and that "a man who does not know how to have a relationship of friendship with a woman.is a man who is missing something." "But the pope is a man. The pope needs the input of women, too. And the pope, too, has a heart that can have a healthy, holy friendship with a woman." Cited examples of saint-friends -- Francis and Clare, Teresa and John of the Cross. 4.Communion for the divorced and remarried: He said that wounded families, and those that have remarried should be integrated into the life of the church. However, when asked if integration meant communion, he said, "This is the last thing. Integrate in the Church doesn't mean having communion. Work towards integration, all doors are open, but we cannot say, ''from here on they can have communion. This would be an injury also to marriage, to the couple. It wouldn't make them do this path of integration." 5..Pedophilia: Pope said it was a "monstrosity" that "destroys" children. Bishops who move pedophile priests from parish to parish were inconscientious and should resign. Thanks Pope Benedict for working hard to rid the church of this filth. "But I thank God because the pot was uncovered, and we have to continue on this path. We need be aware that it's a monstrosity, because a priest is consecrated to lead a child to God and it's there that he eats him in a "diabolical sacrifice." 6. Russia: hinted he may go to Russia. When asked whether Patriarch Kirill had invited him to Russia and whether he was planning to go, Francis said he would prefer not to talk about that, and that he and the Patriarch had a 2 hour private talk and neither would release details beyond what was made public in the document issued at the end. He said that after that talk, both he and Kirill were very happy. 7. 43 missing students: When asked why he didn't meet with the parents of the 43 missing students, Francis said that an attempt was made, but there was infighting going on that made a meeting difficult, plus there are too many victims of crime groups, which made it impossible to meet with them individually. He opted to invite all victims of crime to the mass in Juarez. TRANSCRIPT OF PRESSER, NOT OFFICIAL QUESTION 1 - MISSING STUDENTS Q: Holy Father, thousands go missing in Mexico; but the case of the 43 missing students from Ayotzinapa is emblematic. I'd like to ask you why you didn't meet with the family members and also, please leave a message for the thousands of people who have disappeared. POPE: If you read the messages continuously.the killings, the death or the life taken, by the narco trafficking gangs and human smugglers. That's one of the problems that I talked about, like one of the wounds that Mexico suffers. An attempt was made to meet these groups; but they had some infighting going on. I decided that I would see all of them at the mass in Juarez or at another mass. It was practically impossible to meet everyone and they had some infighting going on. It's a situation that's difficult to understand, especially for me because I'm a foreigner, right? The Mexican society is a victim of all the crimes of "limpiar gente"???. I talked about it in every speech I could. It's a great pain that I'm taking with me, because this country doesn't deserve this drama. QUESTION 2 - PEDOPHILIA Q: Pedophilia in Mexico has very dangerous roots, very hurtful. The Maciel case left a strong inheritance, especially in the victims, who still feel unprotected. Some of them are still very religious, some priests. Did you at any moment consider meeting with the victims? What do you think about moving priests around when cases of pedophilia are detected? POPE; First, a bishop who changes a priest of parish when a case of pedophilia is an inconscientious man and the best thing he can do is to present his resignation. Is that clear? Secondly, The Maciel case - here I allow myself to honor the man who fought in moments when he had no strength to impose himself, until he managed to impose himself. Ratzinger. Cardinal Ratzinger deserves an applause. He's a man who had all the documentation. He was perfect in the doctrine of the faith. He had everything in his hands, conducting all the investigations, and went on, went on, went on, until he couldn't do more in the execution. But if you remember, 10 days before the death of John Paul II, in that Via Crucis of Holy Friday, he said the church needed to clean the filth (porquerias) of the church, the garbage. He wasn't naïve during the Mass Pro-Eligendo Pontefice, he knew that he was a candidate, and he crafted his answer. (maquillar su fortuna). He was the brave one who helped so many open this door. I want to remember him because sometimes we forget about this hidden works that were the base (cimientos) to uncover the pot. Third, We're doing plenty. With the Cardinal Secretary of State [Pietro Parolin], and with the group of nine cardinal advisors, after listening, I decided to name a third adjunct secretary for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to take care only of these cases, because the congregation is overloaded with cases. An appeals tribunal was constituted, headed by Monsignor Sicluna, which deals with second degree cases. When resources are available, because the priority is the "feria quarta," we call it, which gathers on Wednesday. When resources are available it returns to the first degree and that is not fair. The second legal recourse, a legal defense team; but we must hurry because we're behind with the cases, because new cases come forward. The commission for the protection of minors is also working very well. It's not strictly closed to [or exclusively devoted] cases of pedophilia, but the protection of minors. I spent a whole morning with six of them, two German, two British and two Irish, abused, victims. And I also met with victims in Philadelphia (needed to have someone give him the city). Age doesn't come alone! So we're working. But I thank God because the pot was uncovered, and we have to continue on this path. We need be aware that it's a monstrosity, because a priest is consecrated to lead a child to God and it's there that he eats him in a "diabolical sacrifice." (sacrificio diabolico) He destroys him. QUESTION 3 - TRUMP Q: Good evening your Holiness. Today you spoke a lot and eloquently about immigrants. On the other side of the border there is a tough electoral campaign. One of the candidates for the White House, republican Donald Trump, said in a recent interview that you are a politician, and even said that perhaps you are also a pawn of the Mexican government in its immigration policy. He has said that, if elected, he would like to build 2500 km of wall along the frontier. He wants to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, thus separating families. I would like to ask what you think of these accusations, and whether an American Catholic can vote for this sort of person. POPE: Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as 'animal politicus'. So at least I am a human person. As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don't know. I'll leave that up to your judgement and that of the people. And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt." QUESTION 4 - KIRILL Q: The meeting with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill and the signing of the joint declaration was greeted by the entire world as an historic step. But now today in the Ukraine, Greek Catholics feel betrayed. They speak of a political document that supports Russian politics. In the field, the war of words has reignited. Do you think you'll be able to go to Moscow? Were you invited by the patriarch? Or, (will you) go to Crete to greet the Pan-Orthodox Council in the Spring? POPE: I'll begin with the end. I will be present. spiritually. And with a message. I would like to go greet them there at the pan-orthodox synod. They are brothers but I must respect them. But, I know that they want to invite Catholic observers and this is a good bridge, but behind the Catholic observers I will be praying with my best wishes that the Orthodox move ahead because they are brothers and their bishops are bishops like us. Then, Patriarch Kirill, my brother. We kissed each other, embraced, and then a conversation for an hour (Fr Lombardi corrects). two hours. Old age doesn't come on its own. (laughs) Two hours where we spoke as brothers, sincerely and no one knows what was spoken about, only what we said at the end publicly about how we felt as we spoke. Secondly, that statement, that declaration about Ukraine. When I read this, I was a little bit worried because it was Sviatoslav Schevchuk who said that the Ukrainian people, some Ukrainians, also many Ukrainians felt disappointed, betrayed. I know Sviatoslav very well. In Buenos Aires, we worked together for 4 years. When he was elected - at 42 years old, eh, good man - he was elected major archbishop. He came back to Buenos Aires to get his things. He came to me and he gave me an icon - little like this - of Our Lady of Tenderness. And he told me, 'This has accompanied me my entire life. I'll leave it to you who accompanied me over the last four years. It's one of the few things I had brought from Buenos Aires and I keep it on my desk. That is, he's a man whom I respect and also have familiarity. We use the "tu" (familiar) form with each other, and so on. So, for this it seemed strange to me and I remembered something I said here to you: to understand a piece of news, a statement, you need to seek the hermeneutic of everything. But, when you said this, it was said in a statement from January 14th, last February, last Sunday. an interview made by brother.. I don't remember . a father, a Ukrainian priest, in Ukraine, it was conducted and it was published. That news, the interview is one page, two, a little bit more, give or take. That interview is on the last page, a little like this. I read the interview and I'll say this: Schevchuk, in the dogmatic part declares himself to be a son of the Church and in communion with the bishop of Rome and the Church. He speaks of the Pope and his closeness of the Pope and of himself, his faith, and also of the Orthodox people there. The dogmatic part, there's no difficulty. He's Orthodox, in the good sense of the word, that is in Catholic doctrine, no. And then, as in an interview like this one, everyone has the right to say his things and this wasn't done on the meeting, because the meeting, it was a good thing and we have to move forward. This, he didn't do on the meeting, the encounter was a good thing and we must move forward. This, the second chapter, the personal ideas that a person has. For example, this, what I said about the bishops who move pedophile priests, the best thing they can do is resign. This isn't a dogmatic thing, but this is what I think. So, he has his personal ideas. They're for dialoguing and he has a right to have them. Thirdly. ah, all of what he's speaking about is in the document, that's the issue. On the fact of the meeting: the Lord chose to move it ahead, the embrace and all is well. The document. It's a debatable document and there's also another addition. In Ukraine, it's a moment of war, of suffering, with so many interpretations. I have named the Ukrainian people, asking for prayers, closeness, so many times both in the Angelus and in the Wednesday audience. There is this closeness. But the historical fact of a war, experienced as . i don't know if . well, everyone has their own idea of this war, who started it, what to do and it's evident that this is an historical issue, but also a personal, historical, existential issue of that country and it speaks of the suffering. And, there I insert this paragraph. You can understand the faithful, because Stanislav told me that so many faithful have written to me saying that they are deeply disappointed and betrayed by Rome. You can understand that a people in this situation would feel this, no. The final document but it is a jotting down of some things. Pardon, it's a matter of opinion on this issue of Ukraine. But there, it says to make the war stop, that they should come to an agreement, Also, I personally said that the Minsk accords should move forward and not be eliminated. "With the elbows what wasn't written with the hands." ("Con il gomito quello che non e scritto con le mani, eh. ") The Church of Rome, the Pope has always said, 'Seek peace.' I also received both presidents. Equality, no. And so for this when he says that he's heard this from his people, I understand it. I understand it. But, that's not the news. The news is everything. If you read the entire interview, you'll see that there are serious dogmatic things that remain, there's a desire for unity, to move ahead in the ecumenical - and he's an ecumenical man. There are a few opinions. He wrote to me when he found out about the trip, the encounter . but, as a brother, giving his opinion as a brother. I don't mind the document how it is. I don't dislike it in the sense that we need to respect the things that everyone has the freedom to think and in (the context of) this situation that is so difficult. From Rome, now the nuncio is on the border where they're fighting, helping soldiers and the wounded. The Church of Rome has sent so much help there. it's always peace, agreements. We must respect the Minsk accords and so on. This is the entirety. But, don't get scared by that phrase. And this is a lesson that a piece of news must be interpreted with the hermeneutic of everything and not just a part. (Follow up from journalist - did the Patriarch invite you to come to Moscow sometime?) Patriarch Kirill. I would prefer - because if I say one thing, I have to say another and another and another - I would prefer that what we spoke about, us, alone will remain only what we said in public. This is a fact. And if I say this, then I'll have to say another and another. no! The things I said in public, the things he said in public. This is what can be said about the private conversation. To say it, it wouldn't be private. But, I tell you, I walked out of it happy, and he did too. QUESTION 5 - SAME SEX UNIONS Q: Holy Father, my question is about the family, a subject which you addressed during this trip. The Italian parliament is discussing a law on civil unions, a subject that is provoking strong political clashes but also a strong debate in society and among Catholics. In particular, I would like to know your thoughts on the subject of adoption by civil unions and therefore on the rights of babies and of children in general. POPE: First of all, I don't know how things stand in the thinking of the Italian parliament. The pope doesn't get mixed up in Italian politics. At my first meeting with the (Italian) bishops in May 2013, one of the three things I said was: with the Italian government you're on your own. Because the pope is for everybody and he can't insert himself in the specific internal politics of a country. This is not the role of the pope, right? And what I think is what the church thinks and has said so often, because this is not the first country to have this experience, there are so many. I think what the church has always said about this. QUESTION 6 - ZIKA Q: Holy Father, in the past weeks there's been a lot of concern in many Latin American countries, and also in Europe, regarding the Zika virus. Pregnant women are the most at risk. Some authorities have proposed abortion, or else avoiding pregnancy. As regards avoiding pregnancy, on this issue, can the Church take into consideration the concept of "the lesser of two evils?" POPE: Abortion is not the lesser of two evils. It is a crime. It is to kill someone in order to save another. This is what the Mafia does. It is a crime, an absolute evil. On the lesser evil, avoiding pregnancy, we are speaking in terms of the conflict between the fifth and sixth commandment. The great Paul VI, in a difficult situation in Africa, permitted nuns to use contraceptives in cases of rape (violenza). Don't confuse the evil of avoiding pregnancy by itself, with abortion. Abortion is not a theological problem, it is a human problem, it is a medical problem. You kill one person to save another, in the best case scenario. Or to live comfortably, no? How many Hippocratic oaths must doctors take? It is an evil in and of itself, but it is not a religious evil at its root, no, it's a human evil. Then obviously, as with every human evil, each killing is condemned. On the other hand, avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil. In certain cases, as in this one, such as the one I mentioned of Blessed Paul VI, it was clear. I would also urge doctors to do their utmost to find vaccines against these mosquitoes that carry this disease. This needs to be worked on. QUESTION 7 - EUROPE Q: You will soon receive the Charlemagne Prize, and that's the main European one. What do you say to Europe which now seems to be falling to pieces, first with the crisis of the euro and now that of the refugees. Maybe you have a word for us in this situation of European crisis? POPE: First, the Charlemagne Prize. I had the habit of not accepting prizes or doctorates, not out of humility, but because I don't like them. Maybe a little crazy, but it's good to have it, but I just don't like them. But in this case, I don't say (I was) forced, but convinced by the holy theological headstrongness of Cardinal Kasper, because he was chosen, elected by Achen to convince me. I said yes, but in the Vatican. And I said I offer it for Europe, as a co-decoration for Europe, a prize so that Europe may do what I desired at Strasburg, that it may not (anymore) be grandmother Europe but mother Europe. Secondly, reading the news the other day about this crisis and so on - I read little, I just glance through one newspaper. I won't say the name so as not to create jealousy, but it is known! Just 15 minutes. Then I get information from the Secretariat of State and so on, and there was one word that I liked, and I don't know if they will approve it or not, but it was "the re-foundation of the European Union." I thought of the great fathers, but today where is there a Schuman, an Adenauer, these great ones who after the war founded the European Union. I like that idea of the re-foundation of the European Union, maybe it can be done, because Europe - I do not say is unique, but it has a force, a culture, a history that cannot be wasted, and we must do everything so that the European Union has the strength, the inspiration to make it go on. That's what I think. QUESTION 8 - COMMUNION FOR THE DIVORCED Q: Some wonder, how a Church that claims to be merciful, ask how can the church forgive a murderer easier than someone who has divorced and remarried? POPE: I like this question. Two synods spoke on the family. And the Pope has spoken all year in the Wednesday Catechisms. The question is true, you put it very well. In the post-synod document that will be published, perhaps before Easter - it picks up -- in one of the chapters, it has many - the conflicts, wounded families. It is one of the concerns. As another is the preparation for marriage. If you think to become a priest there are 8 years of study and preparation, and then if after a while you want to leave, you can ask for a dispensation and you leave, and everything is ok. Instead for a sacrament, (marriage), which is for your whole life, there are 3-4 talks. Preparation for marriage is very important. It is something Church doesn't value -at least in my country, Latina America, not valued much. Some years ago in my native country there was a custom, called ''accasiamento de apuro (SP?)'' marriage in haste because a baby is about to arrive, and to cover socially, the honour of the family. There, they weren't free. Many times these marriages are void. As a bishop I forbade my priests to do this. When there was something like this, I would say, let the baby come, let them continue as fiancées, and when they feel like they can continue for the rest of their lives, then they could go ahead (and get married). Another very interesting chapter is the education of children - the victims of problems of the family are children. Even of problems that neither husband or wife want (have a say in). For example, the demands of a job. When the dad doesn't have free time to speak to his children, when the mother doesn't have time to speak with her children. When I confess a couple, I ask how may children do you have,? Some are worried I will ask why don't you have more? I'll ask a second question. ''Do you play with your children?" The majority say, ''but father, I have no time. I work all day''. Children are victims of a social problem that wounds the family. It is a problem. I like your question. They have no time to play with the children the children are victims of this social problem. Another interesting thing. In the meeting with families in Tuxtla, there was a couple, married again in second union (after divorcing). Integrated in the church. The key phrase used by the synod, which I shall take up again, is ''integrate'' into the life of the church the wounded families, those that have remarried etc. One mustn't forget the children in the middle. They are the first victims, both in the wounds, and in the conditions of poverty, of work, etc. (Q: can they take the Eucharist): POPE: This is the last thing. Integrate in the Church doesn't mean having communion. I know remarried Catholics who go to church, who go to church once or twice a year (and say) I want to join in Communion. As if joining in Communion were an award (honor). Work towards integration, all doors are open, but we cannot say, ''from here on they can have communion."" This would be an injury also to marriage, to the couple. It wouldn't make them do this path of integration. QUESTION 9 - JOHN PAUL II AND LADY FRIEND Q: POPE: I already knew about this friendship between St. John Paul II and this philosopher when I was in Buenos Aires. It was known. Her books were known. John Paul II was a restless man. Then I would also say that a man who does not know how to have a relationship of friendship with a woman -- I'm not talking about misogynists, those are sick, -- well, he's a man who is missing something. And in my own experience, including when I ask for advice, I would ask a collaborator, a friend, but I'd also like to hear the opinion of a woman because they have such wealth (ricchezza), they look at things in a different way. I like to say that women are those who form life in their wombs -- this is an observation I make. They have this charism (gift) of giving you things you can build with. A friendship with a woman is not a sin, it's a friendship. A romantic relationship (rapporto amoroso) with a woman who is not your wife, that is sin. Understand? But the pope is a man. The pope needs the input of women, too. And the pope, too, has a heart that can have a healthy, holy friendship with a woman. There are saint-friends -- Francis and Clare, Teresa and John of the Cross -- don't be frightened. But women are still not considered so well; we have not understood the good that a woman can do for the life of a priest and of the church in the sense of counsel, help, healthy friendship. Question 10: SAME SEX UNIONS Q: Holiness, good evening. I return back to the topic of the law that is being voted on in the Italian parliament. It is a law that in some ways is about other countries, because other countries have laws about unions among people of the same sex. There is a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith from 2003 that dedicates a lot of attention to this, and even more, dedicates a chapter to the position of Catholic parliamentarians in parliament before this question. It says expressly that Catholic parliamentarians must not vote for these laws. There is much confusion on this. I wanted to ask, first of all, is this document of 2003 still in effect? And what is the position a Catholic parliamentarian must take? And then another thing: (Something about a mosque in Cairo and an audience the pope wants with another pope?) Pope: For this, Msgr. NAME went to Cairo last week to meet the second to the Imam and to greet the Imam...." "I want to meet him. I know that he would like it. We are looking for the way, always through Cardinal Tauran because it is the path...." Italian parliament: "I do not remember that document well ... but a Catholic parliamentarian must vote according their well-formed conscience. I would say just this. I believe it is sufficient because -- I say well-formed because it is not the conscience of what seems to me. I remember when matrimony for persons of the same sex was voted on in Buenos Aires there were votes. And at the end, one said to advise the other: 'But do you have to declare, or no? 'Me neither. Let's go. But if we don't go there won't be a quorum.' "The other said: 'If we have a quorum we will give the vote to Kirchner.' The other said: 'I prefer Kirchner and not Bergoglio.'" "This is not a well formed conscience. On people of the same sex, I repeat what I said on the trip to Rio di Janeiro, in the Catechism of the Catholic church." QUESTION 11 - FUTURE TRIPS Q: We are thinking about future trips, about preparing out suitcases again. Holy Father, when are you going to go to Argentina where they have been waiting for you for a long time? When will you return to Latin America? Or in China? And quick comment, you spoke many times during this trip about dreaming - what do you dream about? And what is your nightmare? POPE: China. (laughs) To go there. I would love that. I would like to say something about the Mexican people. It is a population that has a wealth, such great wealth, a people that surprises. They have a culture, a culture that goes back millenniums. Do you know that today, in Mexico, today, they speak 65 languages, counting the indigenous languages, 65. It is a people of great faith. They have also suffered religious persecution. There are martyrs, I will canonize two, it is a population that you can't explain, you can't explain it because the word "people" is not a logical category, it is a mythical category. The Mexican people you cannot explain this wealth, this history, this joy, the capacity to celebrate (festa) within these tragedies that you have asked about. I can say another thing, that this unity, that this people has managed not to fail, not to end with so many wars, things, things that are happening now. There in the city of Juarez there was a pact of 12 hours of peace for my visit. After that they will continue to fight among themselves. No? Traffickers. But a people that still is together with all that, you can only explain with Guadalupe. And I invite you to seriously study the facts of Guadalupe. The Madonna is there. I cannot find another explanation. And it would be nice if you as journalists-there are some books that explain the painting what it is like, the significance, and that is how you can understand better this great and beautiful people. QUESTION 12 - GUADALUPE Q: Two things, I wanted to know what did you ask (the Madonna of ) Guadalupe? Because you were there a long time in the church praying to Guadalupe. And then something else: do you dream in Italian or Spanish? POPE: I'd say I dream in Esperanto. I don't know how to respond to that. Sometimes I remember some dreams in another language, but dreaming in languages, no. But images, yes, that is my psychology (the way I am made.) I dream only a bit with words, no? Q: And the first question, in front of Guadalupe? POPE: I asked for the world, for peace, for so many things. Poor thing, I "made her a head like this" (Italian expression, means he asked for a lot of things.) I asked pardon, I asked I asked that the church grows healthy. I asked for the Mexican people. And another thing I asked for a lot: for priests to be true priests, and nuns good nuns, and bishops good bishops. as this is what the Lord wants. I asked a lot of her, but after all, the things a child tells his mother are a bit secret.
POPE FRANCIS NEWS CONFERENCE - RESPONSE TO DONALD TRUMP
POPE FRANCIS HOLDS A NEWS CONFERENCE ABORD "SHEPARD 1" AFTER HIS TRIP TO MEXICO, WHILE HE IS ENROUTE BACK TO ROME 1.On Donald Trump: "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not of building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt." Shortly after takeoff, Pope Francis came to the back of the plane and answered 12 questions in Spanish and Italian, spending about an hour with the journalists. After the presser ended, he stayed for some words of farewell for Alberto Gasparri, who served 37 years at the Vatican, organizing papal trips for three pontiffs. Highlights: 1.On Donald Trump: "A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not of building bridges, is not Christian. This is not the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and I will give him the benefit of the doubt." 2.Asked whether church would consider it permissible to use contraceptives to prevent transmission of Zeka, Francis said that in some cases the "lesser of two evils" can be applied. He used the example of Paul VI, who allowed nuns in Africa to use birth control to prevent offspring from rape. Abortion, on the other hand, "is a crime, an absolute evil," whereas birth control is not an absolute evil. 3. Asked about reports that JPII had a romantic yet chaste relationship with a woman, said it was known that JPII had this friendship, and that "a man who does not know how to have a relationship of friendship with a woman.is a man who is missing something." "But the pope is a man. The pope needs the input of women, too. And the pope, too, has a heart that can have a healthy, holy friendship with a woman." Cited examples of saint-friends -- Francis and Clare, Teresa and John of the Cross. 4.Communion for the divorced and remarried: He said that wounded families, and those that have remarried should be integrated into the life of the church. However, when asked if integration meant communion, he said, "This is the last thing. Integrate in the Church doesn't mean having communion. Work towards integration, all doors are open, but we cannot say, ''from here on they can have communion. This would be an injury also to marriage, to the couple. It wouldn't make them do this path of integration." 5..Pedophilia: Pope said it was a "monstrosity" that "destroys" children. Bishops who move pedophile priests from parish to parish were inconscientious and should resign. Thanks Pope Benedict for working hard to rid the church of this filth. "But I thank God because the pot was uncovered, and we have to continue on this path. We need be aware that it's a monstrosity, because a priest is consecrated to lead a child to God and it's there that he eats him in a "diabolical sacrifice." 6. Russia: hinted he may go to Russia. When asked whether Patriarch Kirill had invited him to Russia and whether he was planning to go, Francis said he would prefer not to talk about that, and that he and the Patriarch had a 2 hour private talk and neither would release details beyond what was made public in the document issued at the end. He said that after that talk, both he and Kirill were very happy. 7. 43 missing students: When asked why he didn't meet with the parents of the 43 missing students, Francis said that an attempt was made, but there was infighting going on that made a meeting difficult, plus there are too many victims of crime groups, which made it impossible to meet with them individually. He opted to invite all victims of crime to the mass in Juarez. SOUNDBITES FROM PRESS CONFERENCE QUESTION 1 - MISSING STUDENTS Q: Holy Father, thousands go missing in Mexico; but the case of the 43 missing students from Ayotzinapa is emblematic. I'd like to ask you why you didn't meet with the family members and also, please leave a message for the thousands of people who have disappeared. POPE: If you read the messages continuously.the killings, the death or the life taken, by the narco trafficking gangs and human smugglers. That's one of the problems that I talked about, like one of the wounds that Mexico suffers. An attempt was made to meet these groups; but they had some infighting going on. I decided that I would see all of them at the mass in Juarez or at another mass. It was practically impossible to meet everyone and they had some infighting going on. It's a situation that's difficult to understand, especially for me because I'm a foreigner, right? The Mexican society is a victim of all the crimes of "limpiar gente"???. I talked about it in every speech I could. It's a great pain that I'm taking with me, because this country doesn't deserve this drama. QUESTION 2 - PEDOPHILIA Q: Pedophilia in Mexico has very dangerous roots, very hurtful. The Maciel case left a strong inheritance, especially in the victims, who still feel unprotected. Some of them are still very religious, some priests. Did you at any moment consider meeting with the victims? What do you think about moving priests around when cases of pedophilia are detected? POPE; First, a bishop who changes a priest of parish when a case of pedophilia is an inconscientious man and the best thing he can do is to present his resignation. Is that clear? Secondly, The Maciel case - here I allow myself to honor the man who fought in moments when he had no strength to impose himself, until he managed to impose himself. Ratzinger. Cardinal Ratzinger deserves an applause. He's a man who had all the documentation. He was perfect in the doctrine of the faith. He had everything in his hands, conducting all the investigations, and went on, went on, went on, until he couldn't do more in the execution. But if you remember, 10 days before the death of John Paul II, in that Via Crucis of Holy Friday, he said the church needed to clean the filth (porquerias) of the church, the garbage. He wasn't naïve during the Mass Pro-Eligendo Pontefice, he knew that he was a candidate, and he crafted his answer. (maquillar su fortuna). He was the brave one who helped so many open this door. I want to remember him because sometimes we forget about this hidden works that were the base (cimientos) to uncover the pot. Third, We're doing plenty. With the Cardinal Secretary of State [Pietro Parolin], and with the group of nine cardinal advisors, after listening, I decided to name a third adjunct secretary for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to take care only of these cases, because the congregation is overloaded with cases. An appeals tribunal was constituted, headed by Monsignor Sicluna, which deals with second degree cases. When resources are available, because the priority is the "feria quarta," we call it, which gathers on Wednesday. When resources are available it returns to the first degree and that is not fair. The second legal recourse, a legal defense team; but we must hurry because we're behind with the cases, because new cases come forward. The commission for the protection of minors is also working very well. It's not strictly closed to [or exclusively devoted] cases of pedophilia, but the protection of minors. I spent a whole morning with six of them, two German, two British and two Irish, abused, victims. And I also met with victims in Philadelphia (needed to have someone give him the city). Age doesn't come alone! So we're working. But I thank God because the pot was uncovered, and we have to continue on this path. We need be aware that it's a monstrosity, because a priest is consecrated to lead a child to God and it's there that he eats him in a "diabolical sacrifice." (sacrificio diabolico) He destroys him. QUESTION 3 - TRUMP Q: Good evening your Holiness. Today you spoke a lot and eloquently about immigrants. On the other side of the border there is a tough electoral campaign. One of the candidates for the White House, republican Donald Trump, said in a recent interview that you are a politician, and even said that perhaps you are also a pawn of the Mexican government in its immigration policy. He has said that, if elected, he would like to build 2500 km of wall along the frontier. He wants to deport 11 million illegal immigrants, thus separating families. I would like to ask what you think of these accusations, and whether an American Catholic can vote for this sort of person. POPE: Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as 'animal politicus'. So at least I am a human person. As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don't know. I'll leave that up to your judgement and that of the people. And then, a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. This is not in the gospel. As far as what you said about whether I would advise to vote or not to vote, I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt." QUESTION 4 - KIRILL Q: The meeting with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill and the signing of the joint declaration was greeted by the entire world as an historic step. But now today in the Ukraine, Greek Catholics feel betrayed. They speak of a political document that supports Russian politics. In the field, the war of words has reignited. Do you think you'll be able to go to Moscow? Were you invited by the patriarch? Or, (will you) go to Crete to greet the Pan-Orthodox Council in the Spring? POPE: I'll begin with the end. I will be present. spiritually. And with a message. I would like to go greet them there at the pan-orthodox synod. They are brothers but I must respect them. But, I know that they want to invite Catholic observers and this is a good bridge, but behind the Catholic observers I will be praying with my best wishes that the Orthodox move ahead because they are brothers and their bishops are bishops like us. Then, Patriarch Kirill, my brother. We kissed each other, embraced, and then a conversation for an hour (Fr Lombardi corrects). two hours. Old age doesn't come on its own. (laughs) Two hours where we spoke as brothers, sincerely and no one knows what was spoken about, only what we said at the end publicly about how we felt as we spoke. Secondly, that statement, that declaration about Ukraine. When I read this, I was a little bit worried because it was Sviatoslav Schevchuk who said that the Ukrainian people, some Ukrainians, also many Ukrainians felt disappointed, betrayed. I know Sviatoslav very well. In Buenos Aires, we worked together for 4 years. When he was elected - at 42 years old, eh, good man - he was elected major archbishop. He came back to Buenos Aires to get his things. He came to me and he gave me an icon - little like this - of Our Lady of Tenderness. And he told me, 'This has accompanied me my entire life. I'll leave it to you who accompanied me over the last four years. It's one of the few things I had brought from Buenos Aires and I keep it on my desk. That is, he's a man whom I respect and also have familiarity. We use the "tu" (familiar) form with each other, and so on. So, for this it seemed strange to me and I remembered something I said here to you: to understand a piece of news, a statement, you need to seek the hermeneutic of everything. But, when you said this, it was said in a statement from January 14th, last February, last Sunday. an interview made by brother.. I don't remember . a father, a Ukrainian priest, in Ukraine, it was conducted and it was published. That news, the interview is one page, two, a little bit more, give or take. That interview is on the last page, a little like this. I read the interview and I'll say this: Schevchuk, in the dogmatic part declares himself to be a son of the Church and in communion with the bishop of Rome and the Church. He speaks of the Pope and his closeness of the Pope and of himself, his faith, and also of the Orthodox people there. The dogmatic part, there's no difficulty. He's Orthodox, in the good sense of the word, that is in Catholic doctrine, no. And then, as in an interview like this one, everyone has the right to say his things and this wasn't done on the meeting, because the meeting, it was a good thing and we have to move forward. This, he didn't do on the meeting, the encounter was a good thing and we must move forward. This, the second chapter, the personal ideas that a person has. For example, this, what I said about the bishops who move pedophile priests, the best thing they can do is resign. This isn't a dogmatic thing, but this is what I think. So, he has his personal ideas. They're for dialoguing and he has a right to have them. Thirdly. ah, all of what he's speaking about is in the document, that's the issue. On the fact of the meeting: the Lord chose to move it ahead, the embrace and all is well. The document. It's a debatable document and there's also another addition. In Ukraine, it's a moment of war, of suffering, with so many interpretations. I have named the Ukrainian people, asking for prayers, closeness, so many times both in the Angelus and in the Wednesday audience. There is this closeness. But the historical fact of a war, experienced as . i don't know if . well, everyone has their own idea of this war, who started it, what to do and it's evident that this is an historical issue, but also a personal, historical, existential issue of that country and it speaks of the suffering. And, there I insert this paragraph. You can understand the faithful, because Stanislav told me that so many faithful have written to me saying that they are deeply disappointed and betrayed by Rome. You can understand that a people in this situation would feel this, no. The final document but it is a jotting down of some things. Pardon, it's a matter of opinion on this issue of Ukraine. But there, it says to make the war stop, that they should come to an agreement, Also, I personally said that the Minsk accords should move forward and not be eliminated. "With the elbows what wasn't written with the hands." ("Con il gomito quello che non e scritto con le mani, eh. ") The Church of Rome, the Pope has always said, 'Seek peace.' I also received both presidents. Equality, no. And so for this when he says that he's heard this from his people, I understand it. I understand it. But, that's not the news. The news is everything. If you read the entire interview, you'll see that there are serious dogmatic things that remain, there's a desire for unity, to move ahead in the ecumenical - and he's an ecumenical man. There are a few opinions. He wrote to me when he found out about the trip, the encounter . but, as a brother, giving his opinion as a brother. I don't mind the document how it is. I don't dislike it in the sense that we need to respect the things that everyone has the freedom to think and in (the context of) this situation that is so difficult. From Rome, now the nuncio is on the border where they're fighting, helping soldiers and the wounded. The Church of Rome has sent so much help there. it's always peace, agreements. We must respect the Minsk accords and so on. This is the entirety. But, don't get scared by that phrase. And this is a lesson that a piece of news must be interpreted with the hermeneutic of everything and not just a part. (Follow up from journalist - did the Patriarch invite you to come to Moscow sometime?) Patriarch Kirill. I would prefer - because if I say one thing, I have to say another and another and another - I would prefer that what we spoke about, us, alone will remain only what we said in public. This is a fact. And if I say this, then I'll have to say another and another. no! The things I said in public, the things he said in public. This is what can be said about the private conversation. To say it, it wouldn't be private. But, I tell you, I walked out of it happy, and he did too. QUESTION 5 - SAME SEX UNIONS Q: Holy Father, my question is about the family, a subject which you addressed during this trip. The Italian parliament is discussing a law on civil unions, a subject that is provoking strong political clashes but also a strong debate in society and among Catholics. In particular, I would like to know your thoughts on the subject of adoption by civil unions and therefore on the rights of babies and of children in general. POPE: First of all, I don't know how things stand in the thinking of the Italian parliament. The pope doesn't get mixed up in Italian politics. At my first meeting with the (Italian) bishops in May 2013, one of the three things I said was: with the Italian government you're on your own. Because the pope is for everybody and he can't insert himself in the specific internal politics of a country. This is not the role of the pope, right? And what I think is what the church thinks and has said so often, because this is not the first country to have this experience, there are so many. I think what the church has always said about this. QUESTION 6 - ZIKA Q: Holy Father, in the past weeks there's been a lot of concern in many Latin American countries, and also in Europe, regarding the Zika virus. Pregnant women are the most at risk. Some authorities have proposed abortion, or else avoiding pregnancy. As regards avoiding pregnancy, on this issue, can the Church take into consideration the concept of "the lesser of two evils?" POPE: Abortion is not the lesser of two evils. It is a crime. It is to kill someone in order to save another. This is what the Mafia does. It is a crime, an absolute evil. On the lesser evil, avoiding pregnancy, we are speaking in terms of the conflict between the fifth and sixth commandment. The great Paul VI, in a difficult situation in Africa, permitted nuns to use contraceptives in cases of rape (violenza). Don't confuse the evil of avoiding pregnancy by itself, with abortion. Abortion is not a theological problem, it is a human problem, it is a medical problem. You kill one person to save another, in the best case scenario. Or to live comfortably, no? How many Hippocratic oaths must doctors take? It is an evil in and of itself, but it is not a religious evil at its root, no, it's a human evil. Then obviously, as with every human evil, each killing is condemned. On the other hand, avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil. In certain cases, as in this one, such as the one I mentioned of Blessed Paul VI, it was clear. I would also urge doctors to do their utmost to find vaccines against these mosquitoes that carry this disease. This needs to be worked on. QUESTION 7 - EUROPE Q: You will soon receive the Charlemagne Prize, and that's the main European one. What do you say to Europe which now seems to be falling to pieces, first with the crisis of the euro and now that of the refugees. Maybe you have a word for us in this situation of European crisis? POPE: First, the Charlemagne Prize. I had the habit of not accepting prizes or doctorates, not out of humility, but because I don't like them. Maybe a little crazy, but it's good to have it, but I just don't like them. But in this case, I don't say (I was) forced, but convinced by the holy theological headstrongness of Cardinal Kasper, because he was chosen, elected by Achen to convince me. I said yes, but in the Vatican. And I said I offer it for Europe, as a co-decoration for Europe, a prize so that Europe may do what I desired at Strasburg, that it may not (anymore) be grandmother Europe but mother Europe. Secondly, reading the news the other day about this crisis and so on - I read little, I just glance through one newspaper. I won't say the name so as not to create jealousy, but it is known! Just 15 minutes. Then I get information from the Secretariat of State and so on, and there was one word that I liked, and I don't know if they will approve it or not, but it was "the re-foundation of the European Union." I thought of the great fathers, but today where is there a Schuman, an Adenauer, these great ones who after the war founded the European Union. I like that idea of the re-foundation of the European Union, maybe it can be done, because Europe - I do not say is unique, but it has a force, a culture, a history that cannot be wasted, and we must do everything so that the European Union has the strength, the inspiration to make it go on. That's what I think. QUESTION 8 - COMMUNION FOR THE DIVORCED Q: Some wonder, how a Church that claims to be merciful, ask how can the church forgive a murderer easier than someone who has divorced and remarried? POPE: I like this question. Two synods spoke on the family. And the Pope has spoken all year in the Wednesday Catechisms. The question is true, you put it very well. In the post-synod document that will be published, perhaps before Easter - it picks up -- in one of the chapters, it has many - the conflicts, wounded families. It is one of the concerns. As another is the preparation for marriage. If you think to become a priest there are 8 years of study and preparation, and then if after a while you want to leave, you can ask for a dispensation and you leave, and everything is ok. Instead for a sacrament, (marriage), which is for your whole life, there are 3-4 talks. Preparation for marriage is very important. It is something Church doesn't value -at least in my country, Latina America, not valued much. Some years ago in my native country there was a custom, called ''accasiamento de apuro (SP?)'' marriage in haste because a baby is about to arrive, and to cover socially, the honour of the family. There, they weren't free. Many times these marriages are void. As a bishop I forbade my priests to do this. When there was something like this, I would say, let the baby come, let them continue as fiancées, and when they feel like they can continue for the rest of their lives, then they could go ahead (and get married). Another very interesting chapter is the education of children - the victims of problems of the family are children. Even of problems that neither husband or wife want (have a say in). For example, the demands of a job. When the dad doesn't have free time to speak to his children, when the mother doesn't have time to speak with her children. When I confess a couple, I ask how may children do you have,? Some are worried I will ask why don't you have more? I'll ask a second question. ''Do you play with your children?" The majority say, ''but father, I have no time. I work all day''. Children are victims of a social problem that wounds the family. It is a problem. I like your question. They have no time to play with the children the children are victims of this social problem. Another interesting thing. In the meeting with families in Tuxtla, there was a couple, married again in second union (after divorcing). Integrated in the church. The key phrase used by the synod, which I shall take up again, is ''integrate'' into the life of the church the wounded families, those that have remarried etc. One mustn't forget the children in the middle. They are the first victims, both in the wounds, and in the conditions of poverty, of work, etc. (Q: can they take the Eucharist): POPE: This is the last thing. Integrate in the Church doesn't mean having communion. I know remarried Catholics who go to church, who go to church once or twice a year (and say) I want to join in Communion. As if joining in Communion were an award (honor). Work towards integration, all doors are open, but we cannot say, ''from here on they can have communion."" This would be an injury also to marriage, to the couple. It wouldn't make them do this path of integration. QUESTION 9 - JOHN PAUL II AND LADY FRIEND Q: POPE: I already knew about this friendship between St. John Paul II and this philosopher when I was in Buenos Aires. It was known. Her books were known. John Paul II was a restless man. Then I would also say that a man who does not know how to have a relationship of friendship with a woman -- I'm not talking about misogynists, those are sick, -- well, he's a man who is missing something. And in my own experience, including when I ask for advice, I would ask a collaborator, a friend, but I'd also like to hear the opinion of a woman because they have such wealth (ricchezza), they look at things in a different way. I like to say that women are those who form life in their wombs -- this is an observation I make. They have this charism (gift) of giving you things you can build with. A friendship with a woman is not a sin, it's a friendship. A romantic relationship (rapporto amoroso) with a woman who is not your wife, that is sin. Understand? But the pope is a man. The pope needs the input of women, too. And the pope, too, has a heart that can have a healthy, holy friendship with a woman. There are saint-friends -- Francis and Clare, Teresa and John of the Cross -- don't be frightened. But women are still not considered so well; we have not understood the good that a woman can do for the life of a priest and of the church in the sense of counsel, help, healthy friendship. Question 10: SAME SEX UNIONS Q: Holiness, good evening. I return back to the topic of the law that is being voted on in the Italian parliament. It is a law that in some ways is about other countries, because other countries have laws about unions among people of the same sex. There is a document from the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith from 2003 that dedicates a lot of attention to this, and even more, dedicates a chapter to the position of Catholic parliamentarians in parliament before this question. It says expressly that Catholic parliamentarians must not vote for these laws. There is much confusion on this. I wanted to ask, first of all, is this document of 2003 still in effect? And what is the position a Catholic parliamentarian must take? And then another thing: (Something about a mosque in Cairo and an audience the pope wants with another pope?) Pope: For this, Msgr. NAME went to Cairo last week to meet the second to the Imam and to greet the Imam...." "I want to meet him. I know that he would like it. We are looking for the way, always through Cardinal Tauran because it is the path...." Italian parliament: "I do not remember that document well ... but a Catholic parliamentarian must vote according their well-formed conscience. I would say just this. I believe it is sufficient because -- I say well-formed because it is not the conscience of what seems to me. I remember when matrimony for persons of the same sex was voted on in Buenos Aires there were votes. And at the end, one said to advise the other: 'But do you have to declare, or no? 'Me neither. Let's go. But if we don't go there won't be a quorum.' "The other said: 'If we have a quorum we will give the vote to Kirchner.' The other said: 'I prefer Kirchner and not Bergoglio.'" "This is not a well formed conscience. On people of the same sex, I repeat what I said on the trip to Rio di Janeiro, in the Catechism of the Catholic church." QUESTION 11 - FUTURE TRIPS Q: We are thinking about future trips, about preparing out suitcases again. Holy Father, when are you going to go to Argentina where they have been waiting for you for a long time? When will you return to Latin America? Or in China? And quick comment, you spoke many times during this trip about dreaming - what do you dream about? And what is your nightmare? POPE: China. (laughs) To go there. I would love that. I would like to say something about the Mexican people. It is a population that has a wealth, such great wealth, a people that surprises. They have a culture, a culture that goes back millenniums. Do you know that today, in Mexico, today, they speak 65 languages, counting the indigenous languages, 65. It is a people of great faith. They have also suffered religious persecution. There are martyrs, I will canonize two, it is a population that you can't explain, you can't explain it because the word "people" is not a logical category, it is a mythical category. The Mexican people you cannot explain this wealth, this history, this joy, the capacity to celebrate (festa) within these tragedies that you have asked about. I can say another thing, that this unity, that this people has managed not to fail, not to end with so many wars, things, things that are happening now. There in the city of Juarez there was a pact of 12 hours of peace for my visit. After that they will continue to fight among themselves. No? Traffickers. But a people that still is together with all that, you can only explain with Guadalupe. And I invite you to seriously study the facts of Guadalupe. The Madonna is there. I cannot find another explanation. And it would be nice if you as journalists-there are some books that explain the painting what it is like, the significance, and that is how you can understand better this great and beautiful people. QUESTION 12 - GUADALUPE Q: Two things, I wanted to know what did you ask (the Madonna of ) Guadalupe? Because you were there a long time in the church praying to Guadalupe. And then something else: do you dream in Italian or Spanish? POPE: I'd say I dream in Esperanto. I don't know how to respond to that. Sometimes I remember some dreams in another language, but dreaming in languages, no. But images, yes, that is my psychology (the way I am made.) I dream only a bit with words, no? Q: And the first question, in front of Guadalupe? POPE: I asked for the world, for peace, for so many things. Poor thing, I "made her a head like this" (Italian expression, means he asked for a lot of things.) I asked pardon, I asked I asked that the church grows healthy. I asked for the Mexican people. And another thing I asked for a lot: for priests to be true priests, and nuns good nuns, and bishops good bishops. as this is what the Lord wants. I asked a lot of her, but after all, the things a child tells his mother are a bit secret.
United States Senate 1200 -1300
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate meets to continue debate on the Nomination of Samuel Alito to be the next Justice of the US Supreme Court. 11:59:17.5 the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the senate will be led in prayer by the chaplain of the senate, dr. barry black. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, the center of our joy. prepare our spirits, clarify our minds, and stir our hearts for 11:59:38.2 your movements among us. help us to feel your presence in our opportunities to touch hurting lives. may your whispers prompt us to 11:59:53.1 deliver captives and bring healing to the bruised. abide in the hearts and minds of our senators. guide them with your counsel that they may not stumble in 12:00:07.7 darkness. may their hands touch your hand and find the leading that illuminates the road to peace. bless our families and our homes. 12:00:23.1 protect our loved ones from the perils of these uncertain times. we commit ourselves today to the one who came to give us salvation. we pray in his holy name. amen. 12:00:46.8 the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america. and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and 12:01:00.2 justice for all. under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. 12:01:18.5 under the previous order, the senate will proceed into executive session and resume consideration of calendar number 490, which the clerk will report. the clerk: supreme court of the united states. samuel a. alito jr. of new jersey to be an associate 12:01:33.7 justice. the president pro tempore: the acting majority leader is recognized. mr. sessions: mr. president, today the senate will continue to debate the nomination of samuel alito to the supreme court. yesterday the majority leader, senator bill frist, was forced 12:01:49.0 to file a cloture motion to stop a filibuster from senators on the other side of the aisle. that cloture vote will occur at 4:30 p.m. on monday. it is our expectation that cloture will be invoked and that 12:02:05.6 the senate will then proceed to a vote, a final up-or-down vote on the confirmation of judge alito on tuesday at 11:00 a.m. mr. president, i have some remarks i'd like to make on the alito nomination, but before i do, i would note the absence of 12:02:24.5 a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: 12:02:40.7 mr. sessions: mr. president? 12:03:12.0 the president pro tempore: the acting leader. mr. sessions: i would ask that the quorum call be dispensed with. the president pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: mr. president, it is very distressing and disappointing that we're now looking at a filibuster of a nomination on samuel alito to be a member of the united states 12:03:27.4 supreme court. he has served as a federal appellate judge outside of washington, d.c., not being involved in any of the political issues that are here, for 15 years. and during that time has assembled on incredibly strong 12:03:45.1 group of admirers who have testified on his behalf to a degree that almost exceeds anything i've had the pleasure 12:03:53.7 to see as a member of the senate judiciary committee where we've had hearings on this matter. the american bar association interviewed 300 of his colleagues, lawyers who have litigated against him, lawyers 12:04:07.4 who have worked with him, judges who have heard him practice before them, and his colleagues on the bench. the african-american member of that a.b.a. team who represented the university of michigan in defending their admissions policy that some call a quota 12:04:25.2 policy, that individual said -- quote -- "he was held in incredibly high regard." in fact, i'm not aware that anyone interviewed said anything bad about this nominee. he was the top of his class at 12:04:40.7 princeton, top of his class at yale law school where he served on the "law review," argued 12 cases before the u.s. supreme court. there are not a handful of lawyers in this country that have argued a single case before the supreme court, much less 12. 12:04:58.1 then he was united states attorney, prosecuting criminal cases for the united states of america in new jersey, he prosecuted mafia groups and drug dealers and people like that. and then had spent 15 years on the bench, demonstrating day 12:05:16.6 after day the judgment, the intellectual integrity and honesty it takes to be an outstanding judge. he is a remarkable nominee. his father was an immigrant from italy, grew up in new jersey, had the great honor to be one of 12:05:32.3 those sons of immigrants who got to go to the great university of princeton. he just in every way represents the best there is in american law. and more than that, mr. president, he understands what a 12:05:49.4 judge's role is. and he has expressed this in so many good ways. without notes, he talked to us in that committee from his heart. and he summed up time and again, after question after question 12:06:04.3 his view that a judge has a responsibility to decide that case that's before them. not to set grand policy for america, but there are litigants there and somebody got a 12:06:19.1 complaint, and they complained that the law or the constitution has not been properly followed. and they ask for relief. and the judge decides based on the facts first where a judge must, with intellectual honesty, find out what the facts are. then after the facts are 12:06:36.2 determined apply the established law to that fact situation and render a decision without regard to any personal, political views, whether he's a republican or a democrat, a liberal or a conservative. without regard to any personal, social, religious or other views 12:06:54.3 he may have. then he renders that opinion. and as he said, he learned as a judge that you should delay making up your mind. it's a habit of mind that a judge learns. so, he hears those facts. 12:07:10.2 he thinks about those facts and considers those facts and makes up his mind only after the full matter has been brought before him and it reaches its full, ripe point to make a decision. 12:07:24.0 i thought that was a very insightful and wise comment that he made. so we had a unanimous highest possible rating from the american bar association. and as i read last night, mr. president, one can easily see the tremendous admiration, 12:07:47.0 respect that his colleagues on the third circuit court of appeals has for him. they were so impressive in the committee. several of these judges were senior judges. many of them -- most of them had 12:07:59.8 served the full 15 years with him on the bench. they have known him, they've seen him in private conferences. they said he's a man of intellectual honesty. he is a man who is fair and biased. he never raised his voice, never proselytized for his view. 12:08:17.5 but was a man with incredible analytical ability to get to the heart of a matter and make a just decision. what more could you ask for on the bench? many of these judges were democratic appointees. the third circuit is not a conservative circuit. 12:08:33.2 it's probably one of our more liberal circuits. it sits in philadelphia. and to say this man is extreme, outside the mainstream, unworthy of serving ofpbt supreme court is in itself an extreme 12:08:49.7 statement. it's not justified. 12:08:52.4 the president promised simply in this last election, every stop he made he repeated it. "i want a judge who will show restraint, who will follow the law, not make law, who does not see it in their bailiwick to reset the social policy of 12:09:10.0 america." and we've been seeing that time and time again. our colleagues who like what these judges are doing, our democratic colleagues apparently are not happy with that philosophy. now let me tell you, president bush and i -- and this senator 12:09:29.1 do not believe we should put a conservative activist on the bench. a judge who will utilize his opportunity on the bench to promote a conservative agenda. that's politics. that's what we do here. 12:09:42.8 that's what we're supposed to fight out in this chamber. and the american people have a right to play a role to play in it, because they can vote us out of office. but if a judge on the supreme court of the united states uses that power to interpret the 12:09:58.3 meaning of words in the constitution to undermine the plain meaning of those words, undermine the meaning that the rat fires and drafters had in mind -- ratty phiers and drafters had in mind to make it say something they want it to 12:10:14.4 say, then they are legislating, mr. president. they are in this branch. but they do and it is more dangerous than just that. because they don't just legislate like we do. if we legislate, the next congress can come in. 12:10:30.6 we can be voted out of office and they can reverse it by 51 votes out of this 100 senators. but what if a supreme court judge declares that no longer can states define marriages a union between a man and a woman. 12:10:48.2 that's no longer -- we're going to declare any association of people can call themselves a marriage. and say the constitution says it and they have a lifetime appointment? 12:11:01.3 they never have to answer to the public. they can stay on that bench as long as they desire. what recourse do the american people have to that? only a constitutional amendment. and that takes two-thirds vote of the house of representatives and the senate and three-fourths of the state legislators to 12:11:20.9 overturn it. an incredibly huge task. so it is critically important that we have judges who are not activists on the bench, that we have judges that will faithfully apply the law according to the way the constitutional drafters 12:11:37.6 and ratifers intended it and who follow faithfully the laws of the congress and who respect those laws as long as the laws passed by the congress or the states do not conflict with the constitution and show some respect to the states. 12:11:52.4 and we have had so many of these activities that have gone on by our court that show a lack of discipline. i pointed out last night how 12:12:09.2 we're at the point where one of the courts of appeals that represents 20% of the people in the united states in ninth circuit has ruled the pledge we just cited, mr. president, that says "under god" in it is unconstitutional, and the u.s. 12:12:25.5 supreme court did not reverse it. the u.s. supreme court simply said that the father who brought that case didn't have standing because he didn't have custody of the child. and now he's gone back and found somebody else, and apparently 12:12:42.7 has a plaintiff that does have standing. so i'm not sure what the supreme court's going to rule. will they next come in here with a chisel and take those words right up there on this wall, "in god we trust" or that chisel off the wall of the united states 12:12:58.6 senate? it's not so impossible a suggestion, mr. president. i know senator byrd, our presiding officer came here shortly after senator byrd, but he was here in the congress, i believe a member of the house, 12:13:14.8 when we put "under god" in the pledge. and we've ratified that again when this case first came out in the senate, that we intend that that remain the law. but the court has the ability just like that to strike it down 12:13:33.2 so that's what this issues are about. we talk about the takings case, the kilo, where they redefine the meaning of words, that the 12:13:46.9 property only be taken for public use, now they say can be 12:13:51.0 taken for public purpose. a big change. it is one thing to take your land to build a dam with or to -- or to a highway or to a public land. but to take your land to build a private shopping center, that was not what the founding 12:14:05.1 fathers had in mind. but the supreme court ruled, apparently believing that that was too restrictive. it would be better if you could take land for private purposes as long as it had a public benefit. 12:14:21.5 and they approved that. not good. regardless of what you think of the merits of that takings issue , it represented a lack of discipline, an activist trend on the court by which the judges 12:14:41.1 declared that their personal views would allow them to actually bend the plain meaning of the constitution to have it say what they wanted it to say, not what it actually did say, 12:14:54.7 not what it was meant from the beginning.n so i am disappointed that we have an objection, any objection to this fabulous nominee. president bush in his campaign promised a judge who would show 12:15:11.0 restraint, that he would be highly qualified and a man of integrity or woman of integrity, and that's what he's submitted. but now we're looking at a filibuster. i kid you not. i thought we'd settled that issue. 12:15:25.5 but now we're having a filibuster. they have put it in their news releases, democratic senators have. apparently the former presidential candidate for the democratic party in the last election, who obviously did not win, called back from davos to 12:15:43.2 say that we ought to filibuster here, count him in, he urged a filibuster. the assistant democratic leader here in the senate, senator durbin, apparently is supporting a filibuster of this nomination, and it's not right. 12:15:58.5 this is a solid, mainstream judge that was rated unanimously the highest rating the american bar association gives who has the unanimous support of his fellow judges on the third circuit, democrats and 12:16:16.2 republicans, who has an extraordinary record and resume in every respect. they want to filibuster this nomination? well, i know the people for the american way want it. i know the national abortion rights league or abortion 12:16:33.5 groups, maybe they want it. but we're senators here. we have to ask ourselves, is this where we're heading for the future? is that what we are about that we're now going to take nominees with the kind of respect that 12:16:50.1 judge alito has and subject them to a filibuster? and by the way, it really was disgusting this past election. the american people, i am convinced, strongly support the kind of judge judge alito will be. 12:17:06.0 they don't want an activist judge setting social policy in america. they absolutely understand this issue. and i would just note, i had the pleasure to follow one of our most outstanding young senators 12:17:23.9 last night, senator john thune from south dakota. he made a remarkable speech. and he concluded it -- near the end he wound up saying he campaigned on this in south dakota. 12:17:38.2 he promised to vote for this kind of judge. and i'm thinking, who did he beat? he beat the former democratic leader of the senate, the former majority leader for a short time 12:17:55.2 of the senate, senator tom daschle, who was leading filibusters to obstruct up-or-down votes on highly qualified nominees, and i submit to you, members of this body, that the people of south dakota weren't happy with that. and in large part senator thune 12:18:13.7 is here today because of the obstruction of the democrats over the last several years of highly qualified nominees who simply believe a federal judge should show restraint and follow the law. that's all we want. that's all the american people 12:18:30.8 want. that's what we have a right to expect in federal judges. and what kind of filibuster is this we're seeing? it's almost amusing. where are the senators? i was here last night. i followed three republicans i 12:18:47.7 believe talking. 12:18:49.2 we were supposed to be in session until 8:00 p.m. nobody showed up to talk. i'm not sure there are any around today to complain. they're supposed to be telling us why this man shouldn't be on the bench. so we've been here for two days, and less than 25 of the 12:19:05.3 democratic senators have come to the floor. so it's just been a pretty vacant situation here. we shut down the senate each night. nobody seems to want to come and raise the issues and debate 12:19:22.8 them. if you want to filibuster and you've got some serious concerns, i suggest you come down and express it and let's talk about it because we've been through them. my colleagues, senator specter, during the judiciary committee 12:19:39.6 hearings gave the democratic senators every opportunity they desired to raise for as long as they wanted to any issues they had with judge alito. he allowed them to call a whole host of witnesses who would be 12:19:57.3 critical. the truth is, i don't think any of them knew him. none of them knew him. and most of them had axes to grind one way or the other from some legal agenda that they had. and even that group, i don't 12:20:14.5 think but one or two actually said they were against him. lawrence tribe just raised some concerns. professor tribe, he never said he was against the nominee and he shouldn't be confirmed because he's a professor himself, and he knows the legal 12:20:30.6 expertise that judge alito brings to the court. so i'd say, if you've got something to filibuster about, come on down. why put us through this? senator john cornyn has called this effort "needless and 12:20:47.4 strange." that's a good definition of it. other words come to mind. "pointless," "political." you know, the democratic leader now, senator harry reid, went before the democratic conference 12:21:03.2 caucus, according to the "new york times," just last week and urged his colleagues to vote against this nomination. they've made it a political agenda item to block this nomination. is it presidential politics or 12:21:19.6 politics in general? i submit so. senator reid's spokesperson, when asked about it, said, well, they wanted to get as many votes as they could against him to make it an issue in the election for politics, not -- it's not a 12:21:37.4 question of whether the judge is ready, qualified and able to serve on the bench. so maybe this is some sort of theory that we can reward our base out here, the national 12:21:53.1 abortion rights league, the people for the american way, the alliance for justice, some of those left-wing groups that have been driving this process for years. maybe they ought to keep them happy. 12:22:07.1 maybe they ought to keep sending money. maybe they ought to keep attacking george bush and saying he's appointing extremists to the bench. maybe that's what they're trying to do to -- i don't know, but there's no basis to object to this nominee, and there's absolutely no justification for 12:22:24.7 denying him an up-or-down vote, which is what the filibuster attempts to do. well, i suppose we can all agree that it is an intentional filibuster because it was 12:22:42.7 apparently hatched in davos, switzerland, where senator kerry now is with those masters of the universe that are out there trying to figure our world economy out. maybe they ought to spend more time trying to get the gasoline 12:22:58.9 price down than worrying about conjuring up a filibuster of a judge as able as judge alito. well, they're not here on the floor. that's what we have every right to expect. 12:23:17.3 maybe since they're abroad, maybe they are worried about judge alito's position on foreign law. you know, we've gotten a trend 12:23:33.1 by the members of the united states supreme court and recently justice ruth bader ginsburg went to new york and made a speech in some great detail, really shocking to me where i've just recently read 12:23:50.1 the speech, in which she defended the citation and the consideration of foreign law to determine how to interpret american law. 12:24:03.5 this is contrary to our american legal system. a judge should be -- a judge's duty is to apply the plain meaning of the words. if there's some dispute about it, look to the legislative history, maybe the background of the bill, from an american's 12:24:20.5 perspective, not a european's perspective. for example, in roper vs. simmons in 2005, the case held that the execution of 12:24:36.1 individuals who were under the age of 18 at the time violates the 8th and 14th amendments, overruling a previous precedent of the supreme court, and our liberal colleagues have been very, very 12:24:52.4 strong talking about how we should stick to precedent, particularly when they want to talk about abortion, but here the liberals reversed stanford vs. kentucky. the majority of the court -- now get this -- of the supreme court 12:25:08.5 of the united states of america trying to interpret the constitution of the united states of america spent almost 20% of its legal analysis discussing the laws of britain, saudi arabia, yemen, iran, 12:25:25.3 nigeria and china. mr. president, you know, we have a lot of complaints. people are not happy with rulings of the court. many times those rulings are justified and we're just unhappy 12:25:40.9 with the result. we're just concerned about that. and so maybe not justified. but i believe the american people understand that this is a dangerous trend by the court 12:25:57.4 that they would seek to interpret american law by looking to nigeria and china, red china last i heard, yemen, where terrorists -- iran. the international community, 12:26:19.5 they're quoting them, discussing what their view of our constitution is about cruel and unusual punishment? regardless of what you feel about the merits of the case, will legislations absolutely should discuss the age at which an exconstitution should occur, 12:26:34.9 but what does the constitution say about it. that's what the supreme court is supposed to be deciding, not what they think ought to be done. and in gruder in 2003, justice ginsburg looked outside the 12:26:54.3 constitution to make her decision, noting with approval that the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination allowed for such jim their -- disjim their practices or mate innocents of unequal or separate rights for 12:27:09.5 different racial groups. now, this is a question under our constitution which says that every american, whether they are minority or majority ancestry or 12:27:28.2 background, is entitled to equal protection of the laws. that raises some real questions about quotas and matters of that nature. so in her decision, justice ginsburg, did she look at our 12:27:44.9 constitution that guarantees every citizen, regardless of their race, equal protection of the laws, did she consider it? what did she look at? she considered the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. 12:28:01.0 that's not a basis for american justice to lay an opinion. and we've seen a lot of that. let me just briefly say what judge roberts said about that. "if we're relying on a 12:28:19.2 decision," this is a quote, "if we're relying on a decision from a german judge about what our constitution means, no president accountable to the people appointed that judge, and no senate accountable to the people 12:28:34.4 confirmed that judge, and yet he's playing a role in shaping a law that binds the people in this country. i think that's a concern that has to be addressed." absolutely he's correct. 12:28:49.8 he goes on to say, judge roberts in his testimony -- quote -- "in foreign law, you can find anything you want. if you don't find it in the decisions of france or italy, 12:29:03.6 well, it's in the decisions of somalia or japan or indonesia or wherever. as somebody said in another context, looking at foreign law for support is like looking out over a crowd and picking out 12:29:24.0 your friends. you can find them. they're there. and that actually expands the discretion of the judge. it allows the judge to incorporate his or her own 12:29:36.9 personal preferences, cloak them with the authority of precedent because they're finding precedent in foreign law, and use that to determine the meaning of the constitution. i think that's a misuse of precedent, not a correct use of 12:29:56.9 precedent."n i see the president would -- 12:30 would -- our presiding 12:30:14.3 officer would choose to speak at this time? i'd be glad to yield if you would like. the president pro tempore: yes, i'd be happy to accept that offer. mr. sessions: just one minute, and i would wrap up on this 12:30:27.1 issue of foreign law. i was using humor here about senator kerry offered dovo, switzerland, calling for a filibuster back here. one of the issues we had with confirmation of judges is that judges show restraint and be 12:30:42.8 faithful to our law not -- quote -- "foreign law." there is no doubt about it judges alito and roberts don't agree that we ought to be quoting foreign law to justify legal opinions in the united states. judge alito said this: "i don't think that we should look to 12:30:57.5 foreign law to interpret our own constitution." amen to that. he said this. -- quote -- "our constitution does two basic things. it sets out the structure of our government and it protects fundamental rights. the structure of our government 12:31:14.5 is unique to our country. and so i don't think that looking to decisions of supreme courts of other countries or constitutional courts in other countries is very helpful in deciding questions relating to 12:31:30.7 the structure of our government ." amen to that. he went on to say, "as for the protection of individual ghts( ), i think we should look to our own constitution and to our own precedents, our country has been the leaders in 12:31:47.4 protecting individual rights." we're going to look to china or yemen or iran on that issue? he goes on to say -- quote -- "i don't think that it's appropriate or useful to look to foreign law in interpreting the provisions of our constitution. 12:32:04.3 i think the framers would be stunned by the idea that the bill of rights is to be interpreted by taking a poll of the countries in the world." that's the kind of judge that we need on the bench. 12:32:19.3 that's the kind of judge that president bush promised to nominate. and that's the kind of judge he sent up here. he deserves confirmation. mr. president, i would note the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the 12:32:36.0 clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. leahy: mr. president? 12:33:38.0 the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i'd ask consent that the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. 12:33:47.3 mr. leahy: mr. president, i have spoken before, of course, on this nomination, and i want to emphasize some of the points i made. the constitution as we know 12:34:02.8 gives the senate essential role in the confirmation of a supreme court justice. nothing in our makeup, nothing in the history of this country assumed that the united states senate would be a rubber stamp. 12:34:22.9 it was the united states senate that turned down some nominees of george washington, the most popular president, the greatest president of this country, 12:34:34.3 because it would not be a rubber stamp. there was an overwhelmingly democratically controlled senate. the democrats had a very substantial majority at the time 12:34:49.7 of franklin roosevelt, and it was that senate that said to franklin roosevelt, "you can't pack the supreme court." so, i have said also many, many times the senate should be the 12:35:05.3 conscience of the nation. after all, we're the only 100 people in this whole country -- 95 million americans. only 100 americans get a chance to vote on a lifetime position for the supreme court, somebody who will affect our rights, our 12:35:28.1 personal rights for decades to come. now i have voted on every one of the current nine members of the u.s. supreme court. 12:35:41.4 i actually voted on some who are no longer there. i approach each one the same way. is this going to be a supreme court justice for all americans? and that's why i asked about 12:35:56.5 judge alito. he came before our senate judiciary committee are a record he's created over the last 30 years as a judge and before that as a high-ranking government official appointed to a succession of posts by a 12:36:12.0 republican president. judge alito seemed almost consistently to defer to executive power, though show a little empathy for the plain and ordinary americans. in fact, his record suggested a pattern saying what he needed to 12:36:28.6 say to get on to the next job. certainly nothing in his record, nothing in his job applications indicated he felt very strongly about checks and balances in the three branches of government. now in the course of this 12:36:45.5 nomination hearings, he sought to retreat from his own words, but even trying to retreat, he didn't. the hearing provided him with an opportunity to explain his record. it was an opportunity he chose to squander. 12:37:02.1 when the president's supporters and many of the republican senators on the committee urged him not to be forthcoming. my gracious,18 members of that committee are the only once who get to ask him questions on 12:37:16.4 behalf of all 295 million americans, and some urged him not to answer questions. he had the chance to answer some of the troubling questions that his past words and actions raised. he had the opportunity to demonstrate his replacement of 12:37:32.3 harriet miers was not what it appeared to be, the president selecting someone he knew he could count on to support government power and this expansive doctrine of the unitary executive. and some in the extreme faction 12:37:46.2 in the president's party felt assured would march with justices thomas and scalia in their culture of war. so it was an opportunity to answer the questions, an opportunity he did not take. the hearings and the whole confirmation process left us 12:38:02.6 with more questions and i believe greater concerns than we had before. i have discussed his failure to assure that he would be an effective check and balance on executive power. he failed to show me or the american people that when he recited platitudes that no one 12:38:19.2 is above the law, that he was not just telling us what he thoughted needed to get one more promotion -- thought he needed to get one more promotion. when i voted for john roberts as chief justice -- conservative 12:38:37.2 republican, nominated by a conservative republican -- i voted for i said, i looked at him and i thought george bush or 12:38:47.6 patrick leahy before him or george smith or patrick jones. we would get a fair treatment and we'd be heard on what the facts and the law would be. i don't have that same confidence with judge alito. 12:39:01.1 one question for the senate is whether judge alito takes seer kwusly -- takes seriously his promises to the senate, his obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety seriously. he had an opportunity to talk about his numerous failures to 12:39:17.5 recuse himself through the nomination period, and he didn't accept that. you know, in 1990, mr. president, judge alito came before the senate. 12:39:31.7 i was here at that time. he was seeking confirmation to the third circuit court of appeals. he made a pledge -- actually these pledges are made under oath -- that he'd recuse himself in five categories of cases: cases involving three different 12:39:47.3 financial companies with whom he had dealings, cases in which his sister's law firm represented a party, and cases he'd overseen as united states attorney in new jersey. obviously anybody in that 12:40:02.7 circumstance who wouldn't make such a pledge would not have been confirmed. but i was disappointed to discover that despite making this explicit promise to disqualify himself in these cases, he failed to disqualify himself in at least four of the 12:40:19.7 five categories he'd sworn he'd disqualify from. in fact, he apparently failed to put several of the companies that he had promised us to -- put several of the companies on the so-called recusal list. 12:40:36.1 these are companies he said matters involving them came up before the third circuit. he would recuse himself. he did not even give their names to the clerk to make sure that happened. i don't see him in any way, and i don't suggest in any way he 12:40:52.7 got a financial benefit from this. i doubt if he did. but, again, he was making promises to get promoted to the next job. and once he got promoted, the 12:41:08.4 promises were forgotten. one case we've heard a lot about, the vanguard funds, he invested hundreds of thousands of dollars. he included in his 1990 pledge to the senate he'd recuse from 12:41:23.7 there. i find that particularly troubling not just because of his involvement, but for the various reasons he gave. shifting reasons of why he did it. first it was i didn't realize there was a case involving vanguard. 12:41:37.0 we show him the case. the word "vanguard" appears three times in it. well, the clerk should have notified we're going to a new computer system. well, the name is on there three times. 12:41:52.0 "well, i didn't benefit from it." you know, we're getting a little bit into the dog ate my homework. why not just say i screwed up? you know, vanguard was known as 12:42:12.6 a computerized list to identify conflicts so a computer glitch would not have occurred. he finally did acknowledge -- i'll give him credit for this -- that having stated for weeks and weeks and weeks that there was a 12:42:25.1 computer glitch, he acknowledged there was none. why not just say i screwed up and accept the responsibility? and i'll put into the record further in my statement the number of other shifting 12:42:43.3 concerns about that. now, in his 1985 job application, one that he said he was very careful doing, as he would, applying for a job with the reagan administration, he 12:42:59.4 put in very proudly his inclusion, his membership in the concerned alumni of princeton, c.a.p. called the conservative alumni group. 12:43:13.2 actually he only named two groups that he had been associated with, that and "the federalist" society. actually he was a member at the time of the princeton club in washington. he didn't include that. he didn't include anything else. the reason i mention this, he 12:43:30.7 knew exactly what memberships of what clubs would appeal to those in the meese justice department. some would say that's just 12:43:43.8 being, being wise. but, why emphasize membership in a group of the concerned alumni of princeton? nobody would suggest in his 12:43:58.7 hiring practices or the way he lives, that judge alito is biased against women or minorities. but the concerned alumni of princeton was opposed to 12:44:16.2 princeton allowing women or minorities, african-americans, others, into princeton. why brag -- why brag about being part of such an organization? you know, these are the people 12:44:38.7 who only a generation earlier resisted the admission of people from italian immigrant familiesn i take that rather personally. 12:44:52.0 my mother's family are italian immigrants. my relatives in italy still today are proud of their sons and daughters. my uncles and aunts in italy tell me how proud they are of 12:45:09.3 their sons and daughters that have come to america. i also think about a different era when my father as a teenager had to face signs, my irish father, saying, "no irish need apply," or "no catholics need apply." 12:45:25.4 as a result, we grew up in a family where all discrimination was wrong. why brag about even a loose affiliation with a group that practiced that kind of discrimination? because it had been in the 12:45:45.5 press, i thought i'd help the judge out. i asked him about this. i figured it would be a simple explanation. he'd make it very clear that he was opposed to them. instead he said, i don't really remember that. we alerted him ahead of time that he was going to be asked this question. 12:46:03.2 he said he didn't remember, even though it was clearly on his application. then he said, well, i think it was because of concern that rotc wasn't being allowed on the princton campus. good explanation except, of 12:46:18.7 course, at the time of this rotc was allowed on the princton campus. one of those little facts that kind of -- inconvenient facts that come in. 12:46:37.2 not inconvenient at the time he was applying for the job with edwin meese. then it was something to be proud of. now applying for the job of u.s. supreme court, it's something i don't remember why. 12:46:51.5 well, i'll give him the benefit of the doubt. i'll accept that he's not very active in the group, but then that goes all the more. why emphasize it in his job application? 12:47:16.5 especially in this administration with the meese justice department, this is the most ideological and partisan we have seen an administration 12:47:23.9 until the present time. i'm concerned he tried too hard 12:47:39.1 back then to fit in with those in power, and it makes me wonder what, when he was being screened for this job, he told when he met in that private, closed-door meeting with vice president cheney, karl rove and scooter 12:47:54.9 libby. what did he say to them? i'm especially interested in these circumstances because, as you know, mr. president, judge alito was the third person that president bush nominated for 12:48:13.9 this particular seat. the second one, harriet miers, he nominated and then got a firestorm of criticism from the republicans, not from democrats, but from republicans, from some within the republican party who 12:48:30.2 made it very clear to the president, you can't nominate her because we're not sure how she will vote. we are not sure that she will vote the way we want her to. 12:48:42.1 finally, the president, almost humiliation for him, was forced to withdraw her name. he came forth with judge alito, and those same people said, oh, he's great. we're confident. he will vote. 12:48:53.6 we're fine with him. i look at his job applications. he wrote, "it's been an honor 12:49:10.5 and personal satisfaction for me to help advance legal positions in which i personally believe very strongly. i am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the supreme court that racial and ethical quotas should not with allowed. 12:49:26.1 the constitution does not protect the right to an abortion." these are his words. he was eager to highlight his work in the solicitor general's office, a place where lawyers used to honor working in a 12:49:46.0 nonpartisan and professional manner. we found out a few of the things he said there, but the bush administration's regime of 12:49:58.4 secrecy has prevented the judiciary committee and, of course, the united states senate and, of course, the american people, from reviewing his work when he was there. he would not testify who what his legal view is today. he made it very clear he 12:50:15.8 continues to believe that roe v. wade was wrongly decided. he said a justice should decide a case which is a precedent. he left out the step where the 12:50:31.2 justice, knowing there is a controlling precedent, decides whether the precedent was correctly or incorrectly denied. now, if a justice believes the proceeding case was correctly decided, he has no reason to go 12:50:46.7 on to make the other calculation about weight and relines and so on. he did not do that. i mention this in one more case. much has been said about roe, but for this senator, it goes 12:51:03.1 way beyond the question of roe. it goes to the question to what extent would you allow a president to step aside from checks and balances, all his writings -- all his writings -- 12:51:19.4 indicate a president should be able to do that. he's one of the strongest proponents i've heard in my life speak of the so-called unitary executive. what does that mean if real life? 12:51:32.3 it means that this president more than all presidents in history -- all presidents in history -- have used the illegal theory to say that even though i sign a law, even though i sign into law something, i don't have to follow it because i'm the 12:51:51.5 president. only two presidents i've heard say that something is not illegal if the president does it. one was richard nixon. the other is george w. bush. he's used the illegal theory to do it 103 times. 12:52:06.6 now, that means you can sign a law saying the united states must obey our own laws, our own treaties on torture and then quietly write in a separate page and say, however, as the president i'll decide when we'll 12:52:21.7 follow that law. you know, it's a -- we're at a pivotal constitutional moment in our history with a single fundamental question: will the senate serve its constitutional role and preserve the supreme 12:52:37.5 court as a constitutional check on the expansion of presidential power? the reason presidential power issues have come to dominate this confirmation is we've clearly arrived at this crucial juncture in our nation and in our highest court over one 12:52:55.2 simple question -- is the president of the united states above the law? i feel very strongly none of us are. you, mr. president, you're not, i'm not, the president of the united states is not, the other 12:53:10.1 senators, the other 98 senators are not, judges are not. the framers knew that unchecked power leads to abuse and corruption, and the supreme court has to be the ultimate check and balance in our system. 12:53:27.2 vibrant checks and balances are instruments of protecting both the security and the liberty of the american people. this great, wonderful country of ours has existed for well over 200 years because we have that 12:53:38.8 checks and balances and because we protect the liberties of individual americans, all americans, not just those who fit into one narrow political ideology, but all americans -- all americans, all americans -- from any part of this country, 12:53:55.7 americans who express popular ideas or unpopular ideas, a free press, a free observation of religion, a free people, and in that you have to have the 12:54:09.9 supreme court as the ultimate check and balance and the independence of the court is crucial to our democracy and our way of life. the senate, as i said before, should never be allowed to become a rubber-stamp, and neither should the supreme court. 12:54:27.2 and so we owe it to the american people today, the generations of americans to come, to ask and answer several essential questions. can this president or any president order illegal spying on americans? can this president or any 12:54:45.4 president authorize torture in defiance of our criminal statutes and our international agreements? can this president or any president defy our laws and constitution to hold americans in custody indefinitely and not 12:55:01.3 allow court review? can this president or any president choose which laws he will follow and which he will not by quietly writing a side statement when he signs a bill into law? these are some of the most vital 12:55:17.5 questions of our time, and they're among the most vital questions that confront the senate in considering this nomination to our highest court. judge alito's record and his responses and his failure to adequately answer questions 12:55:31.9 about these issues are deeply troubling. regrettably, it seems that judge alito approached the question of a lifetime appointment to succeed justice sandra day o'connor on the united states supreme court as a job 12:55:48.5 application process that resembled a political campaign with two distinct parts. first he had to get the nomination, which he sought as he acted like an arch 12:56:04.9 conservative and was seen as a reliable vote for republican power. that was accomplished when he received the nomination after harriet miers. that was his primary campaign. the senate confirmation process was more the equivalent of a 12:56:20.2 general election. he appears as much in the middle of the road as possible. fortunately, what he did not do successfully was to reconcile the two roles. ly vote against this nominee -- i will vote against this 12:56:38.5 nominee. i believe the president picked him for these demonstrated legal views which are in stark, stark contrast to the image the white house and the handlers and supporters have attempted to 12:56:55.5 create. mr. president, i yield the floor, and i see the distinguished senior senator from alaska, and i appreciate his courtesy. the presiding officer: the senator yields. the senator from alaska is recognized. 12:57:12.3 mr. stevens: mr. president, i first want to comment upon the chairman of the judiciary committee, senator arlen specter. knowing the health challenges that he has faced in the past, witnessing this senator's just really strenuous schedule in the 12:57:32.9 last few months has been something to watch, to have the opportunity to witness his commitment to the senate and to his role as chairman of the 12:57:48.3 judiciary committee. and i commend him very much for his dedication to his job and to his function as chairman of the judiciary committee. he's come through some very serious medical periods in his 12:58:04.6 life, but he has distinguished himself in recent months, i think, and really demonstrated his total commitment to the work of the senate. i do honor him for the job he's done in conducting these 12:58:19.5 hearings. mr. leahy: mr. president, would the senator just yield on just that one point? i totally agree with what he said about senator specter, who has been an example not just to the other 99 senators, but really to the whole country. i'm going to be honored to 12:58:34.8 present him with an award at 12:58:39.0 tracy's kids, awarding him, among other things, but primarily for the example he's sent to the rest of the country, somebody who can face a very serious health crises and handle 12:58:51.8 it with courage and dignity and stalwartness, with all the people who have suffered from various forms of cancer, as the distinguished senator knows personally and i know from a dearest member of my family. 12:59:08.5 this kind of inspiration helps a great deal. i can't thank the senator from alaska enough for the words he just said. mr. stevens: i thank the senator who serves with the chairman with great dignity in terms of the judiciary committee. 12:59:24.7 i can't appear here without really realizing the serious illnesses that senator specter has gone through and survived and the energy he has shown despite those illnesses. and mr. president, to me there's 12:59:42.8 no doubt that judge samuel alito is well qualified to serve on the supreme court. he served as assistant to the solicitor general, and as u.s. attorney for the district of new jersey, he was unanimously 12:59:58.0 confirmed by this senate to serve on the united states court of appeals for the third circuit. and he has argued some 12 cases before the supreme court. he is well respected by our nation's legal community.
United States Senate 0930 - 1100
SENATE FLOOR DEBATE: The Senate meets for Morning Hour. The Senate will begin debate on the Nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to be the next Justice of the US Supreme Court. 09:29:57.5 the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the senate will be led in prayer by the chaplain of the senate, dr. barry black. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty and merciful god, who has given us grace in times past 09:30:13.0 and hope for the years to come. strengthen us to continue to grow in grace and our knowledge of you. quicken our hearts with warmer 09:30:27.7 affection for you and your creation. stir up the talents in each of us and give us a desire to serve you and humanity. bless the members of this body and the staff that serve them. 09:30:49.5 increase their faith as you increase their years. give them moral fitness to live lives of integrity and faithfulness. may they not falter under the 09:31:03.5 burdens they are asked to carry in these uncertain days. bless them with clear minds and open eyes that they will not seek to solve tomorrow's problems with yesterday's 09:31:19.9 solutions. we thank you for our new senate page class. inspire our pages to trust you passionately so that you will direct their steps. 09:31:35.5 we pray in your holy name. amen. the president pro tempore: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to our flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag 09:31:50.2 of the united states of america, and to the republic, for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. under the previous order, the 09:32:06.8 leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, there will be a period for the transaction of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. mr. frist: mr. president? 09:33:10.0 the president pro tempore: the majority leader is recognized. mr. frist: mr. president, i want to welcome everybody back to begin this second session of 09:33:16.3 the 109th congress. in a few moments we will begin another historic debate in the senate chamber as we consider the nomination of samuel alito to be associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. 09:33:31.0 we will lock in a debate structure in a few moments so that we will be able to alternate hours back and forth between the two sides of the aisle. this will help facilitate the schedule so that members will have a better understanding of when they will come to the floor 09:33:48.3 or have that opportunity to come to the floor to give their statements and to participate in that debate. we will remain in session all day today and into the night this week to accommodate 09:34:04.5 senators who wish to make statements. as i mentioned, every senator will have the opportunity to speak, but it is my hope that we will be able to lock in a time certain for a vote on this qualified nominee as soon as possible in order that our 09:34:21.6 fellow senators will know when that confirmation vote will occur. i'd like to be able to do that shortly, and i've been in discussion with the democratic leader, and we'll continue that discussion on that particular matter. 09:34:36.4 mr. president, at this point i would ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to executive session for the consideration of calendar number 486, the nomination of samuel alito to be 09:34:54.9 associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. the president pro tempore: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. the senate will proceed to executive session. the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination: supreme court of the united states, samuel a. alito jr. of new 09:35:12.2 jersey to be an associate justice. a senator: will the majority leader yield to me for one minute while i bring up an issue that we were discussing yesterday? mr. frist: mr. president, i'd be happy to. the president pro tempore: the senator from arizona. 09:35:27.6 mr. mccain: mr. president, i want to thank the majority leader for his efforts to move the issue of lobbying reform forward. we had a good meeting yesterday amongst other members, and senator lieberman and i and others -frls, -- are also, as 09:35:46.4 the majority leader knows, have introduced legislation. there's been other input made by other members. i know that the majority leader joins me in saying that we need to put together a bipartisan 09:35:59.9 coalition to address this issue as quickly as possible, and we need to sit down members of both sides of the aisle in whatever format that the majority leader and the democrat leader decide to that we can get to work right 09:36:16.4 away, get legislation done to curb the lobbying excesses that have been brought to light that need to be fixed. at another time i'd like to talk about with the majority leader the issue of earmarks. but i want to thank the majority leader for urging rapid action 09:36:33.2 on this issue. and we do have a basis for negotiation. i hope we'll be able to immediately sit down with members from the other side of the aisle, come to conclusions and agreement, since it's pretty 09:36:47.8 obvious the majority of the fixes that need to be made, and move forward. i want to thank the majority leader and the democrat leader for urging rapid action in addressing this issue which is causing us and our image to be hurt very badly, and our 09:37:03.4 reputation, in the eyes of the american people. i thank the majority leader. mr. frist: mr. president? the president pro tempore: the majority leader. mr. frist: just a very short comment. i have been in discussion with the democratic leader on this as well. and as my distinguished colleague from arizona has just 09:37:18.3 said, we on the republican side have put together a working group in terms of how to address this very, very important issue. it's got to be done in a bipartisan way. america is looking at this body to respond to abuses that we 09:37:36.9 have all seen in our government today. and i think that we all just need to be committed to address this in a bipartisan way. we have a great structure to build upon, and the legislation that has been introduced in a bipartisan way with senators 09:37:52.1 mccain and lieberman, and i look forward to working with both sides of the aisle in developing an appropriate response over the coming days. mr. president, i now ask consent that the time from 10:00 a.m. 09:38:08.2 until 11:00 p.m. tonight be divided with the time from 10:00 to 11:00 be under the control of 09:38:15.4 the majority leader or his designee, the time from 11:00 to noon under the control of the democratic leader or his designee, with each hour rotating back and forth in that same manner. i further ask that on thursday the same division occur with the first hour from 10:00 to 11:00 09:38:31.6 under the control -- be under the control of the democratic leader or his designee. the president pro tempore: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. frist: mr. president, 09:38:48.1 today i am honored to open debate on the nomination of judge sam alito to be the 110th associate justice of the supreme court of the united states. 09:39:02.5 i enthusiastically support his confirmation. judge alito deserves to become justice alito, and those who oppose him are smearing a decent and honorable man in imposing an unfair political standard on all 09:39:19.5 judicial nominees. i support judge alito because he is exceptionally qualified to be a supreme court justice. i support judge alito because he's a man of integrity and modest judicial temperament. i support judge alito because he has a record that demonstrates a 09:39:37.2 respect for judicial restraint and aversion to political agendas on the bench and a commitment to the rule of law and the constitution. there is no question that judge alito is exceptionally well qualified. 09:39:53.1 he's measured, brilliant, deeply srerted and respectful of the law, and a man of character and integrity. but there is another reason i support judge alito. i support judge alito because denying him a seat on the supreme court could have devastating long-term 09:40:10.5 consequences for our judicial nomination process. let me address these issues one at a time. exceptional qualifications. from the moment president bush nominated him last october, judge alito's exceptional 09:40:26.8 qualifications had a wow factor that impressed senators of both parties. in every respect, judge alito is a nominee who meets the highest standards of excellence. he is a graduate of princeton and yale law school. 09:40:42.1 he has dedicated his 30-year legal career to public service as a federal prosecutor and assistant to the solicitor general where he argued 12 cases before the supreme court, and for the last 15 years as a federal judge on the third 09:40:57.6 circuit in new jersey. he has been unanimously confirmed by this body not once, but twice. on the federal bench, he has participated in more than 3,500 cases, and he's written more 09:41:13.3 than 300 opinions. the american bar association gave judge alito its highest rating -- unanimously well-qualified. a man of integrity and modest judicial temperament. exceptional qualifications only 09:41:30.6 begin to reveal why sam alito should be confirmed to the supreme court. throughout his career as a prosecutor and a judge, sam alito earned a reputation as a man of integrity who was fair-minded and evenhanded. he earned the trust and respect 09:41:47.0 of his colleagues, republicans, democrats, and independents. that's one reason why seven federal judges endorsed his nomination and testified on his behalf. and through the judiciary committee hearings, i believe we saw a clear picture emerge of 09:42:04.1 judge alito's modest judicial temperament. despite enduring, relentless questioning of his credibility, integrity and personal and political views, judge alito remained unflappable. 09:42:20.1 never once raising his voice or becoming confrontational and focusing clearly and articulately on the facts, the law, and the constitutional questions presented to him. understands the limited role of 09:42:34.3 a judge, judicial restraint, impartiality and a commitment to the rule of law. in addition to all of his exceptional qualifications in integrity and his temperament, judge alito deserves confirmation because he 09:42:49.7 understands the limited role of a judge to interpret the law and not legislate from the bench. he practices judicial restraint in refuses to prejudge cases or apply a personal political agenda on the bench. in his hearing before the 09:43:07.0 judiciary committee, this philosophy was clear. he said "a judge can't have an 09:43:13.4 agenda. a judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case. the judge's only obligation, and it's a solemn obligation, is to the rule of law. and what that means is that in every single case the judge has 09:43:28.2 to do what the law requires." in his 15 years on the bench, judge alito has done exactly that. just listen to the words of one of judge alito's former law clerks, a registered democrat 09:43:42.7 who, by the way, still has a kerry for president bumper sticker on his car. his words: "until i read judge alito's 1985 reagan job application, i could not tell you what his politics were. when we worked on cases, we 09:43:58.9 reached the same result about 95% of the time. it was my experience that judge alito was and is capable of setting aside any personal biases he may have when he judges. he is the consummate professional." 09:44:17.2 long-term consequences for judicial nominations process, perhaps the most important reason to support judge alito has less to do with judge alito himself and more to do with our judicial nominations process.n 09:44:34.7 senators should treat judicial nominees with dig tirks respect -- dignity, respect and fairness, not just because it's the right thing to do but because a process that politicizes and degrades judicial nominees will drive our very best and our brightest away from the bench. 09:44:53.3 i am profoundly disappointed in the unfair and unseemly treatment of judge alito during this process. his judicial record has been distorted and mischaracterized. he's been labeled as "nonresponsive" courage his 09:45:08.9 hearings -- during his hearings, despite providing candid and articulate answers to more than 650 questions in over 18 hours of testimony, far more than many, perhaps any supreme court nominee in the past. and most sadly, he has been the 09:45:25.6 victim of a calculated but unsuccessful campaign to smear his character, his integrity and his credibility. in an editorial in support of judge alito published on january 15th, the "washington post" 09:45:42.8 expressed this concern, even though they would have chosen a different nominee than judge alito. the "washington post" editorial said in part, "he would not have been our pick for the high court, yet judge alito should be 09:45:58.1 confirmed both because of his positive qualities as an appellate judge and because of the dangerous precedent his rejection would set. supreme court confirmations have never been free of politics, but neither has their history generally been one of party-line votes or of ideology as the 09:46:15.1 determinative factor. to go down that road is to believe there exists a democratic law and a republican law which is repugnant to the idea of the rule of law, however, one reasonably defines 09:46:30.8 mainstream of jurisprudence, judge alito's work relies in it, while we harbor some anxiety in the direction he pay push the court, we would be more alarmed at the long-term implications of denying him the seat. no president should be denied 09:46:44.5 the prerogative of putting a person as qualified as judge alito on the supreme court." mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the full text of this "washington post" editorial of january 15 entitled "confirm samuel alito on the supreme 09:47:03.1 court" be inserted after my remarks in the record. the president pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. frist: mr. president, 13 years ago a republican minority in the senate voted to confirm the qualified nominee of a democratic president by an 09:47:18.9 overwhelming vote of 96-3. despite well-documented liberal record, justice ruth bader ginsburg sits on the supreme court today because republican senators chose to focus on her qualifications and not to 09:47:33.9 obstruct her nomination based merely on her judicial philosophy on ideology. i urge my colleagues to vote to confirm judge alito by applying that same fair standard. as we debate this week, i hope 09:47:50.3 we can put aside the partisan rhetoric and the politics of personal destruction and stand on principle. qualified judicial nominees like judge alito deserve a respectful debate and a fair up-or-down vote on the senate floor. 09:48:05.5 as senators, it is our fundamental constitutional duty 09:48:12.5 and responsibility. mr. president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the president pro tempore: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: 09:59:43.5 quorum call: mr. specter: mr. president, i 10:02:36.6 ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. specter: mr. president, before proceeding to the nomination of judge alito for the supreme court of the united states, i think it worthwhile to comment very briefly on some of the scheduling items for the 10:02:56.6 judiciary committee. as is well known, the patriot act was extended from december 31 until february 3. i circulated a letter yesterday 10:03:15.2 among our colleagues, and i would ask unanimous consent that it be included in the record at the conclusion of my remarks. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. specter: outlining the alternatives which we face at the present time. one is to let the act expire on february 3, which i think no one 10:03:32.7 would like. a second would be to extend the current bill for a period of time. we've been discussing a four-year extension. or, third, to have the cloture 10:03:52.1 imposed on the filibuster which is in effect and then vote to utilize the conference report and pass the act. it is always possible to take 10:04:05.2 another course of action if there is unanimous consent. the conference is technically discharged at this point, and the house of representatives has made it emphatically clear that 10:04:18.9 they have gone as far as they think it reasonable to go on the compromises, and there have been very substantial compromised worked out. and at one juncture there were three additional requests which we took to the house and got all 10:04:37.0 of them, the most important of which was the sunset provision 10:04:42.6 changed from seven years to four years. and then additional changes were requested, and they could not be accommodated. so that's where we stand at the present time. 10:04:58.7 i know that there are discussions underway to try to get some additional changes made. my own view is that those projects -- prospects are somewhere between bleak and nonkpeufptent. 10:05:16.5 a senator: would the senator yield on that point just for a moment. mr. specter: certainly. mr. leahy: mr. president, the distinguished senior senator from pennsylvania has worked has hard on this issue as anybody here and has the distinguished 10:05:36.3 presiding officer knows, the patriot act was -- the original patriot act was written by myself and the distinguished senator from pennsylvania and others, and it was the distinguished republican leader 10:05:51.7 from texas, dick armey, and i put in the sunset provisions so that we'd be forced to come back and look at different parts of it. much of the patriot act is permanent law. look at certain parts. those are the parts that are now 10:06:06.6 most in contention because they expire. the distinguished senator from pennsylvania and i were at the white house on another matter here recently and talked briefly about this with the president. i know the distinguished senator from new hampshire, mr. sununu, has been working very hard with 10:06:24.9 him. i think that the changes that still need to be made are relatively minor, and i would urge parties, especially all of 10:06:38.7 us who helped write the original patriot act, to make that one last effort. that would include, of course, the white house and the other body to do it. but as the chairman of the judiciary committee has worked 10:06:53.5 extraordinarily hard on this. i, like so many others, are willing to continue to work with him. and i think a little nudge from the white house, that nudge would have to be a quiet one among some of the principals in 10:07:09.0 both bodies, it could be done. i know that's -- and i commend the senator from new hampshire too for all the work he's doing on this. and i thank the chairman of the senate judiciary committee for yielding. i know he's on his time. mr. specter: mr. president, i 10:07:26.2 thank the senator from vermont for his comments. i thank him for the hard work he has done in the past year on the judiciary committee on many, many matters, including the patriot act. and i think we have set a tone 10:07:40.8 and have been able to agree on almost all matters. if there can be some modifications made agreeable on all sides before february 3, i would be more than willing to be 10:07:56.3 a party to that. and my preference was the bill which passed the senate. but we have a bicameral system, and the house has its own point of view. and i think they have been reasonable. 10:08:11.4 and we have a good bill, certainly a bill in the conference report which is vastly improved with respect to civil rights over the current bill. but i'm not in favor of having short-term extensions. if you have another short-term extension, it's just going to 10:08:29.2 beget another short-term extension. so that i want to fish or cut bait before february 3 on that issue. the judiciary committee -- on the second item -- is scheduled to hold a hearing on the wartime 10:08:46.0 executive power, n.s.a.'s surveillance authority on february 6. and i think that my colleagues would be interested in a letter which i have written to the 10:09:01.9 attorney general dated january 24 -- yesterday -- outlining a series of some 15 questions to be addressed in advance of a hearing or at the time of the 10:09:14.6 attorney general's opening statement, or at least that request to try to set the parameters on the issues for that hearing. and i would ask unanimous consent that the letter to attorney general gonzales be included after my oral statement 10:09:32.1 today. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. specter: a third item of judiciary committee scheduling 10:09:39.4 involves the asbestos reform bill. the leader has stated his intention to bring it up on february 6. as we customarily do, we meet in the afternoon. 10:09:55.8 i intend to absent myself on the judiciary hearing on n.s.a., and we will proceed on that bill. senator leahy and i sent a letter yesterday to our 10:10:12.9 colleagues asking that if there are amendments to be offered -- and i'm sure there will be -- that they be provided to the managers in advance so that we can organize the proceeding on the bill and seek time 10:10:30.8 agreements. that has been a very, very difficult and contentious issue, but it was passed out of the committee last year after numerous executive sessions marking up the bill, extended debate on a variety of 10:10:46.9 amendments. many were accepted, some were rejected. that is an issue where the supreme court of the united states has called upon congress to address this issue. did not lend itself to solution 10:11:02.4 in the courts on class actions. there are thousands of people who are suffering from the injuries of asbestos, mesothelioma, which is deadly and asbestiosis and others, who cannot recover because their 10:11:22.4 employers are bankrupt. approximately 80 companies have gone bankrupt. more are threatened with bankruptcy. the bill which we have reported to the floor is the product of enormous effort and enormous analysis by the judiciary committee and beyond. 10:11:41.1 it was voted out of committee 13-5. senator leahy and i have convened along with the assistance of judge becker, retired senior federal judge -- had been chief judge of the 10:11:58.1 court of appeals for the third circuit, where we have brought in the so-called stakeholders, the insurers, the trial lawyers, the aflcio and the manufacturers -- and worked through that bill which has festered in the 10:12:13.5 congress for more than two decades. i first saw it when gary hart, then-senator from colorado, brought in the johns mansville, which was a key constituent of his who was having the problem. 10:12:28.9 and i think it is clear that if we are not able to act now, that it will be decades before this kind of an effort can be mustered again. just one additional comment on 10:12:44.2 the scope of the work. after it was passed out of committee in late july of 2003, i asked judge becker to assist as a mediator. we had meetings in his chamber in philadelphia twaorbgs full 10:12:59.3 days in august. -- two full days in august. we've had about 50 meetings since attended by sometimes more than 40 or 50 people. and we're still open for business to consider modifications. 10:13:14.9 we know that the legislative process is one, when it comes to the floor there are amendments, there are more ideas. and we are open. but that is an issue which is of tremendous urgency. the president has spoken about it. 10:13:30.7 the president wants it enacted. the majority leader is firmly behind legislation by the senate. the speaker of the house of representatives has spoken about it. but candidly and openly, we face very, very powerful interests who are opposed to any action. 10:13:48.9 there are very, very substantial dollars involved here. there's very, very substantial pain and suffering involved here. and those of us who have worked on the bill led by the distinguished senator of vermont 10:14:03.1 and myself and others have gone to the well and gone to the wall, and we still are open for business and invite comments. but anybody who has amendments, we'd like to hear from you as early as possible so that we can consider them, try to work out 10:14:21.2 time agreements and try to move the bill ahead in a managers context. i'd be glad to yield to senator leahy. mr. leahy: mr. president, again, i agree with what the distinguished senator from pennsylvania has said. 10:14:35.0 this is a bipartisan bill. 10:14:37.0 in fact, to emphasize it, he and i have sent a letter to all our colleagues signed jointly asking them that they have amendments that, they plan for it, to let us know.n it should be emphasized that not only did we have hours upon 10:14:53.7 hours upon hours of hearings, but we had so many open meetings. and the senator from pennsylvania's office and my office and others. we made sure that the 10:15:12.7 stakeholders, all the stakeholders were able to come to those meetings. we also made sure that every senators' office, everybody who expressed any interest, republican or democrat, was invited to those meetings. they were wide open. 10:15:27.1 in fact, almost all of the senators on both sides of the aisle either attended those meetings or had staff attend those meetings. so these -- these meetings we had, again, every single 10:15:47.5 stakeholder involved, it was open, it was bipartisan. that was made clear by the senator from pennsylvania from the beginning that they'd have to be open and bipartisan, and 10:16:04.8 he, as would be expected, kept his commitment all the way through. my concern, and i would highlight two things the senator from pennsylvania has just said. one, if we don't do it now, we 10:16:20.4 lose the opportunity. because i think it would be decades before anybody would put together the kind of coalition that's been possible to put together. the other thing he said was not just some of the powerful 10:16:36.9 financial stakes involved, but it's a powerful amount of suffering that's going on by the people who are suffering from asbestos poisoning and in all the different forms. they are the ones that are held in limbo throughout all this 10:16:55.2 time. we can bring some relief to them now, not the possibility of ten years from now a series of lawsuits go through, but now. we have had members of the supreme court ranging from the 10:17:15.5 late chief justice william rehnquist to justice ruth bader ginsburg serving two different philosophies, have called upon the congress to bring about a legislative solution because our 10:17:32.6 courts are unable to handle all the cases that might come up. let's be clear about that. there are some that would probably like to stay litigating forever on this, but the fact is our courts are unable to handle 10:17:48.3 it. it cries out for a legislative solution. i would urge people to come to this with an open mind. vote it up or down. vote the amendments up or down. 10:18:03.6 i've heard some opponents being quoted as being prepared to demagogue -- to demagogue -- this bipartisan bill. well, this bill didn't just suddenly spring out of nowhere. it's a bipartisan, heavily 10:18:26.0 -worked-on bill. i might say, there has been pain in it for everybody. everybody's had to give something in this. the senator from pennsylvania didn't get everything he wanted. i didn't get everything i 10:18:35.0 wanted. the stakeholders who came to the table, virtually all of them openly and honestly, they gave up a lot on it. but the people who are suffering from asbestos poisening in 10:18:50.9 whatever form are the ones waiting for us to act. i think the time is right to act. we could pass a bipartisan bill here. i believe the other body would be glad to see such a bill. the president has stated publicly, and he's certainly stated privately that both 10:19:06.5 senator specter and myself, he is behind actions. i mean, this is one of those cases -- everybody cries out for some bipartisan action around here this. is one of those cases where republicans and democrats could come together, where the congress and the white house can work together and actually those 10:19:24.0 who will benefit will be the people suffering. we ought to get on with it. mr. specter: mr. president, i think my distinguished clear for those comments. 10:19:35.6 there's no doubt about the suffering from those who were afflicted with mesothelioma and other ailments. there is also no doubt about the tremendous impact it has on the economy of the united states. 10:19:52.1 it has been estimated that this would be a bigger boost than any kind of a tax cut you could have or any sort of an economic recovery program you could have to be able to deal with the companies who have gone into 10:20:07.6 bankruptcy and the others where bankruptcy is threatened. the amount of work, as the senator from vermont has specified, has been gigantic. 10:20:23.0 it is three years in process. senator hatch took the lead with the trust fund idea where the manufacturers and insurers agreed to put up some $140 billion into the trust fund with no government payments not coming out of the pockets of the 10:20:40.8 taxpayers. the meetings which have been held and the efforts and the momentum which we have had can't be recaptured. i think it is fair to say certainly during the -- my tenure here, 25 years, i've 10:20:57.2 never seen legislation worked on to the extent this legislation has been worked on with the complexity of the problem and the involvement of senators and staff and so-called stakeholders. and if it's now, it's never. mr. president, i ask that the 10:21:17.7 comments up until now be put in the appropriate category under morning business and now we proceed to the alito nomination. the presiding officer: without 10:21:30.0 objection. mr. specter: i support the testimony nation by president bush for circuit court judge samuel a. alito, jr., to the supreme court of the united states because he is qualified. in coming to my conclusion, my 10:21:50.2 staff and i have undertaken an extensive review of judge alito's record and of his some 361 opinions in total, we have categorized 238 of those as 10:22:06.5 major decisions wile serving on the -- while serving on thethy, court of appeals. we have reviewed 49 of the cases that judge alito handled during his tenure as united states attorney. we've made an analysis of 43 10:22:22.5 speeches and articles judge alito authored and evaluations of 38 formal opinions, petitions and supreme court briefs which judge alito wrote while serving in the department of justice. additionally, the judiciary 10:22:38.0 committee heard testimony of some 30 hours and 20 minutes where we had 17 hours and 45 minutes of questioning of judge alito and testimony from 31 outside witnesses. and it is on the basis of that 10:22:58.1 voluminous record that it is my personal view that judge alito ought to be confirmed. he has a background from a father who was an immigrant from 10:23:13.5 italy, not born with a silver spoon in his mouth. came up the hard way. had an extraordinary academic record at princeon and -- princeton and the yale law 10:23:28.2 school. worked as an assistant united states attorney and then was united states torn, then worked in the department of justice and for 15 years has been on the court of appeals for the third circuit. he answered questions put to him, i think, more extensively 10:23:46.0 than any other nominee has in recent times, and the full text of the prepared statement which i ask to be included at the conclusion of my remarks, mr. president -- 10:24:01.1 the presiding officer: without objection. mr. specter: -- specifies the details of the questions and the analysis of many, many of his cases. judge alito came under very extensive questioning on the issue of a woman's rights to 10:24:21.2 choose because of his work on a brief on the thornburgh case where he had advocated not reversal of roe but cutting back on some of the provisions. 10:24:34.0 because of a statement which he had made in 1985 when he was looking for a position with the federal government where he expressed the view that the constitution did not protect the right to an abortion. judge alito testified at length 10:24:52.8 that he has an open mind on this subject. i think it is fair to say that when a comment is made by a lawyer in an advocacy capacity that it represents the view of a client on a position taken and 10:25:08.8 not a personal view, and with respect to the statement that he made about his view of the constitution in 1985, that he has gone to great lengths to 10:25:26.6 analyze the supreme court decisions on the issue of a woman's right to choose with the assurances that he does have an open mind. he was questioned extensively on this subject. 10:25:39.2 i led off with it for some 20 minutes on my first round of questioning, and judge alito expressed his regard for stare decisis, the latin expression 10:25:56.8 for let the decision stand. he commented that he agrees with the position of chief justice rehnquist on the miranda case involving suspects' rights on statements and confessions where chief justice rehnquist early in 10:26:13.2 his career had been against miranda and later changed his view to support miranda. once, as the chief justice put it, it had become embed in the culture of police practices. and judge alito stated that he 10:26:29.1 thought that there was a weight to be accorded to cultural changes, and i think it is fair to have that statement of principle apply on a woman's right to choose. 10:26:45.2 judge alito further testified that he agreed with justice harlan's dissent in the case of poe vs. ullman that the constitution is a living document, agreeing with justice cardozo in palco that it 10:27:01.4 reflects the changing values and mores of our society. so he is not an originalist. he does not look to original intent. he does not look to the senateic black letter, but that he 10:27:17.9 understands the concept of evolving patterns and evolving reliance. i questioned him at length about the reliance factor in casey vs. planned parenthood, and i think that judge alito went as far as 10:27:32.3 he could go on the assurances of maintaining an open mind on this important subject. when it came to the issue as to whether he reviewed it, regarded it as settled law, his testimony 10:27:50.5 was virtually identical to the testimony of chief justice roberts, who testified that it was settled and as chief justice roberts put it in his confirmation hearings, beyond. that but chief justice roberts 10:28:03.8 left open the unquestionable right and duty of the court to review all cases on the merits when they are presented and to afford appropriate weight to stare decisis and to precedents but not to take the position 10:28:22.5 that precedents can never be overturned. i think a fair reading of the record is that judge alito went about as far as he could go without answering a question as to how he would rule on a specific case, which is beyond 10:28:39.0 the purview as to what a nominee ought to do. in taking up questions of executive power, judge alito could not answer questions about the president's authority to go to war with iraq, which was 10:28:57.4 posed. how could a nominee answer a question of that magnitude in a nomination proceeding without knowing a lot more about the circumstances? 10:29:07.8 and judges make decisions after they have a case in controversy, when they have briefs submitted, when they have argumented prepared, when they have discussions with their colleagues, and they reflect on the matter and come to a conclusion, not sitting at a witness table in a judiciary 10:29:24.3 committee hearing. judge alito answered the questions as to the 10:29:32.6 considerations which would be involved, and i think again, went about as far as he could go. on the question of congressional power, i questioned him at length on concerns that i have about what the supreme court has had to say about declaring acts of congress unconstitutional 10:29:49.9 because the supreme court disagrees with our -- quote -- "method of reasoning." it is a stretch, as i see it. have some concept that when you leave the senate chamber and go 10:30:05.4 across the green to the supreme court our columns are lined up exactly with the supreme court columns. interesting historically in abearly draft of the constitution the senate was to nominate supreme court justicesn that would be an 10:30:26.4 interesting process if we had that given the political complexity of the senate today. but back to the point, what superior wisdom and what superior method of reasoning comes across a person when he gets to the supreme court of the united states? our method of reasoning may not 10:30:43.2 be too good, but it's our method of reasoning. and to have the court say that they declare acts unconstitutional because they don't like our method of reasoning is, candidly stated, highly, highly insulting. 10:30:59.7 and judge alito said the obvious, that our method of reasoning was as good as the court's. and then in the decision on the americans for disabilities act, where the supreme court has imposed a test of what is 10:31:21.0 proportionate, taking it out of thin air in a 1997 decision, what is con grew went and proportionate, is a test which can't be applied and really 10:31:33.7 just lends itself to legislation from the bench. justice scalia characterized it accurately calling it a flabby test where the court was functioning as the taskmaster of congress to see that we had done 10:31:48.7 our homework. and i think that judge alito's answers showed an appropriate respect for separation of powers and congressional authority. the decisions of the supreme 10:32:05.9 court questioning constutionality of statutes has led a number of us on the committee to prepare legislation which would give the congress standing to go to the supreme court to tkpwau to up-- to argue 10:32:21.1 to uphold our legislation. we thought initially about having a judiciary committee watch, where we would observe what the court had done, and from that move to thought about seeking to intervene as acme 10:32:36.9 cuss curie, as a friend of the court, and then took it as a final step, why not go to the court and argue our cases ourselves through counsel and through an appropriate way, counsel has the authority to grant standing and we can 10:32:50.2 grant standing to ourselves to see to it that our views are appropriately presented to the court. we respect the court as the final arbiter of the constitution. that is our system. but the arguments and the 10:33:06.4 considerations and the record which congress amasses ought to be considered by the court. now the constutionality is upheld by the solicitor general. but in cases where there is a conflict between what the congress has to say and what the president has to say, we ought 10:33:23.6 to be in a position to make our own submissions to the court. and the issue of executive authority and the current surveillance practices came up for discussion in judge alito's confirmation hearings. 10:33:38.5 and again, he couldn't say how he would rule on the case if it came before him. he'd have to read the briefs, hear the arguments, consider it. but he responded by giving us the factors and items which he would consider. 10:33:55.4 many, many issues were discussed, and i think judge alito approached them with an open mind. one subject of particular concern to this senator is the issue of televising the court, which i think ought to be done. 10:34:13.1 the supreme court of the united states today makes the final decisions on so many of the cutting-edge question of our time, and the american people ought to know what is going on. a number of the justices appear 10:34:27.4 on television on programs. no reason why the court 10:34:34.4 proceedings shouldn't be televised. senator biden and i made that specific request on the case of bush vs. gore and got a response from chief justice rehnquist denying it, but then they 10:34:47.6 released an oral transcript of the proceedings at the end of the day, and the court is doing more of that, which is a step forward. the congress has the authority to make decisions on the administration of the court. for example, the congress 10:35:03.9 decides how many supreme court justices there will be. we establish the number at nine. you may remember in the roosevelt year, in an effort to pack the court, increase the number to 15, well, that is a congressional judgment. 10:35:19.4 we decide when the court starts to function -- the third monday in october. we decide what is a quorum of the court -- six. we legislate on speedy trial rules. and i believe it is within the purview of the congress to legislate to call for television 10:35:35.3 of their proceedings. i recognize that the ultimate decision would rest with the court if they decide to declare our act unconstitutional. under separation of powers, that is their prerogative, and i respect it. 10:35:49.7 but i believe we ought to speak to the subject. and on the subject of television, again, judge alito didn't give the answer i'd like to hear, that he's for televising the court. but he said he had an open mind and would consider it. 10:36:06.0 again, that's about as far as he could go. one panel of witnesses i think had a particular impressive line, and that involved seven judges from the court of appeals 10:36:22.3 from the third circuit who had worked with judge alito who testified. there were precedents for judges testifying, and they are elaborated upon in my brief. the retired chief justice warren burger came in to testify in the 10:36:40.5 nomination proceedings for judge bork, and that is something for which there is precedent. and these judges have unique knowledge of judge alito, because they have worked with 10:36:56.2 him in many, many cases. judge becker, for example, former chief judge of the third circuit, now on senior status, sat with judge alito on more than 1,000 cases. judge becker has a national reputation as an outstanding 10:37:13.3 jurist. recently received the award as the outstanding federal judge in the country. and testified about judge alito not having an agenda, not having -- not being an ideologue and having an open mind. 10:37:28.8 judge becker regarded very much as a judge's judge, a centrist judge, pointed out that he and judge alito had disagreed very few times, about 25 times during the course of considering more than 1,000 cases. 10:37:44.5 after the arguments are concluded, the three judges who sit on the panel retire and discuss the case among themselves. no clerks present, no secretaries present; but just a candid discussion about what went on. 10:37:59.0 and that's where the judges really let their hair down and talk about the cases, where you really get to know what a judge thinks. and it is a high testimonial to judge alito that these judges sang his praises in terms of 10:38:16.7 openness and in terms of studiousness and in terms of not having an agenda. one of the witnesses, former judge tim lewis of the third circuit, an african-american, 10:38:31.6 testified about his own dedication to choice for a woman's height to choose, his own dedication to civil rights, civil liberties, and testified very forcefully on judge alito's behalf, and said very bluntly that he wouldn't be there if he 10:38:47.6 didn't have total confidence in what judge alito had to say. one further comment, mr. president, and that is on the party-line vote which we seem to 10:39:05.7 be coming to, voted out of committee 10-8;10 republicans voting for judge alito, 8 democrats voting against skwraoelts. 10:39:19.6 i think it is unfortunate that our senate -- our senate is so polarized today. i believe that this body and this country would benefit greatly by more independence in 10:39:33.9 the senate. i have not voted in favor of judge alito as a matter of party loyalty. if i thought he was not qualified, i would vote "no" as i have in the past on nominees 10:39:47.8 of my own party, from presidents of my own party. but we need to move away from the kind of partisanship which has ripped this body in recent 10:40:02.8 times. we have, i think it important that the american people have confidence in what the senate does on the merits as opposed to the appearance of right politics. 10:40:20.6 and i believe that it is important for judge alito to have supporters who favor a woman's right to choose so that he does not feel in any way 10:40:40.1 beholden to or confirmed by people who have one idea on some of these questions or have another idea on some of these questions. and without naming names and identifying people, we have more than six republicans who are 10:40:52.9 pro-choice, support a woman's right to choose. so the balance of power will, if confirmed, be not only on those who are on one side of that issue or another. but i think we would do well to reexamine the procedures which 10:41:10.8 we utilize in the confirmation process to try to move away from partisanship and for a standard of getting an idea of the judge's temperament, his background, his jurisprudence, 10:41:30.1 where he stands, without pressing him to the wall as to how he stands on any particular issue. when we had the nomination of white house counsel harriet 10:41:46.6 miers, she was supposed -- she was opposed because, as one person put it, there was no guarantee that she would vote to overturn roe. well, you can't get guarantees from supreme court nominees. 10:42:01.5 i've said before, and i think it worth repeating, that guarantees are for used cars and washing machines. they are not for nominees to the supreme court of the united states. and i think when we examine temperament and background, including jurisprudence, that 10:42:18.4 those are the appropriate tests. no one knows with certainty how judge alito is going to vote. the cases are full of surprises. justice sandra day o'connor was very much opposed to abortion rights before she came to the 10:42:35.2 court, and she's been one of the foremost proponents of a woman's right to choose, subject to some limitations. justice anthony kennedy spoke very disparchingly about abortion rights before coming to the court, and he has supported 10:42:52.6 roe vs. wade. justice david souter as attorney general for new hampshire opposed repealing new hampshire's law banning abortions even after it had been declared unconstitutional by the supreme court of the united states. 10:43:05.4 the national organization for women had a rally on capitol hill when david souter was up for confirmation in 1991. i remember well; i was there. big placards "reject david souter or women will die." 10:43:22.4 so that no one knows what will happen. president truman was disappointed by his nominees in the famous steel seizure case. again and again and again there have been surprises. the rule is that there is no rule. 10:43:38.0 so that on the committee and in the senate, we are left for our best judgment as to qualifications without guarantees. separation of powers entrust to the president the role of making the nominations. 10:43:54.5 it's up to the senate to make an evaluation to confirm or not. and then it's up to the justices to make the decisions. and the separation of powers has served us well. and those are the facts which have led me to vote judge alito out of committee affirmatively, and my vote will be cast when 10:44:11.7 the role is called later in this floor debate. i yield the floor.n 10:44:29.4 the presiding officer: the 10:44:30.6 senator from alabama. mr. sessions: mr. president, i'd like the thank senator specter for his excellent leadership of the judiciary committee during the roberts and alito hearings. he squarely addressed the tough issues in his first questioning. he made sure that every member 10:44:47.9 of the committee had full and ample opportunity to ask any question they wanted. we had 30-minute rounds. we had opening statements. we had the opportunity to do multiple rounds. basically i think people could have asked questions as long as 10:45:04.3 they wanted to ask these nominees. both, of course, both roberts and alito were magnificent in their testimony, superb in their knowledge of the constitution, the role of a judge in every possible way. 10:45:20.3 that's why they have been favorably received by the american public, and i think will both be confirmed. justice roberts, of course, has already been confirmed. we have the greatest legal system in the world. it is the foundation of our liberties. 10:45:38.4 it's the foundation of our economic prosperity, but the focus and the key ingredient of our legal system is an independent judge who makes decisions every day based on the law and the facts, not on their personal, political, religious, 10:45:59.7 moral or social views. if we descend to that level, if we allow those social, political views to affect or infect the decision-making process, justice 10:46:15.4 has been eroded. that is contrary to every ideal of the american rule of law. and that's what is important here today because justice -- judge alito has a legal philosophy. 10:46:34.6 not his political philosophy that's important, what is his legal philosophy? the core of his beliefs as a judge is that a judge should be careful, fair, restrained and honest in finding the facts in 10:46:51.7 the case and applying the relevant law to those facts. for what purpose? to decide that dispute, that discreet issue that's before the court at that time and not to indulge, as he indicated, in 10:47:07.9 great theories. that's not what a judge is about. so this is what american judges must do for our entire legal system to work, and that's why i am so proud that president bush has given us two nominees that 10:47:23.9 can explain, articulate that role of a judge in a way that every american can understand, relate to and affirm. my colleagues, i'm afraid, lack a proper understanding of this concept. 10:47:38.6 it goes to the core of our differences over judges. they want judges, i'm afraid, who will impose their own views, their personal views on political issues in the guise of deciding discreet cases before 10:47:54.8 them. oftentimes these are views that cannot be passed in the political legislative process but can be imposed by a judge who simply redefines or reinterprets the meaning of words in our constitution. 10:48:10.5 and they declare that the constitution says that same-sex marriage must be the law of the land. they just declare that's so. it only takes five judges to do that, unelected, 10:48:26.6 lifetime-appointed to set that kind of new standard for america. is it any wonder people are worried about that? it erodes democracy at its most fundamental level. when political decisions are being set by judges with 10:48:42.1 lifetime appointments unaccountable to the public. so that's what it is that we're worried about in so many different ways, and there has within a trend in that regard, no doubt about it, by our court. i think they have abused their 10:49:00.2 authority by taking an extremely hostile view toward the expression of religious conviction in public life. they have struck down christmas displays. our courts have declared the pledge of allegiance to the 10:49:15.8 united states government, the pledge of allegiance unconstitutional because it has "under god" in it. by the way, if those of you can see the words over this door, "in god we trust," it's part of 10:49:30.6 our heritage written right on the wall of this chamber. this is an extreme interpretation of the separation of church and state. it's not consistent with our classical understanding of law in america. we have the supreme court just this past year redefining the 10:49:50.2 takings clause. the takings clause says that you can take private property for public use. it does not say you can take it for any purpose, any private 10:50:05.2 mall. they redefined the meaning because they thought that was smarter, that was better policy, but we don't appoint judges to set policy. we have that responsibility. we're the people that can be 10:50:17.5 voted out of office if we set bad policy. we're the people out there meeting people every day and campaigning and trying to understand what the american people care about, and to do that -- that's not what judges do at 80 years old sitting over there reading briefs every day. 10:50:32.5 so this is an important issue. they've declared that illegal alien, despite state laws to the contrary, are entitled to benefits. they've struck down even partial-birth abortion laws. they have declared morality -- this is hard to believe but 10:50:51.2 true -- in recent years they have declared that morality cannot be a basis for congressional legislation, yet they contend that they may decide opinions and redefine the meaning of words and the 10:51:06.0 understanding of words over hundreds of years based on what they declare to be evolving standards of decency. is that a standard or is that just a license for a judge to do whatever they feel like doing at a given time, evolving standards 10:51:21.5 of decency. who can define that? do they have hearings on what these standards are? so these are important issues. the american people are concerned about it. president bush was concerned about it. he promised that he would appoint jungs that show 10:51:37.7 restraint, judges of great ability and integrity, but who would show restraint and be more modest in the way they handle these cases. i'm telling you, that's a fair request that the president, a fair standard that he set. 10:51:53.6 it's a legitimate issue for the american people to decide. he talked about it in almost every speech he made, and that's what he promised to do and that's what he did. that's what he's done. now, if we were seeing judges, i 10:52:10.1 think there is a legitimate concern that you would appoint judges who would promote some conserve agenda. i don't favor that. i oppose that. we don't want a judge pro-to-promote a liberal or a 10:52:25.0 conservative agenda, although the plain fact is if anybody looks at it squarely will see that the court has actually been promoting a more liberal agenda. but we're not asking that a conservative agenda be promoted. we're asking that the courts maintain their role as the 10:52:41.5 neutral umpire to decide cases based on the law passed by this legislative branch or state legislatures or passed by the people through the adoption of the united states constitution. i don't understand it. 10:52:57.9 the opposition to judge alito. he's such a fabulous nominee. but it does appear, according to the "new york times," just last week, the 19 of january, that our democratic leader, senator harry reid, has urged his 10:53:14.8 colleagues to vote no so i they can -- for political reason, to make placement issue. -- to make it a political issue. we need to be careful about that really. i'm afraid there has been an attempt to change the ground rules of confirmation to set standards we've never set before 10:53:30.0 for nominees, and that knife cuts both ways. if this is affirmed, then it will be more difficult if the future for democratic presidents to have their nominees confirmed. mr. president, judge alito has a 10:53:46.3 remarkable, remarkable record. he's the son of immigrants in new jersey. his father was an immigrant to this country. he goes off to princton, gets his degree there with honors, declines to accept an invitation 10:54:01.5 to join an eating club that excludes women and others, i guess, that are beneath the members of that club. he decided while he was there that he would just dine with everybody else, the scruff and the scrum, i guess, that you 10:54:17.5 find at princton. then he goes to yale law school, where he finished at the top of his class, served as an editor of the "yale law journal," participated in the rotc at a 10:54:28.6 time when that was not an easy thing to do, served in the rh army reserve for eight years and was offended that princton would kick off rotc from campus, and i'm sure was not pleased when the rioters bombed the rotc 10:54:45.9 building at princton. he's an american. he believes in his country, prepared to serve his country, go where he's asked to go if called upon in that fashion. so he was chosen to clerk for 10:55:03.2 the third circuit, the court he now sits on, judge garth. after he graduated, quite an honor. for three years he served as an assistant united states attorney in that great, large new jersey law office for the u.s. attorney 10:55:17.9 where he argued appellate cases. he did the appellate work. that's what he would be as a supreme court judge, is an appellate judge, not a trial judge. that's what he did when he started out his practice. then he went to the solicitor general's office of the 10:55:33.2 department of justice, which is often referred to as the greatest lawyer job in the world to be able to stand up in the courts of the united states of america, particularly the united states supreme court, and to represent the united states of america in that court. 10:55:49.1 and he argued 12 cases before the supreme court, not one half of 1% of lawyers in america have probably argued any case before the u.s. supreme court. he argued 12. there's a reflection of his 10:56:04.7 strength and capability. then he became united states attorney in new jersey, which is one of the largest u.s. attorneys offices in america, prosecuted mafia and drug organizations and was highly successful in that office and 10:56:22.6 won great plaudits for his performance and then was placed 15 years ago on the third circuit court of appeals. so he has served as a circuit judge in the third circuit court 10:56:36.4 of appeals for 15 years, rendering, writing some 350 opinions and participating in many, many others and has had his record exposed to the world. and what does it look like? it is a record of fairness and 10:56:53.1 decency. i submit that it is without question. the mesh bar association -- the american bar association -- now, some of us on the conservative side have questioned the bar. they voted for -- they're pro abortion in their positions. 10:57:09.4 they take liberal positions on a lot of issues. some people have criticized them for that. they declare that their ratings of judges are not based on that, but sometimes they have been accused of allowing their personal views to infect that rating process. 10:57:25.7 how did the american bar association rate judge alito? they gave him their highest possible rating. they found that he was well qualified, unanimously, by the 15-member committee that meets 10:57:43.4 to decide that issue. they talked to -- interviewed 300 people, people who have litigated against judge alito as a private lawyer, people who have been his supervisor, people who have worked for him, people 10:57:58.8 who have had his -- had their cases decided by him. they go out and talk to these people, and they'll share with the american bar association privately what they might not say publicly. so they interviewed 300 people. they contacted over 2,000, and 10:58:17.5 they concluded that judge alito has established a record of both proper judicial conduct and even-handed application in seeking to do what is fundamentally fair. 10:58:31.0 they declared that judge alito was held -- quote -- "in incredibly high regard." that was by attorney john peyton, an african-american who argued the university of 10:58:46.0 michigan quota case before the u.s. supreme court, not a right-winger. he said that they found that the people they interviewed held judge alito in incredibly high regard. i asked him, did he choose that word carefully, he said, "i did, 10:59:03.8 yes, sir." so mr. president, i see others are here, and our time on this side is about to expire. and i would just wrap up with these thoughts. 10:59:23.3 judge alito represents that neutral magistrate that we look