Return to Transcripts main page


Showdown at Camp David; Ricketts and Schilling Hypocrites; 2012 Presidential Election; Sweet Bond Deal

Aired May 18, 2012 - 19:00   ET


ERIN BURNETT, HOST: OUTFRONT next, a heavyweight championship going down tonight and the winner going to decide if America remains the world's greatest country.

And disliking Facebook. A rough first day on the stock market, to say the least. Why did Facebook fail?

And new audio from a witness who describes the tussle between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. we're going to play that for you. That's coming up in just a couple of minutes. So let's go OUTFRONT.

I'm Erin Burnett and OUTFRONT tonight, showdown at Camp David. The world's heavyweights are in the ring. The G-8 leaders arriving today. President Obama is having them all as guests at Camp David and they're going to have a fancy dinner and they're going to play a whole bunch of games and hang out, and I mean literally, that's kind of what it's like. But it's also going to be a little bit like, like a boxing fight. Like the fight where Mike Tyson took off the ear of Evander Holyfield. They're going to take it all off and fight.


BURNETT: France's Francois Hollande is the challenger, the new guy who wants to borrow a boat load of money and say sayonara to spending cuts. He's telling Germany's Angela Merkel that her austere ways are over. And the ref, the guy there with the smile hoping not to get hit with any body blows or parts is Barack Obama. He has a big decision to make.

Will he side with more cuts or will he risk his presidency on saying he wants to borrow more money now to save the economy? All smiling aside, this choice may determine if America remains the world's biggest and best. One person who has been fighting since day one for spending is Paul Krugman. He was critical of President Obama's $800 billion stimulus plan. At the time help said it was too small.

The Nobel Prize winning economist and author of "End This Depression Now" says the only way to win the heavyweight championship is to spend a lot more. Professor Krugman joins me now. And it's a pleasure to see you, sir. How much more do we need to spend?

PAUL KRUGMAN, AUTHOR, "END THIS DEPRESSION NOW!": Well, at the moment I'm calling for about 300 billion a year For basically until the economy is back on its feet. So it's a -- it's a significant amount of money. I mean, the main point is what we've been doing is the reverse, instead of spending more. You know the stimulus, which was never much of a big deal has long since gone. What's actually happening now is anti-stimulus. We've been cutting back at the state and local level. That's been a major drag on the economy. In Europe, of course they've had extreme austerity and it's not working. You know we're still stuck in a depression, as I say in the title of my book.

BURNETT: Yes. All right, well let's get in the ring then. America, there's a lot of people watching who agree with you and there's a lot of people watching who want to wring your neck and they say no we have a debt problem. Right, the fiscal cliff and here's the numbers, $15.7 trillion in debt for this country. According to the Congressional Budget Office interest payments alone will exceed Medicaid spending by 2018. We spend $1.2 trillion a year more right now than we bring in. How much debt is the too much? You're going to borrow more. Right?

KRUGMAN: Yes, so there are two things to say. One is all of those numbers are enormous because America is enormous. We're an economy -- you know we're a 15 trillion a year economy. Debt, I don't like the level of debt. I was actually a big opponent of those too big, unfunded Bush tax cuts and those too big unfunded Bush wars, and if we hadn't done those things we'd have come into this with a lot less debt and I think we'd all be a little bit easier about doing what needs to be done right now.

The fact of the matter is advantaged countries with their own currencies able to borrow on their own currencies are able to carry heavy debt loads for a long time. This is not an urgent crisis. Yes, give me an economic recovery, I'll become a fiscal hawk, but not now. The other thing to say is that right now trying to bring that budget deficit down doesn't even work. Doesn't work in purely fiscal terms.

It shrinks the economy. That reduces tax revenues. It damages our long-run growth because when workers have been unemployed for long periods of time they eventually just drop out of the labor force. They don't come back. When students can't get jobs coming out of college they never get their careers started and those are our future taxpayers that you're undermining, so this is not the time.

BURNETT: And what I'm interested in is other people might agree with you on the Bush tax cuts and the wars, and certainly they are the two biggest components of the deficit, but they're done. Right? It's in the rearview mirror. Ken Rogoff (ph), obviously you know him well, professor has written extensively on countries getting out of debt crises, has said once your debt is 90 percent of your entire economy, growth is choked off. You just can't grow because your debt is too big. We're at 100 percent, 101 percent and growing every day.

KRUGMAN: Yes. I disagree very strongly with his conclusion. I think he's got the causation backwards. If you actually look at it most of the cases that he points to, which are high debt and low growth, is actually the low growth that led to the high debt. Japan is deeply in debt and it's a slow growing economy. What happened first in Japan was their growth collapsed because they didn't do an adequate job of stimulating their economy after their big bubble ended in the early 1990's and the debt followed from that. It's the collapse of their economy and their economic growth that led to the debt problem.

BURNETT: One final thing I wanted to ask you in terms of how to pay for it. You're talking about borrowing now and then once we get growth, paying it off. But "The New York Times" magazine, great analysis a few months ago. Adam Davidson (ph) wrote it -- had him on the show. And he was talking about this whole issue of raising taxes and he was saying look you could tax millionaires at 100 percent, so they didn't have anything left in the next year and you wouldn't get as much money as if you raised taxes by just eight percent on people who make between 30 and $200,000 a year. He was making the point that you can't get out of this by taxing the wealthy. At the fiscal summit earlier this week Bill Clinton said something about that I wanted to play it and get your reaction.


BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You could tax me at 100 percent and you wouldn't balance the budget. We are all going to have to contribute to this, and if middle-class people wages were growing up again and we had some growth in the economy, I don't think they would object to going back to the tax rates that were obtained when I was president.


BURNETT: Professor, do you think --


BURNETT: -- needs to be to get rid of all the Bush tax cuts? Have them go up on everybody? I know you wouldn't say do that now, but that that's where we need to go?

KRUGMAN: Or something like that. No, in the end those tax cuts were based on false premise, which was that we had plenty of money. We didn't. So we need higher taxes on the rich because they are -- it's not going to solve the problem but it can make a major contribution. In the end, middle-class people are probably going to have to pay somewhat more. I probably wouldn't do it just by rolling back the Bush tax cuts. I'd do it in other ways but that would be better than nothing.

In the end we have a long-run budget problem. Not as big as the current deficit which is largely because the economy is in the tank, but we have a long-run budget problem, which will have to be solved through a combination of higher revenue, better cost controls in Medicare, a bunch of things we need do. No one, no one single bullet there, but we could end this depression right now without having to solve that longer run problem.

BURNETT: All right. Thank you very much, Professor. Appreciate it. Everyone let us know what you think. Did he make the case? You of course can tweet me.

Well OUTFRONT next, the Obama campaign takes a page from Newt Gingrich. We'll tell you why.

And he was just sentenced to 16 years in prison for a DUI crash which killed a young man, but tonight a Florida millionaire is not behind bars. Instead he is at home in his mansion.

And an update on the condition of Aimee Copeland (ph). That's the college student -- you met her father earlier on this show -- who is fighting the flesh-eating bacteria.


BURNETT: Now for today's number. It has to do with -- these two guys. Joe Ricketts and Curt Schilling. Ricketts is the owner of the Chicago Cubs and Curt Schillings of course is star pitcher now retired for the Boston Red Sox. But this is not about baseball. No. It's about money. And actually, no. It's about your money. John Avlon is OUTFRONT now. And John you say these are examples of political hypocrisy. Explain.

JOHN AVLON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: (INAUDIBLE) So these two baseball titans are also proud Republican fiscal conservatives.


AVLON: Rail (ph) against pork barrel spending, but they seem pretty happy --

BURNETT: Get the government out of my life.

AVLON: Get the government out of my life, cut spending unless it's corporate welfare that might benefit their bottom line. So let's talk first about Joe Ricketts. He was in the news this week, self- made billionaire, enormously successful, but for an awkward reason this week his Super PAC got a really ugly pitch that they rejected when it came to light. But check the name of his Super PAC, Ending Spending Action Fund. All dedicated to reining in spending. And then our friend Curt Schilling, he is retired now. He is running a video game company called 38 Studios. They recently relocated from Massachusetts to Rhode Island in exchange for some Republican incentives. This past week they bounced a $1.1 million check, so they may be having some solvency problems.

BURNETT: Wow and owing (INAUDIBLE) $35 (ph) million or something --

AVLON: Well that 1.1 was a bounced check, so that brings us --

BURNETT: All right that brings us to tonight's number, which is $225 million. And what the heck is that?

AVLON: That is --

BURNETT: Who screwed me on that -- (LAUGHTER)

AVLON: So that is the grand total. Let's break it down. A hundred and fifty million dollars is the price tag on the amount that the Ricketts family are asking Chicago and Illinois taxpayers to pitch in for renovation of Wrigley Field, 150 million.


AVLON: Seventy-five million is the amount that Curt Schilling's company has on the hook from the taxpayers of Rhode Island, a guaranteed loan they got to relocate to the state. But if they're bouncing a $1.1 million check, that's $75 million guarantee doesn't look too good. Two states that are deep under water with budget deficits.

BURNETT: Wow and two people who have been shown to be a little bit hypocritical tonight.

AVLON: A little bit.

BURNETT: A little bit (INAUDIBLE) by John Avlon.

All right, well our second story OUTFRONT, when enemies become the friends. Newt Gingrich is at a fund-raiser tonight for his former rival Mitt Romney. Now obviously you know everyone comes out and says oh I hate you. I have your guts, and then when you become the nominee, they come behind you and they campaign for you. But in this case, Gingrich was a rather obsessive and virulent critic of Romney's work at private equity firm Bain Capital, so just remember this from January.


NEWT GINGRICH (R), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The fact is he's been going around saying his 25 years in business are a major part of why he should be president. Fine. Let's look at his 25 years in business. What was his approach? It is a question of judgment, of values and of character. And we know of one case for sure where they put in 30 million. They took out 180 million, six times as much, and the company went broke.


BURNETT: So this week the Obama campaign is copying Newt Gingrich trying to hit hard at Romney and Bain. OUTFRONT tonight James Carville and Rick Santorum's director of communications Hogan Gidley. Good to have you -- nice tie, Hogan.


BURNETT: I like that tie. That takes courage and it look goods on you. All right, let me start with though, James. Newt's back tracked on his Bain attack saying hey they don't work. You know what, that dog don't hunt, don't even try it Barack. Give it up. So maybe Barack should give it up?

JAMES CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL CONTRIBUTOR: What -- because Newt Gingrich told him to give it up? I don't think that's going to qualify as good political advice for Obama. And you know Romney is the one that put it at issue because he claimed that he created all the jobs. Said he create -- had he just claimed that he just made his partners a lot of money had been quite different. So if you're going to talk about the jobs you created, why complain if somebody going to talk about the jobs you destroyed, too? That's part of the deal. And Newt Gingrich made his point and I think Obama will make the same one.

BURNETT: Will Newt's support of Romney really help him, Hogan? I mean is it going to ring hallow considering -- I mean we just played one of the attacks, but there were many attacks especially, you know I remember being in South Carolina. That was a pretty nasty couple of days there between those two.

GIDLEY: Well, voters pretty much have short memories as it relates to things like this. Don't forget, Tim Pawlenty gave one of the best attacks on Mitt Romney and the entire primary season and a couple of days after he got out of the race, now he's all over the country talking about how great Mitt Romney is going to be as the next president. So that's just part of politics.

You and I both know that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton had one of the most difficult, harsh campaigns in a long time and they kissed and made up since then. And that's just the way it works in politics, and we unite behind the Republican ticket, because we know we think he's better than the president. So that's the bottom line and that's where it will continue to go throughout the summer and on into the fall.

BURNETT: All right, Hogan. So you've given a very statesmanly (ph) Jefferson-like response there, so let me just play what you said about Mitt Romney in March.


GIDLEY: He wants us out so he can stop talking conservatism and go back to showing who he was as governor, being pro-abortion and pro- choice and being against the NRA. And those are things he's uncomfortable talking about as you've seen on the campaign trail. He stumbles through those parts of his speech but he wants to go back to talking the moderate conversation because that's who he is at his core and we know that.


BURNETT: But you like him now, Hogan?

GIDLEY: It's not about liking him. It's about trying to defeat the president. And you know Mitt Romney has run for president two times now. I got to know him pretty well the first time around and you know this is what we do. We fight and scrap and claw and try to become the nominee and once the nominee is chosen we unite behind that nominee and try to push forward because we know we had disagreements in the primary. That's what makes the party stronger. It's what makes the primary process stronger, but we unite behind the nominee because we know that our nominee is better than the president. And on Mitt Romney's worst day he's still 10 times better than Barack Obama.

BURNETT: James Carville, I have to say what's interesting about all of this though is people do forget, but if they forget what everybody says, then don't they look at the ads that are running and ignore them, too, all of these negative ads? Why even worry about those?

CARVILLE: Well, a lot of people do, but look this thing is going to be a pretty close race. It's going to be one on the margins and some of these attacks when they are repeated can have some effect and their campaign is going to have some effect. It's very close. It's interesting to see how it's going to wash out.

BURNETT: James, last week you said that Democrats who are counting on the president winning needed a wake-up call. That it wasn't going to that close. And just in the past few days --


BURNETT: -- you've been vindicated. Mitt Romney is raising a lot of money in some key areas. In some recent polls this week swing states, he's been looking that he is leading the president, you know fairly solidly. So do the Democrats get it now? Get the challenge that they're up against?

CARVILLE: Well, I think people do. And my point is that incumbents all over the world -- this is not a very good time to be an incumbent. But look, in the end, I think it's going to a close election. I think the president will prevail. I don't think Romney is that good of a candidate. I think he's shown it time and time again, but we can't take anything for granted. What I was hearing a couple, three weeks ago was people just sort of took it for granted that the president was going to be re-elected and there's no such thing that I see that anybody can take anything for granted in this election at all.

BURNETT: Hogan --

CARVILLE: That was the point I wanted to make.

BURNETT: Yes and you clearly did. And Hogan, how is Mitt Romney supposed to fight back against these Bain ads because obviously as part of what he did in private equity, people did lose jobs and in some places they gained them. In some places they lost them.

GIDLEY: Right.

BURNETT: And there's a truth there and it can be portrayed to be a very ugly one.

GIDLEY: Oh, it can be. There's no doubt about that. But look, for every sad story where Bain failed, there are 10 stories where Bain succeeded, and right now the American people pretty much understand by all polling, it indicates that they trust Mitt Romney more on the economy than Barack Obama. I mean the promises the president made, he can't run against George Bush now, he's got to run against his own record. And his own record he promised to cut the debt in half. It's the highest debt in the history of the country. He grew it more rapidly than any president in history and he's got to settle with that. And the American people at this point in time are just starting to pay attention and just starting to see who Mitt Romney is, and that's why they put out that new ad just recently trying to frame him that way as someone who can make changes and can be different than the president.


GIDLEY: And these things will go on for quite some time, but I mean that's just the way it works from now on.

BURNETT: All right James Carville, Hogan Gidley, have a wonderful weekend, both of you.

All right still OUTFRONT a millionaire just sentenced to prison for DUI manslaughter is at home tonight in his mansion. Will he ever return to a prison cell?

And what did one witness see right before George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin? We have the audio tonight we're going to play for you of his statement to police.


BURNETT: Our third story OUTFRONT Florida polo magnate (ph) John Goodman appealing his DUI manslaughter conviction. So that means that well he is home tonight on $7 million of bond. What a home it is, his home sits on the grounds of the polo club that he founded near Palm Beach, 11,000 square feet, luxurious. Goodman will be under house arrest. He will be wearing an ankle bracelet.

He has to pay for two sheriff's deputies to monitor him 24/7, but he can go over to his office. He can entertain visitors including the 42-year-old girlfriend he adopted to oversee his biological children's trust fund. It's a lot better than a prison cell. Now Goodman was sentenced to 16 years in prison for killing a young man while driving drunk and then leaving the scene. Paul Callan is joining me now. Let me just -- is this normal that this is how this would go?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: Well to be fair the judge did say that he's not allowed to wear a tuxedo. Believe it or not that was in the judge's discourse in court when he set this bail. In Florida apparently, this is not unusual. In Florida you can get bail post-conviction if it's not a capital crime and if you have a good faith basis to appeal the case. Defense attorney Roy Black (ph) says one of the jurors did a test. Remember we talked about this once --

BURNETT: Right, of what it was like to be that drunk.

CALLAN: -- alcohol test, so he has got a good faith basis. Now I will say this. In every other state that I know of in the United States, you don't get released when you're sentenced to 16 years in prison after the conviction, but this is Florida.

BURNETT: And I understand that this time however long the appeal goes, this time will count to his prison time if he ever eventually does have to go to prison. But it also could add up to $800,000 to $1 million a year to pay for the security.


BURNETT: So if there's ever a civil trial and he has to pay money, that's money he doesn't have.

CALLAN: Well so we could look at it that way. But on the other hand, being confined to your mansion with a swimming pool and it's not too bad. Most people are sitting in a jail cell while their appeal is pending for many, many years.

BURNETT: Right, right, but what I'm trying to get at is he's not going to have as much money left for a civil case.


BURNETT: Right, so theoretically, would that affect what they choose to do --

CALLAN: Well here's -- here's the interesting thing about the civil case. There were court papers filed that indicated he's already settled the civil case against him for $41 million and he says he's broke, and that his brother and sister put up the money --

BURNETT: For the bail --

CALLAN: -- the $7 million for the bail, because he is broke.


CALLAN: However there are reports that insurance companies may have funded the settlement, so I don't really know what the truth is here and I don't think he's going to be losing money. And remember -- well, this is the guy who adopted his girlfriend.

BURNETT: Right, right.

CALLAN: So she's going to inherit millions and millions of dollars, possibly, so maybe he gets the money back.

BURNETT: Wow. This is -- it's a bizarre story, also a tragic one in a lot of ways. Thanks to Paul Callan.

Well still OURFRONT in the second half Facebook's IPO, remember how excited we were? I was just excited because it's fun when you know you've got anticipation for a big event that everyone's looking at. Then it just, you know, did a belly flop. We're going to talk about whether it was a failure.

And a major update on Aimee Copeland (ph), the young woman who's been battling flesh-eating bacteria. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BURNETT: Welcome back to the second half of OUTFRONT. We start the second half with our stories we care about, where we focus on our reporting from the front lines.

Aimee Copeland, a University of West Virginia grad student, who's fighting flesh-eating bacteria has now had both hands and remaining foot amputated. Her leg and soft tissue from her torso were removed in earlier surgeries. Her father Andy came on the program early in the week and just posted in a Facebook post today that when Aimee learned about the surgery, she said, let's do this.

Her ordeal started less than three weeks ago when a homemade zip line snapped causing her to fall. She got a gash in her leg. She got stitches. A few days later, it still seemed infected. She went back to the hospital and she realized she had the bacteria that causing necrotizing fasciitis.

Well, Pentagon officials says China's radar evading fighter jet could be operational in only six years. That is a big speedup. According to David Helvey, an acting deputy assistant secretary, China could have sufficient number of J-20 fighters and enough pilots trained to fly them by 2018. Now, those of you who watched this show from the beginning who were a little obsessed by the J-20, and analysts tell us that J-20 has a radar evading capability, comparable to American F-22s and F-35s. And, of course, we're told that the American drone that went down over Iran, which had America's most sophisticated radar evading technology for drones also could be in China's hands.

Speaking of Iran, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency is going to the country on Sunday. According to a statement, the director general will meet with the head of Iran's national security council and other senior representatives of the government. It's a really important visit, because it comes just a couple of days before Iran will be discussing its nuclear program with leaders from the United States, France, Russia, China, Britain and Germany. It's a crucial group of countries and we'll see if there's a breakthrough before the sanctions fully take effect this month.

Well, there's a finally a plan to move the Costa Concordia. Someone asked me about this the other day. And then this cruise, the ship that you remember, turned on its side after striking rocks off the coast of an Italian island. Salvage teams hope to actually move the ship one piece. They're going to work on raising it from the seafloor.

Here's what's going to happen. The operation will start in the next couple of days, but it's going to take a full year to actually complete it. The plan will be to stabilize the ship. You can see right there the profile how it would look if it weren't on its side.

They've got to stabilize it and then eventually pull it up right, so it will sit in an underwater platform which they're going to slide under it. Then they're going to attach caissons to both sides, and once the water is purified, empty it, fill it with air and that will force the ship up to the top.

The ship will be towed to an Italian port where it will be dismantled and disposed of.

Well, it's been 288 days since the United States lost its top credit rating. What are we doing to get it back? Well, it's the worse week for stocks this year. Dow closed at 12,369. So, no good news there.

Our fourth story -- well, a stock that maybe picked a bad week to go public. Facebook's faceplant. Investors around the world were watching Facebook's debut. And as I said, we were all really excited about it. I mean, it's a company Americans are justifiably incredibly proud of. It came from this country.

But when the stock finally started trading, it opened at $42.05 a share. Now, that's actually pretty good. You may remember last night, it was priced at $38. So, it got that little $4.05 pop at the open. Everyone thought that would just be the beginning.

Problem is, it didn't get much higher. At the end of the day, shares closed at $38.08, 8 cents above where it was priced.

Now, you heard people on the show and if you follow the story, you know the vast majority of people, experts on this, thought the stock would climb much higher. Some people said it could open as high as $50 a share and would close at $60 or $70. But it didn't move. So, what happened?

Brent Wilsey of Wilsey Asset Management agency joins you.

And, Brent, let me just ask you, I know some people might say, oh, this is a great example of, hey, you priced the stock exactly right, exactly right demand -- except you usually, you leave a little on the table so the little guy can feel they made a little money?

BRENT WILSEY, WILSEY ASSET MANAGEMENT: That's correct, Erin, because what actually happened here coming out $38 a share is good for the company offering at that price, but investors don't feel great about it because -- I think another problem, too, that 30-minute delay, 11:00 our time and didn't come out until a half hour later. But when it came out at $38.42, started falling down, people said, it's not supposed to do that and you lost the momentum on the stock.

BURNETT: And so, you know, another thing that a lot of people may not realize is that -- I mean, it theoretically and most people say would have gone below that offering price, which would have been the first of major IPOs in this country to ever do that on its first day. If it weren't for the underwriters, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, coming in and buying, buying, to try to hold that price?

WILSEY: And that's exactly correct. I was reading the same thing, because they didn't want to fall below $38. But my concern is, OK, they did that today. What about Monday? What about Tuesday? They're not going to be there forever. You can have a nice decline of the stock, you know, maybe 10 percent, maybe 20 percent more, because underwriters can't keep putting money in to keep the stock up. That's a problem.

BURNETT: How did this happen, Brent?

WILSEY: Well, I think what happened is that -- a lot of people knew, 70 percent of professionals are saying, don't buy the stock. And I think maybe, just maybe, investors are starting to get, yes, we know Facebook, we know the company. Maybe it's not a good investment.

One thing I try to do for people is put it in perspective, if you look at the same fundamentals, the same valuations, you'd put those, from Facebook, put those on Apple, Apple would be trading at $3,300 a share. You say that's crazy, I wouldn't buy Apple at that $500, let alone $3,300. So, I think they got -- maybe $38 a share was just too expensive for Facebook.

BURNETT: What would you do now? I mean, if you're I guess let's just say you're somebody who hasn't bought in yet. What do you do? I mean, obviously, if you're already in, everybody you just heard. I mean, it could go down further, but you're in. You're in. What about somebody thinking about buying?

WILSEY: I wouldn't buy the stock. I said before -- I'm saying for six months, don't buy Facebook. It's a great thing for social media but it's not real business. What do they manufacture? They don't really manufacture anything. There's problems maybe on the advertising. There are problems with this company.

Again, I use Facebook. I think you probably use Facebook. We all use Facebook, but that doesn't mean the company can make enough money to make that stock price of $38 or even $35 a share worth it.

You've got to look at: is this a good investment? I'm saying right now. Maybe in the future it will be. But right now, I stay away from the stock. It's too expensive.

BURNETT: All right. Well, Brent Wilsey, thanks so much. Good to see you. It's been a while. So, good to have friends on.

And I just want to clarify, the stock settled its close at $38.23 a share.

All right. OUTFRONT next -- the audio of one witness describing the final minutes of Trayvon Martin's life. Everybody has been waiting to see -- did anyone other than those two people know what happened? Well, it appears that someone did. What that witness saw, you're going to hear it next.

And we talk a lot about -- well, we're going to show you something really strange that happened about a world leader. It actually just happened in the past few minutes. It's actually the most bizarre thing I think I've ever seen from a world leader, and it's coming up.


BURNETT: We're back with our "Outer Circle" where we reach out to sources around the world.

And we begin in Greece tonight. People are pulling billions from their bank accounts in fear of default. Just one day this week, Greeks pulled nearly $1 billion from accounts. So where is the money going?

I asked our Nina Dos Santos.


NINA DOS SANTOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Erin. Well, it turns out that the Greeks have been taking their money out of their bank accounts for quite some time now. Because since 2009 when the crisis began, they withdrawn about 25 percent to 30 percent of their deposits during that period.

But as you were saying, the pace has picked up in the last two or three weeks since it's obvious they've been unable to form a government after the last round of elections, and that's when we discovered that $890 million is coming out in Greek accounts just in the last week alone.

And the big question, where is that money going? Some of it, ironically enough, is going to the country Greece blames for some of its ills, Germany. The Greeks have been buying German bonds seen as a very safe haven, but also wanting to take their money out of the eurozone are plowing it into British property, notably in the British capital, London, because we've seen inquiries for prime real estate here going up 39 percent in just the month of April alone -- Erin.


BURNETT: Thanks to Nina.

And now to London, where Queen Elizabeth II hosting a monarch's lunch today, as part of the jubilee celebrations to mark her 60 years on the British throne. But some of the kings and queens on the guest list sparked controversy.

And I asked our Max Foster who the problem was.


MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, the queen invited every monarch in the world, and it's a very exclusive club, but within it there are some controversial figures. The king of Bahrain, the king of Swaziland, for example, both of whom have been accused by activists of human rights abuses.

Also, a glaring mission of the table, it felt, was that the queen of Spain. She turned down her invitation on the advice of her government. Spain and Britain are in a dispute over the island of Gibraltar. So, there were some controversy and some small demonstrations. But overall, the event went as planned -- Erin.


BURNETT: All right. Well, last, the most watched annual sporting in the world. Not the Super Bowl. It's the Champion Leagues football. We call it soccer. And it's tomorrow in Germany between Chelsea and Bayern Munich.

Alex Thomas is in Munich, and I asked why Champions League is the number one watched in the world?


ALEX THOMAS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Erin, quite simply, because when it comes to sports, we all like to see the best of the best play each other, and that's exactly what the Champions League offers, fans of football or soccer, the most popular sport on the planet. Only the NBA can match it for global appeal. You know, you may well see kids wearing a Kobe Bryant Laker shirt in some far-flung corner of the globe, but I can guarantee you'll see one wearing a Manchester United, Real Madrid or Barcelona uniform.

And we talk about the NBA, what's the highlight of the season? The all-star game. It's kind of like what the Champions League week in and week out. It may be a European competition but it attracts footballers from around the world because of the European clubs that have the most prestige and also because it pay the most money, no wonder with TV and prize money in the Champions League worth around $1 billion, Erin.



All right. Let's check in with Anderson Cooper.

Anderson, what's coming up on ".C.360"?

ANDERSON COOPER, HOST, "A.C. 360": Hey, Erin, you'd be hopeful, Romney pushing fuzzy math this week, repeatedly claiming he helped create 100,000 jobs when he was CEO of the equity firm Bain Capital. The fact is the numbers don't add up. Romney also claiming the auto industry lost about 100,000 jobs on President Obama's watch. Again, the math just isn't there to support it. We're keeping them honest tonight.

And a warning now. This video is very disturbing. It shows a young disabled man shocked again and again, electric shocks for misbehaving, 31 shocks in seven hours. This was done in a school where he was a student. It's a controversial school where this happened.

His mother wants the school shut down. Supporter of the school say it's changed the lives of kids with severe behavioral disorders. You'll hear the passionate voices on both sides of the issue.

Those stories and tonight's "Ridiculist" at the top of the hour, Erin.

BURNETT: All right. Thanks very much, Anderson. Looking forward to it.

And now, our fifth story OUTFRONT. New audio evidence in the killing of Trayvon Martin. Now, we're going to play the tapes in just the moment. It could be a huge development in terms of an eyewitness, what he saw when the two men were fighting.

Now, this comes out just the day after we got those photos if George Zimmerman, remember, we showed you this last night. These are wounds to the back of George Zimmerman's head. This other one is a grainy photo from a phone camera that shows a swollen nose of George Zimmerman that was taken by a policeman at the scene.

An autopsy found a cut on one of Trayvon Martin's fingers and a trace amount of marijuana in his body.

Now, OUTFRONT tonight, Bradley Cohen, a defense attorney in Florida, Stacey Honowitz, a Florida state prosecutor, and Jasmine Rand, an attorney for Trayvon Martin's family.

Good to have you all with us.

I want to just begin by playing you a little bit of the audio that we have here. This is a statement that a witness who saw exactly what happened between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, a witness of what he said. Let's play it.


WITNESS: When I first walked out there, the black guy was on top. And the only reason I can that he will was because the guy that was on the ground under him at that point wrestling was definitely a lighter color.


BURNETT: Bradley Cohen, how significant is that statement?

BRADFORD COHEN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I think it's pretty significant. I mean, you had someone who actually saw what happened. Now, what the argument's going to be is what happened prior to that? Who struck who first? Who attacked who first?

But in terms of Zimmerman's story, this certainly gives credibility to what he was saying that Trayvon was on top of him and he was being assaulted while on top of him, but we don't know how that began.

BURNETT: All right. And, Jasmine, what's your reaction when you hear that? I mean, is it as damning as it seems it could be?

JASMINE RAND, ATTORNEY FOR MARTIN FAMILY: I mean, I don't think that evidence is really that significant. We've been saying from the very beginning, and the facts remain, that officers told George Zimmerman not to get out of his car, not to the pursue Trayvon. Zimmerman made the decision to get out of his car, he followed Trayvon way loaded weapon and pursued the teenager throughout the apartment complex.

So, I think it's very clear who the aggressor in this incident is and I think that the injuries are consistent with the evidence. We know we have George Zimmerman with scratching and we have Trayvon dead with the use of a gun.

BURNETT: OK. But we do also have, those pictures -- I mean, George Zimmerman, it was more than scratches. He had several areas in the back of his head where there's blood pouring out of his head and a broken nose?

RAND: He certainly did not have life-threatens injuries. I think most notable, EMT called out, they were told to turn around. He did not go to the emergency that night. And let's not forget that nobody saw George Zimmerman that night. So no one medically inspected him until the following day. The evidence we have now --


BURNETT: Go ahead, finish your point and then Bradley come in.

RAND: The evidence that we have now still remains that Zimmerman pursued and shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

BURNETT: OK. Go ahead, Bradley. Then I want to get to Stacy.

COHEN: Sure. Erin, just because the injuries are not life threatening doesn't mean the individual did not feel his life was being threatened at the time he was being beaten. Just because your injuries don't say, oh, my God, these injury look like you could have died from them. If someone, like he said, was smashing his head against cement, you'd feel your life was in danger.

BURNETT: Let me play something else we heard today in discovery. And this is something everybody has been waiting to hear, the first time we've heard the voice of Trayvon Martin's girlfriend. Everyone who's following this case may remember that he was on the phone with her right as this whole altercation began. Her identity still hasn't been reveal.

Here's her voice and what she said.


ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: So you definitely could tell another voice that was not Trayvon?


ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: And you heard this other voice say --

GIRLFRIEND: What are you doing around here?

ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: What are you doing around here -- OK.

GIRLFRIEND: And I called Trayvon, Trayvon, what's going on? What's going on?

ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: This was you saying --



GIRLFRIEND: Then I'm calling him, he didn't answer.

ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: No answer from Trayvon?

GIRLFRIEND: Yes. I hear something like, bump, you could hear that Trayvon -- somebody bumped Trayvon. I could hear the grass.


BURNETT: So, Stacy, what do you hear there?

STACEY HONOWITZ, FLORIDA STATE PROSECUTOR: Well, listen, everything we are discussing tonight is extremely significant. We have been waiting to hear if anybody was an earwitness or an eyewitness and certainly in this discovery that has been disseminated, we are starting to see or feel what actually went on.

But without knowing exactly and because none of these witnesses can tell who started it. But certainly, we know who set the chain of events in motion and that's what's very important. That Zimmerman was the one that got out of the car and started the chain of events and certainly, we know that the law states if you are the aggressor in all of this, you can't then stand behind the shield and say I'm standing my ground.

Putting that aside, none of us on this panel know all of the evidence. The prosecutor does and now the defense attorney is getting everything. And at the stand your ground hearing, it will be very important for this judge to make this decision by a preponderance of the evidence if, in fact, it was more likely than not what Zimmerman said happened happened. And that is what we are going to know.

BURNETT: Brad, let me ask you a question though, let's just say from these two pieces of evidence do end up being directionally what happened. So, the first person to step out of the car and cause the problem was George Zimmerman. Does it then matter if he was on the bottom in the fight, if he started it? Does he have any grounds to still use self-defense if he started it?

HONOWITZ: Well, we know --

COHEN: Absolutely. It's not that he was the starter. He was -- he wasn't -- being the aggressor means the physical aggressor. Following someone is not the physical aggressor. Calling someone a name is not the physical aggressor. The first physical aggressor is the individual that can't stand behind the law. We don't know who the first physical aggressor is. Because I walk out of my house and I get hit by a car is it my fault that I walked out of my house to get hit by the car? No.

The fact is the law is very specific in that if there is a physicality type law. It is not calling your mom a name that starts as an aggressor.

BURNETT: So, Stacey, what if we then never know who was the first physical aggressor? How does this case then go? What if we never know?

HONOWITZ: Well, certainly, there is more evidence and probably -- well, not probably it is going to be left up to a judge to say, I don't know who started this. I don't know who was the aggressor in all this. I don't know really what happened. It's murky.

And that judge -- the standard is very low. It is by a preponderance of the evidence, which mean it is more likely than not. That judge has to make the decision whether or not he is immune from prosecution or whether or not this is a self-defense argument that has to go to a jury.

So it's a murky situation and now, by just getting these little bits and pieces of the evidence, we don't know the whole picture.

BURNETT: Jasmine, what about the marijuana question? Last night we had on a forensic pathologist who was talking about how the sample was taken from what he called so-called open blood and he said really, as a result, the amounts that were shown in the autopsy didn't mean anything, that it could have meant he was smoking right before or smoking hours before, it was just -- you were unable to tell.

How much more difficult is that going to make your side of this case?

RAND: Not at all. It has absolutely no legal relevance to the case at hand. And in fact, it is so insubstantial it is not admissible in Florida courts.

I want to go back and address that last issue about physical aggression. I think it is physically aggressive to follow somebody with a loaded gun and we talk about fear and somebody fearing for their lives. Certainly, a 17-year-old child who is being approached by a -- approached and followed by a grown man with a loaded gun would certainly fear for his life.

COHEN: Well, that sounds interesting but the Florida case law doesn't support that. The Florida case law says very specifically what physical action is. And following someone is not a physical action. It is a physical aggression toward that individual. That's what counts.

He didn't even know allegedly that Zimmerman had a gun. Zimmerman never said he pulled the gun before the whole altercation occurred. And that's the only person we can hear at this point. If there's other witnesses that come forward or other statements that are made that is to be seen.

HONOWITZ: That's to say. Right now, we are talking in the hypotheticals. We have a couple pieces of evidence and certainly, the prosecutor, before they filed the indictment, the information, had a slew of witness statements, an audio and photographs and forensics and that's what we have to wait and see.

To sit here and say because we don't know if he is the aggressor or this one witness came out after the fact, we don't know how long that witness was watching. This is all for the mini-hearing that is going to take place for the stand your ground.

BURNETT: All right. Well, thanks very much to all three of you. We appreciate it.

All right. When we come back, like I said, the most bizarre thing that I have ever seen of a world leader -- a sitting leader of one of the biggest countries on this planet, naked in a -- in a piece of art.


BURNETT: Sometimes, you just luck, it just falls in your lap. So the president -- President Obama is at this moment greeting all of the G8 leaders who are coming to Camp David. It's the event when they get together for frank and revealing discussion. They will be talking about some serious things -- austerity, spending.

This is a live picture of Camp David. The president is coming out and going to greet the world leaders. There's one I'm very curious to see how he is responding because one of the people that he is about to greet, I hope the camera pans, maybe I will be this lucky. This person was caught revealing a little bit more than he wanted to today. Um, yes. Well, see, that -- that is a picture -- it is a painting, actually, that was unveiled at the Kingston public library in Canada today.

It depicts Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper reclining on a chaise lounge wearing nothing but a smile. A dog rests at his feet as a woman offers him what looks like a Tim Martin's (ph) cup on a silver platter. It's a large oil painting. It's by Kingston, Ontario-based artist Margaret Sutherland, priced at $5,000.

Harper's office is taking it in stride. Here is the tweet from his director of communication, Andrew McDougall. We're not impressed. Everyone knows the prime minister is a cat person.

I'll leave you with the picture of, yes, him and his cat. I think he's better naked.

Anderson starts now.