Recag/C4_4 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 12 27.8k
And in California tonight, strong wildfires sweeping through the Santa Cruz Mountains. The fires there burned now more than 3,000 acres, destroying ten buildings. Some evacuations have been ordered. About 50 homes are being threatened by those fast-moving fires. The fires have being fueled by dry brush and high winds. No reports of any injuries at this time.
Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts.
George in California said: "I'm so tired of hearing that the voters of Florida and Michigan must be punished for voting early. If someone must be punished, then go after those that changed the dates, not the individual voters."
It is so simple, isn't it?
Paul in Oklahoma: "Lou, if you want to see the DNC get off their dead ends and count Michigan and Florida votes, just let Hillary announce she's going independent. I'd love to see it."
You know, that's an intriguing idea.
And William in New York: "I've been a Democrat since 1964. I'll now register as an independent. I'm fed up with the phony B.S. from both parties. Keep up the good work."
Good idea. We welcome you to our ranks.
We'll have more of our thoughts here later in the forecast.
And a reminder to join us on the radio Monday through Friday for "The Lou Dobbs Show." Next Tuesday my guests include Bill Fleckenstein, the author of "Greenspan's Bubbles: The Age of Ignorance at the Federal Reserve," a scathing assessment of Alan Greenspan's 19- year tenure. And China expert, Professor Gordon Chang on earthquake relief efforts there.
Go to loudobbs.com -- loudobbsradio.com to find local listings for "The Lou Dobbs Show" on the radio.
Up here next, a left-wing group purporting to be an independent watchdog has joined forces with a congressional Hispanic caucus. They're attacking me and our reporting here on illegal immigration. One of the leaders of the advocacy group, Paul Waldman, joins me.
And a top military commander hinting at the possibility of more troop withdrawals from Iraq. General David Grange will be here to assess that.
And the legal fight between a polygamous sect and the state of Texas goes to a public court. The polygamists are winning.
DOBBS: Important legal ruling in that polygamy case in Texas, an appellate court ruling. The state of Texas should not have removed those children, the children of 38 women from the polygamist ranch last month.
Child Protective Services removed those children, believing that girls as young as 13 were married to much older men.
Jenny Hoff of our affiliate KXAN reports now from San Angelo, Texas -- Jenny.
JENNY HOFF, KXAN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, today in San Angelo, there were a lot of happy emotions here at the courthouse. That's because the 3rd Court of Appeals ruling filed on the writ of mandamus filed on behalf of 38 FLDS women came down.
That court ruling was in the mothers' favor. The ruling said that CPS never had a right to take all of the children off the Yearning for Zion Ranch without evidence and on the assumption that their religious beliefs would damage them.
So today Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, which filed the mandamus, said this was a great day for all families in Texas.
Now, what CPS said they are doing at this time is working with the attorney general's office here in Texas to see what steps they should take next. They stand by their belief that those children were in danger on the ranch. They said in their statement that they did see many reasons -- many reasons to believe that there was abuse out here. But they won't say if they plan on filing an appeal to the Texas Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, they have ten days here for the judge to reverse her decision and send those children back home with their kids. Otherwise, CPS can file for a stay, and if they're granted that, those children should stay in state custody.
Meanwhile, all of the hearings here at the courthouse, the status hearings that were scheduled for the next two weeks. They've at least been canceled until the end of this week so CPS can figure out what they're going to do and mothers can, of course, meet with their lawyers and see if they can get their children back as soon as possible.
Jenny Hoff of our affiliate, KXAN in San Angelo, Texas.
Joining me again, our senior legal analyst. A busy day for you, for all of us. This was a blockbuster decision: 460 children, 38 of them under this ruling, the appellate court saying, you know, "You made a mistake, Texas."
TOOBIN: It's really a breathtaking decision, and a total rebuke of the Texas authorities who removed those kids and of the lower court judge who said it was OK to do it.
DOBBS: Well, now, anyone worried about two things here. We keep calling it polygamy. It's pedophilia as far as, certainly, I'm concerned.
TOOBIN: That's right. That's the real issue.
DOBBS: And for the judge to make this decision without addressing that issue and the welfare of all of these children without ascertaining it, it seems peculiar to me.
DOBBS: My God. Puberty is the demarcation point for the appellate court?
TOOBIN: Well, that's -- if you were going to remove children from their parents, you have to show specific threats to specific children. And that's what they said the Texas authorities didn't do.
DOBBS: Well, this is -- could this ultimately apply to all 460 children?
TOOBIN: It does apply to all 460 children.
TOOBIN: That's right. I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. Certainly, the evidence presented here applies across the board. And the hostility to the government's position would certainly apply broadly if the evidence, as I suspect, is the same about all the rest of them.
DOBBS: But simply, do you agree or disagree with the appellate court decision?
TOOBIN: I was persuaded by the appellate court decision. I think it is such a huge step to take a child away from his or her mother that you have to be more sure that there's a good reason than the Texas authorities had here.
DOBBS: Jeffrey Toobin, thank you. Appreciate it.
We'll have much more on this polygamy case on CNN throughout the evening. "LARRY KING LIVE" will have exclusive reaction from the mothers who have children in state custody in Texas. We'll join Larry at 9 p.m. Eastern right here on CNN, of course.
Up next, one of the authors of a report attacking me and this broadcast because of our coverage of the illegal immigration crisis. It promises to be an interesting discussion.
And more recalls of toxic toys. Can you believe America's toy brands still can't manage to ensure that the toys they're importing from communist China and elsewhere are safe for American consumers? We'll have that report. Stay with us. It gets better and better.
DOBBS: The left-wing advocacy group, Media Matters, which sometimes describes itself as a watchdog group and which purports to be same, has teamed up with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to attack me, this broadcast, and a few others in broadcast media, but specifically me and this broadcast, for our coverage of illegal immigration.
The group issued a scathing report, saying this broadcast and those other programs on cable television spread what it calls the myths of illegal immigration.
Paul Waldman is senior fellow, director of special projects for Media Matters of America, and is kind enough to join us here tonight.
PAUL WALDMAN, DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS, MEDIA MATTERS OF AMERICA: Thanks, Lou.
DOBBS: Let me ask you this. You're hooked up with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Media Matters is itself a left-wing organization. I mean, why -- what credibility do all of you have on this issue? Would you have any more credibility, for example, than the Chamber of Commerce and the Bush administration in proposing amnesty and open borders?
WALDMAN: Well, I know that's the kind of thing you've been saying about this for the last day or two. I heard on the radio today that you said I was out to lunch.
DOBBS: Were you actually out to lunch?
DOBBS: If I said it, but I don't recall saying it.
DOBBS: I'm not any longer. Because what you did here is distort both the record, the reality and the issue. And that's a combination that I frankly don't find endearing.
Let's go to just a couple things. Your report says that 70 percent of the LOU DOBBS TONIGHT programs last year mentioned illegal immigration.
Now, last year, as you may recall, comprehensive immigration reform was a major issue, with a vote, ultimately on June 28, that resulted in its demise in the Senate. You may recall that last year was a campaign year in which a number of the candidates were taking on the issue of illegal immigration and specifically, Governor Eliot Spitzer calling for driver's licenses for illegal aliens.
Why would you be surprised that we would be taking up that issue in such an active period, if you will, in public policy?
WALDMAN: We're not. And we don't criticize you for talking about illegal immigration a lot. Obviously, that's an issue that you care very deeply about. The question, though, is when you talk about it -- the question, though, is when you talk about, how do you talk about it?
Are you propagating myths? Are you encouraging people to believe things that don't happen to be true? That's the real question.
Lou, let's think about it this way. There is probably no more important voice on this issue than you. You talk about this issue almost every night. You have a national -- you have a national television audience. You've got a nationally-syndicated radio program. There is no one whose voice is louder when it comes to the issue of immigration than yours.
DOBBS: Let me say, if that's the case -- Paul, if that's the case, why in the world would you not look at the record and realize how much reporting we've done on this? Instead, you criticize the broadcast for having its own, quote unquote, "own correspondents." So does "60 Minutes."
WALDMAN: We mentioned it. We don't criticize you for having your own correspondents, Lou. The question, though, is, when you talk about this, are you feeding into some of these myths?
And what we found was that, actually, there are a lot of myths that get played on this show. Like, for instance, the NAFTA superhighway. Let me ask you, Lou. Do you actually believe that there is a secret plan to create a superhighway four football fields wide that is going to stretch from Mexico all the way to Canada?
DOBBS: The question is, do you really reject the evidence? Because that's precisely what's going on under the umbrella of the Security and Prosperity Partnership and the fact that the Trans-Texas Corridor is precisely that.
WALDMAN: The Trans-Texas Corridor is in Texas, Lou. So the question is, do you have -- do you have actual evidence that there -- that there is a plan that is going to take this all the way from Mexico to Canada? What is the evidence there?
DOBBS: What is the evidence?
DOBBS: The evidence is straightforward. It is the reporting of -- you know, if you really don't -- you know, I'm not going to get -- we haven't enough time for this.
But even the Texas newspapers, which have resisted this idea for a number of years, now recognize what's happening. Citizens' groups are forming all over Texas to stop it.
WALDMAN: Do you have one?
DOBBS: Of course, we do.
DOBBS: You are a left-wing advocacy group. You're charging nonsense.
DOBBS: And the only way to appease both you and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus would be for me to support illegal immigration and open borders. I reject it, I reject you, and I reject your position.
Now let's get to your report.
WALDMAN: This isn't about what positions you take. You can advocate any kind of particular immigration reform you want.
DOBBS: I'm not going to let you prattle. I want you to listen to this. OK? I'd like you to listen to this. Would you do that?
DOBBS: You cannot reform immigration if you can't control it. You cannot control immigration unless you control the borders.
Absolutely, I am also for raising legal immigration.
No country, no three countries can come close to us on our immigration. Legal immigration levels. And we should be very proud of that. I am. I am just as excited about illegal immigration -- I'm more excited.
DOBBS: Why didn't you report that in any part of your report? My position on illegal immigration?
DOBBS: My position on immigration. My position on border security. Yours is a scurrilous attack, and you pretend that it has some scholarly basis. It is an absolute, pitiful joke.
DOBBS: You do? But you forgot. You forgot to include that in your report?
WALDMAN: You've said that many times. Let me ask you a question. What was the last time you did a story, a positive story about immigrants?
DOBBS: I don't know. Why. What's the issue?
WALDMAN: ... not even beyond the show. Let me make my point. Beyond this show, you know that there are a lot of voices out there that are not very responsible. OK?
DOBBS: Don't conflate illegal and legal immigration, and don't conflate me and anyone else, as you've already done.
DOBBS: So what is your point?
WALDMAN: My point is, if you'll let me make it.
DOBBS: I would -- I'm waiting, and so are millions of others.
DOBBS: What was the last time you did a positive story at Media Matters on a right-wing Republican candidate? When was the last time?
DOBBS: When was the last time you did it?
DOBBS: When was the last time you did that report?
WALDMAN: Are you going to let me make me point?
DOBBS: I think I made it.
DOBBS: My question, straightforwardly, is why did you not include my position on immigration and border security in your report?
DOBBS: Because not to do so is obfuscatory. It's distortion and irresponsible on your part, and for you to pretend that that is a responsible piece of research is a joke.
DOBBS: Pardon me. How many stories have you done on illegal immigration? How much research have you done on illegal immigration? How much?
DOBBS: No, I'm asking you a question, Paul.
DOBBS: So that's the only time.
WALDMAN: We're only a media watchdog group.
DOBBS: So until you went after me and Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck, you haven't done anything, had you? We've been reporting on this subject here for seven years.
DOBBS: And you have no standing whatsoever to make such outrageous, arrogant comments.
DOBBS: Let's do in. Shall we do this? Do you recall the 60 -- 60 illegal aliens who were rescued from drop houses in Los Angeles and Phoenix last week?
DOBBS: Where else did you see that reported besides here?
DOBBS: Because that's a positive story.
DOBBS: Please, don't give me that.

And in California tonight, strong wildfires sweeping through the Santa Cruz Mountains. The fires there burned now more than 3,000 acres, destroying ten buildings. Some evacuations have been ordered. About 50 homes are being threatened by those fast-moving fires. The fires have being fueled by dry brush and high winds. No reports of any injuries at this time.

Let's take a look now at some of your thoughts.

George in California said: "I'm so tired of hearing that the voters of Florida and Michigan must be punished for voting early. If someone must be punished, then go after those that changed the dates, not the individual voters."

It is so simple, isn't it?

Paul in Oklahoma: "Lou, if you want to see the DNC get off their dead ends and count Michigan and Florida votes, just let Hillary announce she's going independent. I'd love to see it."

You know, that's an intriguing idea.

And William in New York: "I've been a Democrat since 1964. I'll now register as an independent. I'm fed up with the phony B.S. from both parties. Keep up the good work."

Good idea. We welcome you to our ranks.

We'll have more of our thoughts here later in the forecast.

And a reminder to join us on the radio Monday through Friday for "The Lou Dobbs Show." Next Tuesday my guests include Bill Fleckenstein, the author of "Greenspan's Bubbles: The Age of Ignorance at the Federal Reserve," a scathing assessment of Alan Greenspan's 19- year tenure. And China expert, Professor Gordon Chang on earthquake relief efforts there.

Go to loudobbs.com -- loudobbsradio.com to find local listings for "The Lou Dobbs Show" on the radio.

Up here next, a left-wing group purporting to be an independent watchdog has joined forces with a congressional Hispanic caucus. They're attacking me and our reporting here on illegal immigration. One of the leaders of the advocacy group, Paul Waldman, joins me.

And a top military commander hinting at the possibility of more troop withdrawals from Iraq. General David Grange will be here to assess that.

And the legal fight between a polygamous sect and the state of Texas goes to a public court. The polygamists are winning.

DOBBS: Important legal ruling in that polygamy case in Texas, an appellate court ruling. The state of Texas should not have removed those children, the children of 38 women from the polygamist ranch last month.

Child Protective Services removed those children, believing that girls as young as 13 were married to much older men.

Jenny Hoff of our affiliate KXAN reports now from San Angelo, Texas -- Jenny.

JENNY HOFF, KXAN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, today in San Angelo, there were a lot of happy emotions here at the courthouse. That's because the 3rd Court of Appeals ruling filed on the writ of mandamus filed on behalf of 38 FLDS women came down.

That court ruling was in the mothers' favor. The ruling said that CPS never had a right to take all of the children off the Yearning for Zion Ranch without evidence and on the assumption that their religious beliefs would damage them.

So today Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, which filed the mandamus, said this was a great day for all families in Texas.

Now, what CPS said they are doing at this time is working with the attorney general's office here in Texas to see what steps they should take next. They stand by their belief that those children were in danger on the ranch. They said in their statement that they did see many reasons -- many reasons to believe that there was abuse out here. But they won't say if they plan on filing an appeal to the Texas Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, they have ten days here for the judge to reverse her decision and send those children back home with their kids. Otherwise, CPS can file for a stay, and if they're granted that, those children should stay in state custody.

Meanwhile, all of the hearings here at the courthouse, the status hearings that were scheduled for the next two weeks. They've at least been canceled until the end of this week so CPS can figure out what they're going to do and mothers can, of course, meet with their lawyers and see if they can get their children back as soon as possible.

Jenny Hoff of our affiliate, KXAN in San Angelo, Texas.

Joining me again, our senior legal analyst. A busy day for you, for all of us. This was a blockbuster decision: 460 children, 38 of them under this ruling, the appellate court saying, you know, "You made a mistake, Texas."

TOOBIN: It's really a breathtaking decision, and a total rebuke of the Texas authorities who removed those kids and of the lower court judge who said it was OK to do it.

DOBBS: Well, now, anyone worried about two things here. We keep calling it polygamy. It's pedophilia as far as, certainly, I'm concerned.

TOOBIN: That's right. That's the real issue.

DOBBS: And for the judge to make this decision without addressing that issue and the welfare of all of these children without ascertaining it, it seems peculiar to me.

DOBBS: My God. Puberty is the demarcation point for the appellate court?

TOOBIN: Well, that's -- if you were going to remove children from their parents, you have to show specific threats to specific children. And that's what they said the Texas authorities didn't do.

DOBBS: Well, this is -- could this ultimately apply to all 460 children?

TOOBIN: It does apply to all 460 children.

TOOBIN: That's right. I'm sorry, you're absolutely right. Certainly, the evidence presented here applies across the board. And the hostility to the government's position would certainly apply broadly if the evidence, as I suspect, is the same about all the rest of them.

DOBBS: But simply, do you agree or disagree with the appellate court decision?

TOOBIN: I was persuaded by the appellate court decision. I think it is such a huge step to take a child away from his or her mother that you have to be more sure that there's a good reason than the Texas authorities had here.

DOBBS: Jeffrey Toobin, thank you. Appreciate it.

We'll have much more on this polygamy case on CNN throughout the evening. "LARRY KING LIVE" will have exclusive reaction from the mothers who have children in state custody in Texas. We'll join Larry at 9 p.m. Eastern right here on CNN, of course.

Up next, one of the authors of a report attacking me and this broadcast because of our coverage of the illegal immigration crisis. It promises to be an interesting discussion.

And more recalls of toxic toys. Can you believe America's toy brands still can't manage to ensure that the toys they're importing from communist China and elsewhere are safe for American consumers? We'll have that report. Stay with us. It gets better and better.

DOBBS: The left-wing advocacy group, Media Matters, which sometimes describes itself as a watchdog group and which purports to be same, has teamed up with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to attack me, this broadcast, and a few others in broadcast media, but specifically me and this broadcast, for our coverage of illegal immigration.

The group issued a scathing report, saying this broadcast and those other programs on cable television spread what it calls the myths of illegal immigration.

Paul Waldman is senior fellow, director of special projects for Media Matters of America, and is kind enough to join us here tonight.

PAUL WALDMAN, DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS, MEDIA MATTERS OF AMERICA: Thanks, Lou.

DOBBS: Let me ask you this. You're hooked up with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Media Matters is itself a left-wing organization. I mean, why -- what credibility do all of you have on this issue? Would you have any more credibility, for example, than the Chamber of Commerce and the Bush administration in proposing amnesty and open borders?

WALDMAN: Well, I know that's the kind of thing you've been saying about this for the last day or two. I heard on the radio today that you said I was out to lunch.

DOBBS: Were you actually out to lunch?

DOBBS: If I said it, but I don't recall saying it.

DOBBS: I'm not any longer. Because what you did here is distort both the record, the reality and the issue. And that's a combination that I frankly don't find endearing.

Let's go to just a couple things. Your report says that 70 percent of the LOU DOBBS TONIGHT programs last year mentioned illegal immigration.

Now, last year, as you may recall, comprehensive immigration reform was a major issue, with a vote, ultimately on June 28, that resulted in its demise in the Senate. You may recall that last year was a campaign year in which a number of the candidates were taking on the issue of illegal immigration and specifically, Governor Eliot Spitzer calling for driver's licenses for illegal aliens.

Why would you be surprised that we would be taking up that issue in such an active period, if you will, in public policy?

WALDMAN: We're not. And we don't criticize you for talking about illegal immigration a lot. Obviously, that's an issue that you care very deeply about. The question, though, is when you talk about it -- the question, though, is when you talk about, how do you talk about it?

Are you propagating myths? Are you encouraging people to believe things that don't happen to be true? That's the real question.

Lou, let's think about it this way. There is probably no more important voice on this issue than you. You talk about this issue almost every night. You have a national -- you have a national television audience. You've got a nationally-syndicated radio program. There is no one whose voice is louder when it comes to the issue of immigration than yours.

DOBBS: Let me say, if that's the case -- Paul, if that's the case, why in the world would you not look at the record and realize how much reporting we've done on this? Instead, you criticize the broadcast for having its own, quote unquote, "own correspondents." So does "60 Minutes."

WALDMAN: We mentioned it. We don't criticize you for having your own correspondents, Lou. The question, though, is, when you talk about this, are you feeding into some of these myths?

And what we found was that, actually, there are a lot of myths that get played on this show. Like, for instance, the NAFTA superhighway. Let me ask you, Lou. Do you actually believe that there is a secret plan to create a superhighway four football fields wide that is going to stretch from Mexico all the way to Canada?

DOBBS: The question is, do you really reject the evidence? Because that's precisely what's going on under the umbrella of the Security and Prosperity Partnership and the fact that the Trans-Texas Corridor is precisely that.

WALDMAN: The Trans-Texas Corridor is in Texas, Lou. So the question is, do you have -- do you have actual evidence that there -- that there is a plan that is going to take this all the way from Mexico to Canada? What is the evidence there?

DOBBS: What is the evidence?

DOBBS: The evidence is straightforward. It is the reporting of -- you know, if you really don't -- you know, I'm not going to get -- we haven't enough time for this.

But even the Texas newspapers, which have resisted this idea for a number of years, now recognize what's happening. Citizens' groups are forming all over Texas to stop it.

WALDMAN: Do you have one?

DOBBS: Of course, we do.

DOBBS: You are a left-wing advocacy group. You're charging nonsense.

DOBBS: And the only way to appease both you and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus would be for me to support illegal immigration and open borders. I reject it, I reject you, and I reject your position.

Now let's get to your report.

WALDMAN: This isn't about what positions you take. You can advocate any kind of particular immigration reform you want.

DOBBS: I'm not going to let you prattle. I want you to listen to this. OK? I'd like you to listen to this. Would you do that?

DOBBS: You cannot reform immigration if you can't control it. You cannot control immigration unless you control the borders.

Absolutely, I am also for raising legal immigration.

No country, no three countries can come close to us on our immigration. Legal immigration levels. And we should be very proud of that. I am. I am just as excited about illegal immigration -- I'm more excited.

DOBBS: Why didn't you report that in any part of your report? My position on illegal immigration?

DOBBS: My position on immigration. My position on border security. Yours is a scurrilous attack, and you pretend that it has some scholarly basis. It is an absolute, pitiful joke.

DOBBS: You do? But you forgot. You forgot to include that in your report?

WALDMAN: You've said that many times. Let me ask you a question. What was the last time you did a story, a positive story about immigrants?

DOBBS: I don't know. Why. What's the issue?

WALDMAN: ... not even beyond the show. Let me make my point. Beyond this show, you know that there are a lot of voices out there that are not very responsible. OK?

DOBBS: Don't conflate illegal and legal immigration, and don't conflate me and anyone else, as you've already done.

DOBBS: So what is your point?

WALDMAN: My point is, if you'll let me make it.

DOBBS: I would -- I'm waiting, and so are millions of others.

DOBBS: What was the last time you did a positive story at Media Matters on a right-wing Republican candidate? When was the last time?

DOBBS: When was the last time you did it?

DOBBS: When was the last time you did that report?

WALDMAN: Are you going to let me make me point?

DOBBS: I think I made it.

DOBBS: My question, straightforwardly, is why did you not include my position on immigration and border security in your report?

DOBBS: Because not to do so is obfuscatory. It's distortion and irresponsible on your part, and for you to pretend that that is a responsible piece of research is a joke.

DOBBS: Pardon me. How many stories have you done on illegal immigration? How much research have you done on illegal immigration? How much?

DOBBS: No, I'm asking you a question, Paul.

DOBBS: So that's the only time.

WALDMAN: We're only a media watchdog group.

DOBBS: So until you went after me and Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck, you haven't done anything, had you? We've been reporting on this subject here for seven years.

DOBBS: And you have no standing whatsoever to make such outrageous, arrogant comments.

DOBBS: Let's do in. Shall we do this? Do you recall the 60 -- 60 illegal aliens who were rescued from drop houses in Los Angeles and Phoenix last week?

DOBBS: Where else did you see that reported besides here?

DOBBS: Because that's a positive story.

DOBBS: Please, don't give me that.