Return to Transcripts main page


Manti Te'o Speaks Out; NAACP Fights Bloomberg's Soda Ban; Super Bacteria Could Be Bigger Than Terror Attack

Aired January 24, 2013 - 19:00   ET


ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: OUTFRONT next, Manti Te'o speaks out, and we hear the voice of the man who left messages, pretending to be Te'o's girlfriend.

And the U.S. government warns Americans to stay out of Libya right now.

And why is the NAACP fighting mayor Bloomberg's soda ban? A very serious and troubling question.

And Britain's chief medical officer said we are facing a new super bacteria that could have the same effect and be even a bigger effect than a terrorist attack. Dr. Oz comes OUTFRONT to say why.

And Democratic senator Dianne Feinstein proposes a federal ban on assault rifles. But does she have the votes to get it passed or is she wasting her time?

Let's go OUTFRONT.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Erin Burnett.

And OUTFRONT tonight, gone too far. Today, Democratic senator Dianne Feinstein proposed a new federal ban on some assault rifles and semi-automatics. Now, she certainly got it right visually, when she was standing there today, she had a backdrop of some of the guns she wants to ban, and it included, and very prominently, a Bushmaster, like the one used in the Newtown massacre. There was also a circle of uniformed law enforcement officers and gun violence victims. There was rolled out with pomp and circumstance, but did she get the message right? She, herself, admits that getting this passed will not be easy.


SEN. DIANE FEINSTEIN (D), CHAIRMAN, SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE: If anyone asks today, can you win this? The answer is, we don't know. It's so uphill.


BURNETT: Uphill is right. The fact of the matter is that gun violence from assault weapons is estimated to be between two and eight percent of the gun crime in this country. So, is this how Democrats should be spending their time? Or are they overreaching and risking chances for success?

Roland Martin joins me along with Reham Salam.

Good to see both of you.


BURNETT: Roland, let me just ask you. The point blank question here, Dianne Feinstein coming out with this bill. Can this bill pass?

MARTIN: Look, you don't know until you actually take the effort. I think it's crazy when we say things such as, well, it's a small piece. It sort of reminds me of the federal budget, Erin, when we say, well, it's only a drop in the bucket. Well, every little bit helps. I don't have a problem if we have an impact on guns that could affect two to eight percent. And guess what, as if there will be next ten percent, the next 20 percent, the next 70 percent. So, you make the effort. And if you fail, at least you try. At least you tried to do something. But doing nothing that to me is ridiculous.

BURNETT: All right. It's a fair point, Roland. But what about the majority of the violence? The handgun violence in this country? The inner city violence and the crime. That's where most of the deaths --

MARTIN: You tackle all of it.

BURNETT: But if you only have the political capital for one thing, that's what I'm trying to say, right? Because this is going to be an uphill battle, do you think it's smart to use it on an assault weapon ban?

MARTIN: Here's a deal. I don't necessarily believe you have the political capital to only do one thing. This is how Washington D.C. works. We can only do one thing at one time. So, if that is if, you can do gun control and immigration and the debt ceiling. Guess what, we're paying these people. They have tons of staff. They can do more than one thing. The question is not do you have political capital, the issue is, do you have political courage? That's what you need to see more from politicians, courage, and not so concerned about whether or not they'll get re-elected.

BURNETT: Reham, Senator Feinstein, obviously saying it's an uphill battle, but she pointed to what the voters want. And she is right about that. Voters support an assault weapons ban, 56 percent support, 44 percent do not.

Now, obviously, by party, if you broke that down, it could be different. But, again, this question to you. If there is the will to do not a lot on guns, but something, is this the something?

REHAM SALAM, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I think absolutely not. And I think it's really important that you noted that statistic early on. But another thing to note is a lot of the folks who answer that question don't necessarily know what an assault rifle is. These assault weapons are designed essentially by cosmetic features that the gun has, like the kind of grip that the gun has. These are not machine guns. An assault weapons is the gun where you fire once, you fire one bullet. Machine guns, on the other hand, have been effectively illegal since the 1930s. So, the truth is that overseeing a situation in which people want to do something and take a symbolic action, but I think you're absolutely right.

There are things that could stem the tide of handgun violence that would like be far more effective, and if Congress were started to get to work on something, they really ought to get to work on that. The trouble is, that doesn't resonate with the activists in this issue, who a lot of times don't understand what an assault weapon is. So it's a huge problem.

MARTIN: The issue also goes beyond the congress, Erin. This is the problem. We keep looking at congress, but you have state legislatures, you have city councils, you have different governmental entities that could take the step to make some changes. All I'm simply saying is, let's not act as if this one thing is not going to help. I simply believe in the notion, every little bit helps.

BURNETT: All right. Let me ask you, Roland, something that I'm curious about, though. Because it seems to me it's a fair question to ask as to whether the Democratic Party has an internal problem on this issue. And I want to give you example number one of Democratic congressman John Barrow of Georgia. Here's a campaign clip from a campaign ad that he ran last fall. Again everyone, democratic congressman. Here's what said.


REP. JOHN BARROW (D), GEORGIA: I'm John Barrow, and long before I was born, my grandfather used this little Smith & Wesson here to help stop a lynching. And for as long as I can remember, my father always had this rifle real handy, just to keep us safe. That's why I support the second amendment.


BURNETT: All right. Again, Democratic, right? And then on the day that the president unveiled -- again, I have to keep emphasizing this. You know, it seems like they're trying to make this a Democrat/Republican issue. You know, then there was the day, Roland, that, the president unveiled his 23 action points on guns, and barrow released a statement on that day that said, "I strongly disagree with proportions that would deny law-abiding citizens their second amendment rights." Obviously, far from an absolute endorsement. And then, Roland, I got to tell you this because it has got even better. Then, the liberal pro-Obama stop gun violence campaign ran this ad invoking Newtown against Democrat Barrow. Here's that ad.


BARROW: I'm John Barrow.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Breaking news now --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's been a shooting at a school.

BARROW: And long before I was born --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Twenty children targeted.


BARROW: My grandfather used this little Smith & and Wesson here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Beautiful little kids between the ages of five and 10-years-old.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And for as long as I can remember, my father always had this rifle real handy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Someone is shooting in the building.


BURNETT: That's a pretty horrific thing.

MARTIN: Here's the deal, though. What you're trying to show is, again, this issue that we have in this country, when it comes to gun culture. The fact that you are a politician and you are running ads, not talking about health care, not talking about education, but you are showing the two guns, because you're trying to solidify to those voters who vote based upon guns, that to me is crazy. And so if you're going to get criticized, you're going to praise guns, you're going to get criticized. So, look, I understand that --

BURNETT: But just because someone says that guns are OK does not mean that they are advocating mass shootings like in Newtown.

MARTIN: Look --

BURNETT: That's aggressive. That's bullying and far worse, some might say.

MARTIN: Last I checked, politics is a rough and tumble business. And I have seen far worse when it comes to commercials. But, again, the point you're making is, when you have a commercial and you want to tout guns on one hand, expect the opposite reaction on the other.

BURNETT: Rehan, I have to say, if that ad is OK, maybe using -- I mean, the other ads that the NRA ran that were offensive about the president's children, all these ads seem to be problematic.

SALAM: I find that ad really infuriating for this reason. We have some deep, deep problems that drive crime and violence in this society. For example, one percent of U.S. adults are behind bars. And that, a lot of scholars believe, has actually exacerbated the crime problem by reducing the stigma of (INAUDIBLE) with incarceration. It actually drains communities of their life blood and causes huge, huge problems. Diane Feinstein has been a big advocate of three strikes laws, lock away the key, throw them in jail, you know, throw away the key kind of approaches that have actually had devastating effects on a lot of communities that are the biggest victims of criminal violence.

And then, we get an assault weapons ban that, is basically a cosmetic approach. The reason you said two to eight percent, is that we don't even know what really counts as an assault weapon. They are literally naming guns. Guess what, I take off this one stock, this foldable stock, it's not an assault weapon anymore. This is nonsense legislation that is purely symbolic, that is an absolute waste of time.

BURNETT: Roland, I have to ask you one more question, just in terms of these Democrats doing these things to other Democrats to get them in line.

This weekend, Bill Clinton weighed in on the issue. And he was talking at a private conference to top Democratic donors and he said, and I want to quote him, because he said, do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them. And, obviously, that sort of made me remember the comment for which Mr. Obama was much maligned in the 2008 campaign. Let me just play that.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We went to some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And it's not surprising then, that they get bitter. And they cling to guns or religion.


BURNETT: Roland, should the Democrats heed president Clinton's advice on the gun issue?

MARTIN: I think what the key for Democrats to do is, again, to be sensible when it comes to guns. You have seen Democrats who are strong NRA supporters say, who get A-ratings say, we should do something. And that's what the real key here is.

The problem is when it becomes, you either do something, and the opposition says, no, you do nothing. There has to be some kind of middle ground. And so, what some Democrats are saying is, look, we've got to be able to appeal to them. But it's not just folks in the south also, Erin. You have Democrats in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Maine, New York that have all gotten "A" ratings from the NRA.

BURNETT: Fair point.

MARTIN: So again, it's a very delicate issue here. I just can't believe it has to be one or the other. You can do something.

BURNETT: Thanks to both. And still to come, a new super bacteria, has been discovered and one medical expert compares to it a terrorist attack. Dr. Oz is OUTFRONT.

Plus, the NAACP joins the fight against mayor Bloomberg's the soda ban. But do their claim against the ban add up when sodas are up contributor to obesity in this country.

And later, Mark Zuckerberg hosts a political fund-raiser for a Republican.


BURNETT: Our second story OUTFRONT, apocalyptic scenario, a dire warning from Britain's chief medical officer. James Ali Davey (ph) says the threat from drug-resistant bacteria is so serious that it could trigger a national emergency, similar to a terrorist attack.

Some pretty stunning words and it sure caught my attention, and OUTFRONT tonight, we're lucky to have Dr. Oz, host of "the Dr. Oz show."

You know, I saw that apocalyptic scenario. It caught my attention and read it. You know, I've always wondered, people who go to the doctor every time they get sick and get antibiotics. So, are they causing are problem? Are we going to have, you know, all these things be resistant to antibiotics? Is she exaggerating or she is right?

DOCTOR MEHMET OZ, HOST, THE DR. OZ SHOW: She's not exaggerating at all. I'm very concern about this. The real challenge is, what are we going to do about it? The reality is we can't keep up with the bacteria. They're going to change much more rapidly than we develop new medications at the current pace. As we take care of people who are sicker and sicker, we get folks to survive cancer, transplant patients, all sorts of artificial limbs, when these things get infected, we use high-powered antibiotics. It's like firing these arrows into a field of soldiers, and some of the soldiers died, but otherwise, they have shields, and then they share their shields with their friends. And so, they will have shield and your arrows don't work anymore.

We are at a turning point right. And we have to change how we think about antibiotics. We have to change and we develop new ones.

BURNETT: And I want to talk about, because some people say, look, antibiotic prescriptions are down, and they are down, about 17 percent, but the antibiotics that are being prescribed are stronger and more powerful, maybe not like arrows, but like a bazooka, you know, skits row. And there was at time when everyone was taking Cipro, like everyone should have Cipro at home and take Cipro. Cipro is powerful drug.

OZ: It is. I have this battle of my whole family.

Listen. The first response we all have when we feel ill or our family is not feeling well, we give them something to help. And so, that's the natural response. Unfortunately, we believe that antibiotics offer the promise that they don't. Because for most folks, they're using a weapon that kills off many more good bacteria in your body than bad bacteria.

Let me just define that for a second. There are more bacteria in our gut, Erin, than there are cells in our body. We're mostly not us, we're mostly made up of bacteria. So when you take these antibiotics, you murder hundreds of millions of good guy bacteria that you need. To make sure you don't have gas or bloating and you can fight off other infections. And when you kill off those more, you know, the weakened ones, the resilient ones, they hang on, the toxic ones grow and thrive. When you immediately jump to the strongest antibiotic you have, the bazooka, in you vernacular, all of a sudden, now you've got to build up these big-time terrorist antibiotics and they're tough to take out.

BURNETT: And we have already seen strain resistant strange start. Things vampire can't fight gonorrhea, STD, staph bacteria, people go in the hospital, and you know, talk about legionnaires' disease again, and even strep throat. Then, how close are we at this point to getting some kind of a super bug that could be highly contagious and we just can't do anything to fight it?

OZ: We are already there. There are scenarios now, doomsday scenarios, which are not in the distant future, and I think we're more and more encountering these really resistant problems in our patients. There is five or 10 percent of folks who go to hospitals and get infected, one of the most important things you can do, if you can hear my voice, listen to this. Get out of the hospital. Don't spend much time in there, because we have bad bugs in there because they are taking care sick people. Eighty percent of gonorrhea is resistant now to the old-fashioned antibiotics. So, we are already in this situation with tuberculosis where we don't (INAUDIBLE) some of these problems.

That stated, the good news is, and this is what we have to rally around, we control our destiny. The less we over-use antibiotics, the more we preserve the good bacteria in our body, the more we avoid those resistant strains, and we have to fund, now these money, with our government some of these new innovative programs. We have to think out of the box when it comes to antibiotics. Don't go the same old path we've always been traveling.

The last 25 years, there has not been a ton of innovation in this area. That's a generation without major change. The bacteria multiply quickly, we need to change what we're doing.

BURNETT: The innovation. And now, what about, this is another things, some people will say, we all know. Some of you out there probably watching are in this category, you're Purell freaks. Every time you touch something, you've got to Purell. I was like that for a very brief period of time, until I read, it kills all the good bacteria and causes problems. We are about almost quarter a billion dollars a year for things like Purell in this country are sold. So, I this also increasing our problems of super bugs and problems or is it actually keeping us clean?

OZ: Well, the alcohol-based sanitizers, just Purell of that generation, are not as problematic for me as the antibiotic soaps, the antibiotics we give to our cows and livestock, which is, by the way, that's probably 85 percent of all antibiotics go.

BURNETT: So even if you're not taking antibiotics and you're like, I'm not in that category that's causing a problem, you are if you're drinking milk --

OZ: Well, the antibiotics, to me, the milk or the meat, the animals are given the antibiotics to keep them healthy enough so they can be made into your meat or give you milk, and the problem with that, they go to the bathroom, and in their poop, now, there's resistant sometimes microbes bacteria -

BURNETT: So it's not from in the meat or the milk. It comes in to the --

OZ: Exactly. Once it gets into the water supply, and then it's next to the spinach. And all of the sudden, now you have lots of resistant bacteria there growing. That combined with these antimicrobial soaps that truclescent (ph) soaps that have chemical and then it kill of the bacteria, again, it kill off them easily and kill one, the resistant one, the toxic was ones you don't get rid of.

BURNETT: So the bottom line is, you do think this is a bigger risk than a lot of other things, terrorist attack, I mean, in the UK, they said more than massive flooding, coastal flooding, more than any of these things?

OZ: I think over the next five to ten years, we're going to see a lot more folks lose their lives and their wellness because of resistant to antibiotic -- bacteria resistant to antibiotics than we will from the many other catastrophes we envision. And again, the main focus for us has to be making it easy for young investigators and pharmaceutical companies to develop products. No one's in that space now in a meaningful way. Let's nudge them in the right direction.

BURNETT: All right, thank you very much, Dr. Oz. Really appreciate it.

OZ: Thank you.

BURNETT: And still to come, mayor Bloomberg's ban on large sodas faces opposition from the NAACP. They say it's unfair to minorities.

And later in the show, Manti Te'o breaks his silence. And the voice mails, we have them, from the woman who didn't exist.


BURNETT: Our third story OUTFRONT is New York City's soda ban unfair to minorities?

So, there are two powerful advocacy groups who say that it is. They are teaming up with the soft drink industry to help take down the city's ban on large-sized sugary drinks. Now, the problem is, is that it's not that simple. Questions are emerging about the real motive behind the group's decision to get involved. There are some things in this that don't seem to add up.

And Mary Snow is OUTFRONT.


MARY SNOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The fight to ban large soda and sugary drinks in New York City is getting some high- profile but unlikely support. One of the nation's oldest civil rights groups is taking a stand in support of beverage companies. The New York chapter of the NAACP is backing a lawsuit filed to try and stop the city.

Hazel Dukes is the New York chapter president.


SNOW: It's about?

DUKES: Economic disparity. And how the small business is being punished while we allow the big corporate people, again, have their own way.

SNOW: Convenience stores like 7-eleven are exempt. The NAACP, along with the Hispanic federation, argue that small and minority- owned businesses will feel is a disproportionate impact. Then, there's the obesity epidemic. Non-Hispanic blacks, according to the CDC, have the highest rates of obesity at 44 percent, followed by Mexican Americans at 39 percent.

The NAACP followed a legal brief in support of beverage companies, saying, to tackle the public health crisis of obesity, it's developed a holistic, educational program called project help. The funding for that project, according to the NAACP's Web site, is the coca-cola foundation, the philanthropic arm of the company. Duke says the New York chapter received $75,000 in the past two years. There's a conflict?

DUKES: Absolutely not.

SNOW: You don't see a conflict?

DUKES: If this was the first time that Coca-Cola had given us money, sure, it would raise questions, but it's not the first time? Coca-cola has been supporting NAACP nationally and locally three years, not only here in New York state, but all over the country.

SNOW: The Hispanic federation also said it received $75,000 from coke for this year. The organization's president also left last year to work for coca-cola. A spokesman for HF says those factors had no impact on its decision to file the legal brief. As for the city, when asked to comment on the beverage industry's latest allies, it said in a statement, the obesity crisis impacting the nation and disproportionately affecting minorities calls for bold action and we are confident support will grow as more people learn about the unique impact sugary drinks have on this epidemic.


SNOW: We reached out to coca-cola for comment, which referred us directly to the American beverage association. It says it's not surprised it's gaining more support. It believes the city's board of health overstepped its authority, which is why it filed a lawsuit -- Erin?

BURNETT: All right, thanks very much to you, Mary.

OUTFRONT next, the Obama administration very concerned about the terror threat in northern Africa, warning Americans to stay away.

And later, facebook's CEO likes Chris Christie. I know where those two met. Will the other tech leaders throw their support behind the GOP?


BURNETT: Welcome back to the second half of OUTFRONT.

We start with stories where we focus on reporting from the front lines. We begin with North Korea, which warns it plans to carry out a nuclear test that targets the United States, it supposed sworn enemy of the Korean people. In the U.S., meanwhile, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says he's very concerned with North Korea's continuing provocative behavior, but says that the U.S. is fully prepared to deal with.

Gordon Chang, though, the author of "Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes on the World", says Panetta's remarks are refreshingly candid, but says we should be paying close attention, because North Korea's belligerent words are an escalation in the rhetoric, and this time he thinks the North Koreans have the capability to actually back up their threats.

President Obama has nominated Mary Jo White to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. She took on Wall Street as a former chief federal prosecutor. It was a position she held for nine years in the southern district of New York. But it's her more recent work that could be the subject of criticism and confirmation hearings. As a corporate defender, she has rapped firms while they were under SEC investigation -- hey, look, you've got to know how they try to beat the rap if you're going to bust people for cheating. I think that could be a good thing.

David John of the conservative Heritage Foundation hopes the nomination signals a shift towards full enforcement of existing laws and away from what he sees as burdensome regulations. Well, the Yemeni government has confirmed the top leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is dead. Saeed Al-Shihri, who is second command, died after being wounded in a counterterrorism operation. Apparently, he died at the end of last year. We just found out about it today. The government says he was buried by al Qaeda-linked militants as an undisclosed location.

Terrorism expert Scott Stewart of the firm Stratfor says al Shihri's death could impact al Qaeda's fund-raising ability, but that someone else will take his place.

It has been 539 days since the United States lost its top credit rating. What are we doing to get it back?

Well, the number of Americans filing for new jobless benefits fell again last week, hitting a five-year low for the second week running, and that is good news.

And in our fourth story OUTFRONT: an imminent threat.

The United States is warning Americans to stay out of Benghazi, Libya, the site of the deadly attack four months ago. This comes as the British government warns of a specific and imminent threat to Westerners in that city. Germany and the Netherlands also told their citizens to leave immediately.

The terror threat in North Africa is a growing concern for the Obama administration, one that is opening up an incredibly divisive debate about what the United States should do.

Pentagon correspondent Chris Lawrence is OUTFRONT.


CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hillary Clinton says it's risky to ignore this rising threat.

HILLARY CLINTON, SECRETARY OF STATE: Benghazi did not happen in a vacuum. Instability in Mali has created an expanding safe haven for terrorists.

LAWRENCE: And the defense secretary sounds like a man ready to go on offense.

LEON PANETTA, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: We've got to go after al Qaeda, wherever the hell they're at. And yes, in Mali, if necessary.

LAWRENCE: But the White House is not embracing the same tough talk.

JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We are working with France and support their effort in Mali, and believe that the goal of preventing terrorists' safe haven is an important one.

LAWRENCE: In public, the administration swings from forceful to tentative. A senior U.S. official said the defense secretary's tough talk is classic Panetta. Quote, "He's letting the French know we've got their back in the offensive against al Qaeda."

U.S. military planes recently started landing in the capital, Bamako, bringing 200 French troops and tons of the equipment to the fight. They're also sharing intelligence. But France is taking the lead, in a push to rout out al Qaeda from Mali.

But the Obama administration debated that help, worried it would make Americans an even bigger target overseas.

The White House is still considering sending refueling planes for French fighter jets, but wants more specifics on what France will target.

But the biggest question for the administration: what's the end game?

GEN. CARTER HAM, U.S. AFRICA COMMAND: We would all like to see the elimination of al Qaeda and others from northern Mali.

LAWRENCE: But like Libya and Syria, the U.S. is hesitant to become deeply involved in a murky fight with no clear outcome. And as for purging al Qaeda from Mali, the top U.S. military commander in Africa says, French or no French, it can't be done.

HAM: Realistically, probably the best you can get is containment and disruption.

LAWRENCE (on camera): Now, there is some division within the military and the administration as a whole. Some feel the U.S. should take a stronger role now to keep the al Qaeda affiliate in Mali from going from a regional threat to a global one -- Erin.


BURNETT: Thanks very much to Chris Lawrence.

And now to a much lighter story about high-tech love. We're not talking about the Manti Te'o kind of love. That's later on in the show. We're talking about the kind that rich guys in Silicon Valley give with their very obese checkbooks.

Now, we all know President Obama and Google's Eric Schmidt are tight. These guys are bedfellows. Schmidt's Google employees gave 95 percent of their campaign contributions to the president in 2012, $700,000. It's safe to say that would be a sweep, 97 percent. That's a Democratic company. There are even rumors that Schmidt might join Obama's cabinet as treasury secretary, which added to the commonly held belief that rich tech guys are all liberals.

Rich California guys, a bunch of liberals. But you know what? Times appear to be a-changing. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is hosting his first political fund-raiser for -- Republican New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.

I mean, look at that pair, made in heaven.

McKay Coppins, "BuzzFeed" reporter, broke the story.

And Joe Lockhart joins me. He's a former Clinton White House press secretary and former communications V.P. of Facebook, knows all sides of this.

McKay, your reporting, what brought this marriage about?

MCKAY COPPINS, BUZZFEED: Well, you know, they met in 2010, Chris Christie and Mark Zuckerberg, when Zuckerberg donated $10 million to Newark's school system. And they've kind of worked together on education reform since then. And that's kind of the issue that brought them together.

But it's interesting, the Facebook spokesperson that I talked to says that Mark doesn't just support his efforts on education reform, he supports him on a broad array of issues, which is really interesting, especially since you said, a lot of people believe that Silicon Valley and the tech world is very liberal, right?

BURNETT: Right, right. It's interesting. And I believe they met at that big media mogul conference in Sun Valley.

COPPINS: Sun Valley, yes, that's right.

BURNETT: I think I recall that.

All right. Joe, you know Mark Zuckerberg. You also know politics. Were you surprised at all when you heard this?

I mean, I've seen those two men together. They clearly get along, although they are very, very different, in appearance, and certainly how they dress, and everything else. But you know what? Sometimes it is opposites who attract.

JOE LOCKHART, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: No, I'm not surprised at all. I mean, I think we here in D.C. approach politics from a professional and partisan way. I think Mark approaches politics in a personal way.

You know, it's interesting, the way Mark got into education reform in New Jersey and Newark, specifically, was at a Sun Valley conference, when he met Mayor Cory Booker. And that conversation rolled into conversations with Governor Christie and $100 million commitment to helping reform the education system there.

So I don't think Mark looks at it the way a lot of people in D.C. do. It's someone who he had hosted at Facebook. This is someone who, I think, hosted a dinner for previously. You know, a social dinner. He believes that they share a commitment to education reform. And he's ready to support him.

BURNETT: McKay, this is a shift though. Look at the 2012 election. I gave the example of Google, because this is important with the Democrats, the Republicans are in complete and utter disarray, the Democratic Party is becoming more powerful, and they thought they could count on Silicon Valley. Nate Silver of "The New York Times", you know, added all the contributions -- $2.7 million went to Barack Obama, $554,000 went to Romney; 83 percent of the money went to Barack Obama.

Mark Zuckerberg coming out in favor of Chris Christie, who is going to be a candidate in 2016 for the Republican Party, seems to be a significant event, a tipping point.

COPPINS: Yes. No, it could matter a lot. And it's not just money. The Bay Area, Silicon Valley hosts to, you know, all these great tech companies. Obama won that area by 49 points in 2012.

Chris Christie making inroads in that community is huge. There's a lot of cash there, but there's also a tech talent gap that Republicans have suffered from. The campaigns, when they're staffing up, they don't have access, all the time, to a lot of the most talented tech people, because they're all so liberal.

But if Chris Christie can, you know, use his relationship with Mark Zuckerberg to, kind of, ingratiate himself with those people, it could matter going forward.

BURNETT: Hey, look, he needs the Obama apps to get to people.

COPPINS: Right, exactly.

BURNETT: Joe, let me ask you. This is a tough -- this is a tough one for you. You work for Bill Clinton, you know, Hillary Clinton well, you know? Now, you work with Mark Zuckerberg. So Christie versus Hillary, what's your take on who might be better in 2016?

LOCKHART: Well, I obviously think that Hillary is. I think if you look at just the politics of this, you know, Chris Christie is a conservative Republican, in the state of New Jersey. It's -- you know, that's a tough road for a state that's fairly progressive. So it's -- no, you know, his campaign plan will be moderate, but I think he's very conservative, much closer to the Tea Party than the real, you know, traditional Republicans.

The one thing I come back to, though, is -- you know, we can, and I think we are probably making too much of this. This is not Silicon Valley endorsing a Republican. This is based on a personal relationship. It's probably the best of politics, someone who believes in someone else. Not the partisanship that we see now.

You know, Silicon Valley will remain, I think, progressive and Democratic. It's one of the most progressive areas in the country. I think the numbers play that out. That you just -- so I don't think Democrats have a problem.

I think Chris Christie and Mark Zuckerberg just have a great relationship. And Mark is demonstrating that.

BURNETT: Yes, it may be that simple, but it certainly seems to indicate Chris Christie is going to be a guy who breaks stereotypes. COPPINS: No kidding.

BURNETT: That's going to be an exciting time for all of us to watch that go down.

All right. Still to come, the Notre Dame football player breaks his silence. What Manti Te'o says about messages sent to him from a girlfriend who obviously, as we all now know, didn't exist. But you're going to hear her voice.

And a soccer player kicks a ball -- kicks a ball boy on the sidelines. Was a tweet behind the attack?


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

And tonight, we go to London, where video of a Chelsea soccer player kicking a ball boy has gone viral. That player, Eden Hazard, got a red card. But as it turns out, the ball boy wasn't all that innocent

Pedro Pinto is covering the story and I asked him what the ball boy actually revealed on social media.


PEDRO PINTO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Erin, before heading over to the stadium to work, so to speak, this 17-year-old ball boy had posted ton on Twitter that he was going to do his best to waste as much time as possible if the ball came his way during the game. And that's exactly what he did, with about 10 minutes to go, his team were leading the much higher-profile Chelsea in this game, so he took it upon himself, literally, to hide the ball from one of the Chelsea players.

Eden Hazard, one of the highest profile players on the Chelsea side, went the extra mile to get the ball back, but this is just the kind of behavior that you can't have if you're a professional athlete.

In the end, there were no charges filed. Both the player and the ball boy apologized for their role in this incident -- Erin.


BURNETT: Thanks so much to Pedro.

And now our fifth story OUTFRONT: Manti Te'o talks.

The Notre Dame star talked to Katie Couric about the hoax involving a fake girlfriend that he says fooled him, fooled his family, and of course the entire country too.


MANTE TE'O, NOTRE DAME LINEBACKER: I wasn't as forthcoming about it, but I didn't lie. You know, I never was asked, did you see her in person?

And so, through the embarrassment and the fear of what people may think, that I was committed to this person who I didn't have the chance to meet, and she, all of a sudden, died, now, that scared me. And so, to avoid any further conversation, I kind of -- you know, I wasn't as forthcoming as I should have been.


BURNETT: OUTFRONT tonight, Brian Polian. He is a former assistant coach for the University of Notre Dame. He recruited Te'o in 2008 to play for the university. He's known Te'o and his family since. He's now the head coach for the University of Nevada football team.

Good to see you, sir. I really appreciate you taking the time.

I know that you visited Te'o 15 times when you were recruiting him, you got to know him, you've talked to him since this story broke. What has he said to you?

BRIAN POLIAN, HEAD COACH, UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA: Well, our conversations, in fact, have been via text. And to be honest with you, I did not want to get into the details of the whole thing with him. Frankly, I was more concerned about his welfare as a person and that of his family.

So, really, the focus was, hey, kiddo, how you doing, is everything OK? And the conversations kind of went along those lines.

BURNETT: And how was he? Does he seem -- is he -- are they -- are you truly worried about him and his mental well-being right now, or is he doing OK?

POLIAN: No, I think he's doing OK. At the very beginning of this whole process, I could just sense that he was tired and that he was, you know, a little bit worn out by it and I was concerned about his mom and dad.

And, you know, the one thing about the young man, he's very emotional. He wears it on his sleeve. And when, you know, when all of this began to occur, I was concerned about him, just how he was handling it, just in general.

So I think he's doing better. Just the text messages that we traded back and forth --


POLIAN: And the messages we've shared with the family. I think he's doing better.

BURNETT: Let me ask you this. You know, Te'o explained why he never met Lennay, and I wanted to just play his explanation and then ask you something about it. First, here's Manti.


TE'O: For me, I guess I was just so caught up in the whole thing, I was like, OK, she can't see me, and she would give me good reasons too. She would say, oh, my brother's at my car, or, I was in the hospital, or -- you know, I wasn't going to tell a person who was just out of a coma, you need to come and see me right now.


BURNETT: And he also went on to say when he Facetimed, met over the Web, she could see him, but he couldn't see her.

You've met him. You've talked to him. A lot of people say, this is ridiculous. How could anybody be this gullible?

You talk about him as an emotional young man. Do you think he could have been hoodwinked by this? Do you think he could have been that gullible?

POLIAN: There's no doubt in my mind, and I don't think gullible is the right word, to be honest with you. This is -- this is as good- hearted and selfless a person as I've ever met in my life. And I think, just in general, the public and certainly the media are having a hard time wrapping their head around the image of this young man.

Could he be that naive? And naive is a better word to be honest with you. But he really is a completely trusting person.

And what Jack Swarbrick, the athletic director at Notre Dame, stated in his press conference, that one of the greater tragedies of this whole thing is that this young man, who was completely trusting, was taken advantage of and made to look foolish, frankly. And that's not right, because the image of this young man is, in fact, reality. I mean, this is as trusting and selfless a human being as I've ever had the chance to be around.

BURNETT: And let me ask you one final question. Katie asked a question that I know a lot of people have been asking. It's an awkward one, but she asked it, as she should have. She asked him whether the hoax had anything to do with his sexuality.

Here's his -- here's the interchange.


KATIE COURIC, HOST, ABC'S "KATIE": One of the theories, many theories, Manti, making the rounds, is somehow you created this whole scenario to cover up your sexual orientation. Are you gay?

TE'O: No. Far from it. Far from that.



BURNETT: Now, I don't want to ask you about Manti Te'o and his sexuality. What I want to ask you is this, you know, there has never been an openly gay player in the NFL, professional sports. It just doesn't happen. As the head coach of football at Nevada, do you think being gay could affect somebody's professional football career?

POLIAN: If I could for one moment, I'd like to back up. I don't think in my opinion that the question was appropriate, in my opinion.

That being said, do I think that professional major college sports is prepared for an openly gay athlete? I do, I do believe that. I certainly, in my position as the head football coach at Nevada, if one of our players was openly gay, it certainly would not change my opinion of him one way or another.

We're judged on whether or not we're taking care of our business in the class room and whether or not we're productive as football players. And ultimately, our job is to graduate players and win games. If a young man is doing those two things and being a responsible citizen, his sexual orientation, one way or the other, has no bearing on what's going on.

BURNETT: All right. Coach Polian, thank you for your time.

And I want to bring in Dr. Drew Pinsky, the host of "Dr. Drew on Call".

Dr. Drew, let me ask you, do you think that was a fair question? And what do you think of Manti Te'o's response?

DR. DREW PINSKY, HLN: I think it was a question you had to ask merely because it was in the vapors, and it was a reasonable thing to ask, and his response seemed categorical and reasonable. That's fine. But with each of the questions he answered in "Katie" show, I ended up with many more questions than I got answers that really help me understand what was going on here.

For instance, many times he had actually planned to go meet her, and yet it was him that made excuses it sounds as to why he was unable to go meet this woman in person. That's what we expect from the people who are hoaxsters.

Also, listen to these tapes. I challenge the viewers to listen to the tapes. They're available online. It really sounds like a woman, it is incredibly compelling and emotional. But once again, what motivates the person who is the hoaxster to do this, to spend their time and energy to effectively abuse Manti. It's very abusive, very problematic.

And then why again, wouldn't he go further, have the intuitive instinct to go further, to actually form a relationship with this woman rather than this sort of vapors, this Internet thing that he was carrying on.

BURNETT: It does seem strange he would be the one to cut off meeting her. Certainly, you know, if he was in love with her or thought he might be or dating her, that would be what he would want to do. Again, regardless of his religion and whether it would allow him to, you know, be intimate with her or not.

PINSKY: Absolutely.

BURNETT: But let me play, as you asked me to, one of the voice mails and let our viewers judge. This is the woman -- the person, let me use the right word, Dr. Drew, that Manti was speaking to. Here is one of the exchanges.


"LENNAY KEKUA": I'm just letting you know I got here and I'm getting ready for my first session and I just want to call to keep you posted. I miss you. I love you. Bye.


BURNETT: That could be a girl. It wasn't, but it could be.

PINSKY: Absolutely. I'm not -- listen, I'm still not sure it's not, by the way. The whole thing seems so bizarre. I mean, but the really bizarre and scary question is what motivated the guy who's pulling off the hoax to do this? Why? Why did he do this and sustain it over a long period of time?

The people who do these sort of catfishing behaviors are often people that are isolated and socially awkward and are looking for contact in some form and have no identity and feel bad about themselves.

He's a football player. These are guys that have a social life. In fact, Manti himself had a girlfriend after this girl allegedly died.


BURNETT: Between the, quote/unquote, "former friends" who did the hoax to Manti Te'o, there's got to be more there. That's what you're saying?

PINSKY: There's so much more. You got to ask yourself, I'm glad you asked the coach of what this means for him as a player because would you as an NFL team want to take on the liability of the guy that is this gullible. There are going to be -- what kind of liability might that mean for them as a franchise if this guy can be taken advantage of like this and sustained over periods of time? And is it that gullibility that this hoaxster, lets call him, was exploiting and taking advantage of and making fun of in some way?

BURNETT: Yes. Dr. Drew, thank you.

And, of course, you can see Dr. Drew at 9:00 on HLN.

And still to come, Subway says they have a foot long. But you know what? It doesn't add up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BURNETT: A picture of an Australian teen measuring his foot-long sub went viral this week. Matt Corby posted this photo of his Subway sandwich next to his tape measure on Facebook.

As you can see, it is 11 inches, not the 12 that a Footlong would imply. Now, this story even made the front page of a newspaper in New York, and it led Subway to issue a statement saying the name Footlong is, quote, "a descriptive name for the sub sold in Subway restaurants and not intended to be a measurement of length."

That explanation is a little tough to swallow. So, we decided to investigate. We ordered a couple of Footlongs from Subway and called in producer Bob Hand to measure the foot. Appropriate, right?

Hand is a big fan of Subway and approached the job seriously. His veggie delight on white was more than 12 inches, almost 13. The meat one, though, also on white, I don't know why it's relevant, but it's in here didn't quite make it, unless you included the meat hanging over the side.

So, apparently, it's true that not all their sandwiches add up, which brings me to tonight's number: $5 million. That's the amount a Chicago man is suing Subway for. Nguyen Buren alleges he ordered a Footlong from Subway and he only got 11 inches and it was part of a pattern of fraudulent, deceptive and otherwise improper advertising. And the day he filed his lawsuit, two other men in New Jersey sued Subway for the same thing.

And today, the three said they're considering joining forces and filing a huge federal class action lawsuit.

Look, if something is called a Footlong, you do expect it to be a foot long, I give you that. But there's another side to this -- Americans, you know, struggling with an obesity epidemic are suing because they want to eat more. Class action lawsuits from the world's fattest nation because we deserve a little more food. I mean, a foot long at 11 inches and not 12 is 52 inches you did not eat in a year. Now that adds up, or rather, slims down.

And so on this one, we begrudgingly -- begrudgingly though, wow -- side with Subway.

"ANDERSON COOPER 360" starts now.