either the bad guy was killed and his gun was left at the scene or used during the commission of a crime in which the gun was left behind. >> that makes no sense to me. >> between reasonable men within the law enforcement community, no, there is no reasonable explanation to let these guns walk. >> two of those guns made their way back north to the scene where border agent brian terry was shot dead a year and a half ago. he just finished buying christmas presents for his family. two months later, atf agent sopada was shot by a batch of ten firearms sold in a part of fast and furious. but the big headlines today were in washington, d.c. after initially cooperating with the house oversight committee, which is investigating fast and furious. attorney general eric holder refused to turn over more internal justice department documents. in a letter today, the deputy

attorney general james cole notified the committee chairman darryl issa that president obama was holding them on the basis of executive privilege. the move came after threats to site holder for contempt. and negotiations yesterday between the attorney general and committee members. today's decision to invoke executive privilege led republicans on the committee to say their search for accountability is being stymied. >> if congress has time to look into major league baseball, the bcs and invite stephen colbert to come to a committee hearing, surely to goodness, we have time to get answers only fundamentally flawed lethal investigation like fast and furious. >> well, democrats accused chairman issa and his republican colleagues of conducting a witch hunt. republicans say the administration is using executive privilege to impede the investigation. keeping both sides honest, it's worth points out facts. this is the first time president obama has invoked executive privilege. back when democrats controlled

the house, any republican administration was claiming executive privilege for the sixth time. the sound bites were 180 degrees opposite. back then, as democratic house members debated contempt citation against two george w. bush advi advisers, frun members including darryl issa simply walked out. listen. >> we will not stand here and watch this floor be abused for pure political grand standing at the expense of our national security. we will not stand for this and we will not stay for this. and i would ask my house republican colleagues and those who believe that we should be here protecting the american people not vote on this bill. let's just get up and leave. >> that's the complete opposite of their position today. also now keeping the white house honest, president obama's views on executive privilege do seem to have changed an awful lot, now that he's chief executive.

here's senator obama back in 2007 during the bush showdown. >> there's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place. and i think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. i think the american people deserve to know what's going on there. >> republican congressman trey gauti. thanks for being with us. you said president obama is, quote, either part of it or he's not. if he's part of it, there's a series of witnesses that misled the committee. if he's not part of it, he has no business exerting executive privilege. what do you mean by that statement? are you implying the president is part of covering something up? >> no, quite the opposite. we had no one testify before either judiciary or oversight

who said the president knew about fast and furious at all. my point was to point out the absurdity of asserting executive privilege if you had no knowledge of it. he doesn't have to worry about his counsel being subpoenaed before members of congress. >> that's not actually true, though. vice president cheney used executive privilege for discussions about energy policy. it was even used with hillary clinton in her role in the health care debate under the clinton administration. so it doesn't necessarily mean the president was sitting in meetings. >> well, what does it mean then? it's executive privilege. it has to mean something. it can't cover your entire administration or no one would have to turn over documents. >> one of your colleagues said eric holder is protecting

documents and is in complianpli by statutes passed by congress and signed by the president of the united states. you disagree with that? >> no h, he's partially correct. the initial request was for wiretap application, which rule 6-c does not allow anyone to give to anyone who's not part of the investigation or the trial. so to the extent that the original request for documents was overly broad and included protected material, then mr. cummings is correct. where he's not correct is after chairman issa narrowed the scope of documents to not include anything that was legally prohibited from being discovered, he's still not complied. what could possibly be protected about the drafting of a false letter to a committee of congress? >> but back in the bush administration when cheney was talking about executive privilege because of discussions on energy policy and discussions from people outside the white

house even, republicans rallied around him and said it's legitimate. it was very much a partisan issue, just as this is now. if it was okay, though, under the bush administration, why isn't it okay now? what's the difference? >> anderson, i've never subscribed to that theory in life, which is why i may not be long for this town. i was a prosecutor back when that's going on. the notion that it's okay for me to do it because you did it has never been appealing to me. if it was wrong to do it now, it was wrong to do it then and i hoped a court would intervene and say you're wrong to assert executive privilege. the fact that a republican does something doesn't mean i automatically agree with it. in fact, i would be happy to have everyone who's had their fingerprints on wide receiver, fast and furious, any gun walking investigation comment. i don't think you would be able to tell much of a difference in the tone of my questions irrespective of their political persuasion. >> what happens next? i mean, this is going to go to a vote in the full house.

how do you see this being brought to a resolution? do you think it's going to wind up in the courts? >> i hope not. i hope he gives us the documents. it's not a political exercise to me. i want to know how fast and furious happened. i want to know how a false letter was delivered to a committee of congress. i hope we don't get to that point because i hope the attorney general gives us the documents. if he doesn't, then yeah, we'll vote on it on the floor of the house. there's three different forms of contem contempt. there's criminal contempt, civil contempt. if it's criminal, it will be referred to the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia. if it's civil, it will go to a federal judge here in the district of columbia. >> appreciate your time today. thank you very much, sir. >> thank you. jeffrey toobin joins me now to take us through the legal ins and outs of the executive privilege. you just heard the congressman say i take him at his word. he said he would vote the same

way under the fwim as he does now. but does it only apply to national security issues or that the president is having a conversation about? >> no. the courts said it's about the internal deliberations of the executive branch. as you pointed out, there are supreme court cases involving the vice president. there are many cases involving the president's advisers. you know, sometimes executive privilege is upheld, sometimes it's not. but the president himself doesn't have to be involved and national security doesn't have to be involved. >> certainly some people are going to look at this and say look, the president obviously has something to hide by invoking this executive privilege. you say not necessary? >> not necessary. every president in the modern era since richard nixon, including richard nixon have cited executive privilege. sometimes -- >> eex plain the idea behind it, the rationale behind it. >> the idea behind it is pretty simple. ice that the executive branch, the white house and the president and his or her advisers need space to be able

to consider all sorts of policy options without the worry that they will be subpoenaed to disclose exactly everything that they considered. now, the countervailing argument or issue is the constitution says the legislative branch, the congress, has a right to investigate, to engage in oversight for the executive branch. so those two ideas are in tension. and there are legitimate good faith fights over what's covered by executive privilege. and those have come up in every recent administration. >> there are those who would say look, if there's nothing to hide, why invoke this, though? it's basically on principle? >> it is on principle. at least that's what the obama administration is asserting. and that's what the bush administration asserted the last time we had this kind of conflict. >> the flip side is if you want to hide something, this is a good way to hide sufficient stuff? >> it is. and certainly the most famous case of all involving executive

privilege was united states versus nixon where the supreme court 9-0 in -- held that nixon had to disclose the white house tapes. and those turned out to be extremely incriminating and led directly to his resignation. so ever since nixon, the innovation of executive privilege has had kind of a nasty taint. and it's guilt by association with the most corrupt modern president. >> so basically you think this kind of goes away in the courts? it's lost in the election hoopla? >> i absolutely do. i think this will not have a neat resolution. it's embarrassing for eric holder. i don't think he's going to be found in contempt, that he's going to be led away in handcuffs. this is just going to be another political dispute. and if people remember it at all, they'll remember 23 republicans were for it, 23 democrats were against it.

>> the jury in the sandusky sex abuse trial is expected to get the case tomorrow. sandusky did not take the case afterall. clearly his lawyers seem to have made the right call, at least according to a lot of experts who are following this. jason carroll will recap the key testimony and our legal panel weigh in next. ♪... ♪... choose the perfect hotel

scroll... tap... pinch... and zoom... in your car. introducing the all-new cadillac xts with cue. ♪ don't worry. we haven't forgotten, you still like things to push. [ engine revs ] the all-new cadillac xts has arrived,

and it's bringing the future forward. where tonight we switched their steaks with walmart's choice premium steak. it's a steakover! tender. really tender. the steak itself is phenomenal. it's so juicy. this steak is perfect. these are carefully aged for flavor and tenderness. it's probably the best steak i've had. tonight you are actually eating walmart steak. are you serious? wow. i'll get some steaks from walmart. walmart choice premium steak in the black package.

it's one hundred percent satisfaction guaranteed. try it and check us out on facebook. >> jerry sandusky's lawyers rested their case without calling jerry sandusky to the stand. many legal experts considered it risky, obviously. he's charged with 51 counts in

the child sex abuse child. eight accusers described the alleged assaults they endured in sandusky's homes during trips in the penn state campus and showers. the case has torn a hole through the community. his revered boss was ousted as a result of the scandal, died of cancer in january. his storied career scarred by accusations that he didn't do as much as he could to try to stop the alleged abuse. now, if sandusky, who's 68 years old is convicted, he could spend the rest of his life in prison. the trial has gone very quickly. here's the recap of what we learn learned. >> reporter: the prosecution launched right in on day one, calling the first of eight sandusky accusers to the stand. alleged vick tum number one says he was assaulted in the basement of sandusky's home. the 18-year-old brought to tears. quote, after rubbing and cracking my back and the blowing of the stomach, he put his mouth

on my privates. another alleged victim, number five, said sandusky assaulted him in a penn state shower. i kept lurching forward but i didn't have anywhere to go. he touched my genitalia. >> here he was, relationship with boy after boy after boy which by any conventional evaluation of any normal adult would say, this is just so terribly odd and wrong. >> reporter: on the second day in court, the prosecution turned to another of its key witnesses, former grad assistant mike mcqueary who said in 2001, he saw sandusky sexually assaulting a young boy in a penn state show per .quote, coach sandusky's arms wrapped around the boy's midsection, just as close as i think you could be. the prosecution went on, showing letters sandusky wrote to some of the boys. one reading, love never ends

opinion it bears all things. w the defense called 18 character witnesses often sandusky's behalf, many former members of second mile. a charity founded by sandusky. chad rexrose told jurors, i never had a father in my life and he was a father figure. the most anticipated character witness said she never saw inappropriate contact with her husband and young boys. she told the court, three of the accusers had actually visited the sandusky home as adults. one of the oddest moments came from joe amendola, comparing the trial to a soap opera. >> it's like "all my children." >> that went viral. people called him insensitive. amendola said he has not revealed the accusers'

identities. a psychologist testified that he has histrionic personality disorder, which causes people to act inappropriately when not the center of attention. then the defense laid out what is their strongest move, presenting jurors with a recording which they say shows investigators leading an accuser. the final witness testifying, i felt like they kept asking me to say something that wasn't true. >> jason carroll joins me now. do we know why sandusky didn't testify today? >> reporter: well, that's a good question, anderson. i can tell you this, a source close to the case that i spoke to late yesterday afternoon and late last night tells me the, the idea of testifying or not testifying was still very much in play, still under discussion up until late last night. i'm also told that the final decision came down to two people -- joe amendola and jerry sandus sandusky. you have to wonder if this whole idea of risk came into the

equation. remember, sandusky gave two interviews to the media in the past. those interviews did not go well. enyou have to wonder if attorneys were telling him or wondering what kind of risk would present itself if he were to take the stand under cross-examination. >> given that interview with costas, who knows what he would have said on the stand. it would have been incredible to listen to. what's next in terms of closing arguments tomorrow? >> reporter: i think what we can expect is look for each side to revisit some of the points they brought up during the trial. for the prosecution, that means presenting jerry sandusky as a serial predator. asking jurors to remind them to listen to the testimony the accusers gave. to look at the pictures they put up on the stand there of these accusers when they were youngsters. and from the defense's point of view, to point out these accusers are in it for the money and that many of these accusers, they say were socoaxed into makg these allegations by the investigators. >> let's talk now to criminal

defense attorney mark geragos and marcia clark, author of "guilt by degrees." the defense rested today. were they able to cast reasonable doubt, do you think? >> i think with the right jurors, and i think they got the right jurors, that this could very well end up in a hung jury. i think the -- >> really? >> i think the character witnesses got on and off the stand. i think nay got on and off unscathed in terms of the character evidence. i think dottie was exactly what they needed. i think dottie is the reason he didn't take the stand. she was able to fill in some of the blanks they thought maybe he would have to put up there. but that was a high-risk propositi proposition. and then i think ending with that idea that the investigators wanted to coach the witnesses, i think it was helpful to them. i think you'll end up seeing a hung jury. >> marcia, do you think reasonable doubt is possible? >> of course it's always

possible, anderson. i think the defense hit every spot they had to hit. mark's right, they ended strong by putting on the witness who said i think the investigators were trying to tell me what to say, trying to get me to make a false accusation. that's a strong point for the defense when you have investigators admitting that they talked to the accusers about one another. they talked to one victim and said you're not the only one. but they denied having imparted any details of what one victim said to another. and that ultimately is extremely important. at the end of the day, anderson, the jury was the one who saw all of these witnesses testify, heard the heart wrenching testimony of these victims. i think it's very difficult to believe after all that we've seen and heard that they're going to find reasonable doubt given what we have seen in the entirety of the trial. i think the defense did what they could. i do not think it would be enough. >> mark, how important are closing arguments, both for defense and prosecution? can that really sway things one way or the other?

>> you know what i also say, and i bet marcia will agree. i think the case is won or lost in jury selection. i think what happens in closing argument is if you have a juror who's with you, what you're doing is you ear arming that juror with an argument so when they go back in that deliberation room, tlhey can articulate to the other jurors your position. you're never going to have on any case, your best jury. you're never going to have 12 jurors who are with you. youer. >> going to have jurors who drive the discussion and what you want to do as an advocate is drive the discussion with the arguments that will convince the others that have not staked a position. >> that's right on the money, anderson. i think it's true in all cases but especially one like this. and mark is also 100% right, you want to arm the jurors that may be in your camp. there may be only two or three, but if they're strong and vocal

and they're leaders in the pack, then what you've armed them with is enough to at the very least hang the jury and rise up in an acquittal. do i think it will happen in this case? i do not, but that's exactly the mentality, the strategy that you would follow. >> are you surprised at all, mark, how fast that trial went? i don't know why i expected it to go on longer. is that really based on just what kind of evidence they had both the defense and the prosecution? or is, say, more about the judge? >> well, at the risk of -- i want to hide my face when i say this. it wasn't in california. this is a judge who decided he was going to keep a tight leash on this thing. and he -- >> mark, are you giving up practicing law now in california? >> yeah. i'm moving to new york very soon, anderson. >> okay. but that's interesting. so marcia, do you want to dig

agrave along with mark on this? do you think it really is a sign of where this was? >> i do. i think he's right. you know, it seems that outside of california, judges know how to tamp it down and get it done. i think the prosecution was inclined probably to do a little rebuttal. it seems to me from reading the tea leaves that the judge might have talked them out of it. probably wisely so. i'm surprised and a little bit surprised that the prosecution did not call an expert on child abuse accommodation syndrome. one of the experts that could explain the failure to report, delay in reporting, inconsistent i want stas and so forth. i'm surprised they didn't call a witness like that. but they're inside the courtroom and they may have felt they didn't need to. that said, i think outside of california, yes, judges do not how to clamp it down and get it done. >> well, we welcome both of you -- >> marcia is so right. >> i appreciate it. disturbing accounts of alleged

abuse from sandusky's abusers and eyewitness testimony did not sway everyone in the courtroom. one of jerry and dottie sandusky's long-time friends was a character witness who testified on his behalf. her loyalty is unshakable. you're going to hear from her just ahead. is there any evidence that could be presented that would make you believe with these accusers are saying about jerry sandusky? >> i would have to see him do it myself with my own eyes. i think he's a wonderful person. i just can't believe these things. usiness credit card! pizza!!!!! [ garth ] olaf's small business earns 2% cash back on every purchase, every day! put it on my spark card! [ high-pitched ] nice doin' business with you! [ garth ] why settle for less? great businesses deserve the most rewards! awesome!!! [ male announcer ] the spark business card from capital one. choose unlimited rewards with 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase, every day! what's in your wallet?

ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about the cookie-cutter retirement advice ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you get at some places. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 they say you have to do this, have that, invest here ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you know what? ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 you can't create a retirement plan based on ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 a predetermined script. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 to understand you and your goals... ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 ...so together we can find real-life answers for your ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 real-life retirement. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 talk to chuck ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 and let's write a script based on your life story. ttd#: 1-800-345-2550 two pat downs and one trip through security, a passenger gets one and then she gives one. we'll tell you why she said she did it and what authorities

thought of her explanation. details ahead.

welcome back. quick clarification on something marcia clark said a moment ago. she wondered why the prosecution

didn't bring in an expert on child sex abuse. pennsylvania is the only date that doesn't allow such testimony unless they're personally involved in the case. the mek chur they painted didn't look anything like the sexual predator on susly described in court by eight of sandusky's alleged victims the week prior. a friend says she's known sandusky for four decades. she was one of the character witnesses. last night, we played part of the interview i did with her. tonight i want to show you the rest of the interview. she's 100% convinced that sandusky is innocent. i asked her to watch an interview with bob costas. >> so it's entirely possible you could have helped young boy a in some way that was not objecti

objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy b, c, d and e. >> well, you might think that, i don't know. in terms of my relationship with so many, many young people, i would guess that there are many young people that would come forward, many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and what i had done for them made a very positive impact on their life. and i didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that i've helped or many that i didn't have -- i hardly had any contact with who i have helped in many, many ways. >> joyce, some people hearing that find that kind of startling, particularly the last

line that sandusky said where he said i didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that i helped. there are many i didn't have -- and then he pauses. there are some i hardly had any contact with and helped many, many ways. how did you interpret that? >> i heard him say he didn't have sexual contact with kids that he helped. >> well, he said i didn't go out seeking every young person for sexual needs that i helped. there are many that i didn't have -- and then he stopped and said some i hardly had contact with and helped in many, many ways. certainly opened to interpretation. is there any evidence that could be presented that would make you believe what these accusers are saying about jerry sandusky. >> i would have to see him do it myself with my own eyes. i think he's a wonderful person. i just can't believe these things. sorry.

>> there's nothing to be sorry about. i think you're a good friend and you're standing by your friend. his wife dottie, who's your good friend testified. how do you think she did on the stand? >> i think she did an excellent job and i think she validated that she was a light sleeper and she would have heard something going on if it was going on in her home. i mean, she was there all the time. and she's a wonderful, moral person. she would cracked the whip if anything were going on. >> sandusky was overheard by a police officer years ago steling the mother of one of the accuser, quote, i wish i could ask for forgiveness, but i know i won't get it from you. i wish i were dead after she confronted him about taking a shower with her son. does that raise any eyebrows for you? >> no. it may me think he felt bad enough just taking a shower with a kid. >> and yet he continued to take

showers with kids. >> i don't know if that was one of the first ones or one of the last ones. >> but if he did continue to take showers with kids, do you think he really felt bad about it? >> i don't know. i would say he felt bad in that one case. >> well, joyce, i appreciate you coming on and talking to us. thank you very much, joyce. >> thank you, anderson. see you later. bye. >> one of jerry sandusky's strong defenders. a lot more happening around the country and the world. isha? >> anderson x no sign of progress in syria where syrian troops kept up the shelling today and at least 42 civilians were killed. new reporting as well about just how many people have fled syria. "the new york times" citing jordanian authorities who estimate there are now more than 100,000 syrians living in jordan.

egypt next, former dk tai tor hosni mubarak tonight is off life support. that's according to his lawyer. mubarak is not clinly de licall but is in critical condition and in failing health. greece has a new prime minister sworn in today. after successfully forming a new government, something the economically devastated country has done without for the last 223 days. the u.s. economy, not getting much of a boost from the federal reserve today. chairman ben bernanke announcing the extension of operation twist, which aims to keep borrowing costs low, but has only had a modest effect so far. and have you had up to here at the airport? tired of long lines and intrusive patdowns? well, this woman was. not only did the camera catch the patdown, well, it also caught the passenger shall we say patting back? carol price, that's her name is a retired tsa agent. she says she was only

demonstrating what happened to her. the law, though, says otherwise and she's being charged with misdemeanor battery. and anderson, she's heading to court next month. >> wow. she's been charged with misdemeanor battery for that? >> yep. they're saying she did not ask before she put her hands on the supervisor and that's what she's facing. >> wow. and she's a former tsa person? that's really interesting. >> she is. and she's claiming that -- she says it's a vendetta. but yeah, i think you can say it's a bad day at the airport. >> i guess we've all had those. isha, thanks. two healthy people who donated their kidneys died after surgeries after a device that has had warnings since 2006. keeping them honest next.

flash flooding turned streets into surging rivers in dulu duluth, minnesota. we have details on the evacuations ahead in the program. ♪ [ engine turns over ] [ male announcer ] we created the luxury crossover and kept turning the page, writing the next chapter for the rx and lexus. see your lexus dealer.

welcome back on the program. every year about 6,000 helped the americans choose to donate one of their kidneys to save a life. it's a remarkable thing to do. typically, everything goes fine. the operation is considered safe. but since 2001, five donors have died. their death is tied to a device that was warned to be unsafe back in 2006. so keeping them honest, did the food and drug administration, the agency that monitors the devices, did they do enough to sound the warnings and to protect these patients? and is it doing enough right now to stop more deaths in the future? here's cnn medical correspondent elizabeth cohen.

>> reporter: when this man developed a deadly kidney disease, his sister didn't hesitate to give him one of her kidneys. she went in for what's considered to be a very low risk surgery. >> she was overwhelmed that she was able to save her brother's life. >> reporter: the surgery was a success. she was wheeled out to the recovery room where her daughter melinda williams was waiting. but then, not even 30 minutes later, she took a mysterious turn for the worse. >> she raised up, she took a deep breath and her eyes got real huge and then she fell back down and then just started breathing really, really bad. >> reporter: surgeons at university of texas medical center rushed her back into the operating room. once inside, they realized something horrible had happened. in order to remove her kidney, doctors haed to cut an art are i. they put clips on it to make sure it didn't open back up. but the clips slipped off and

blood gushed oit. >> what was the next thing you heard? >> we couldn't save her. he did everything we possibly could, but there's nothing we could do. >> reporter: the mother of four bled to death at age 41. >> it just literally -- i couldn't hold it in new mexico. it just felt like my world fell apart. my heart was torn in pieces. >> reporter: what melinda williams didn't know -- her mother's death wasn't just some freak accident. it was 100% preventible. >> to learn that yet another donor has died has been simply devastating. >> reporter: dr. amy friedman, a transplant surgeon in syracuse, new york, has spent the last eight years trying to persuade the food and drug administration to do more to warn that clips can kill kidney donors. and yes, dr. friedman said another donor was the fifth kidney donor to die because of these clips. and at least 12 others suffered

injuries the clips are safe to use in many types of surgery, but not in laprascopic did knee donor surgeries. the fda worked with the manufacturer of these clips to send up to six warning letters, alerting hospitals that the clips were contraindicated, unsafe for use in that procedure. but doctor friedman says the letters were hardly persuasive and easily forgotten. the letter florinda's hospital received came five years before her surgery at a time when the hospital wasn't even using the clip. it was one of dozens of letters about various devices and other safety issues the hospital gets every wryear. and the letter never once mentioned patients had died. >> would this letter have had more impact if they had mentioned that people actually died? >> absolutely. it's shocking that it doesn't say that even a single donor died. it's meaningless without saying that. >> reporter: by 2007, documents obtained by dr. friedman through

the freedom of information act showed the fda called these letters effective and adequate to prevent a reoccurrence of the problem. effective and adequate, even though only about half the hospitalsing a knowledged getting the notification according to a 2007 audit by the fda. >> half the hospitals. >> right. >> reporter: is that enough? >> clearly it is not enough and clearly it still left flaps. >> florinda and at least one kidney donor died after the letters were issued. dr. friedman says she wants the fda to require a warning right on the package and doing so earlier could have saved lives. there's no warning on these clips. the there's no warn on the package the clips come in. there's no warning on the box. believe it or not, the only warning about how not to use these clips doesn't come with the clips at all. it actually comes separately with an entirely different

medical device, an applicator that's used to put the clips on. and the warning is far from obvious. it's one line in pages of instructions. if you were designing this, what would you put? >> i think it would be great to say don't use on a kidney donor. that would be terrific. >> reporter: the manufacturer of the clips points out that although no specific warning is on the clip packaging, it does feature a warning symbol and a referral to the applicator's instructions for use. keeping them honest, we wanted to ask the fda to justify why they said the letter writing campaign was effective, but only about half the hospitals said they got the warning. we also wanted to ask why they never required a warning label right on the packaging of the clip. but the fda wouldn't talk to us on camera. in a statement to cnn, the fda said most transplant surgeons heed the warning, but continue

to improperly use these clips. while the fda can warn against the unsafe use of the medical device, doctors are not prohibited from using cleared or approved devices for an unapproved use withiner that practice of medicine. teleflex said surgeons have safely and successfully used their clips in millions of surgical procedures and a contraindication is a clear, well understood and accepted concept in the medical community that says do not use this device for this purpose. teleflex says it believes the transplant community is well aware of the contraindication. the medical center where florinda died said the hospital was insufficient in warnings and put corrective actions in place. no one worned the family. now all they can hope for is by talking about florinda, they can prevent another senseless death. >> i told them i wanted my

sister back. i want my sister. they should have known better. >> can these still be used in kidney transplants despite what the manufacturer and fda say? >> anderson, doctors tell us that it is possible. right after florinda died, the fda issued a safety notification. but those notifications aren't ongoing. there's nothing specific on the label. doctors could miss that one sentence in the instructions. so doctors hope the transplant surgeons have gotten the message, but it's possible they haven't. >> wow. elizabeth, thanks very much. we'll keep on it. weather across the country, extreme heat in the east to flash floods in minnesota. the latest on all of it when we continue. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed

testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62%

so you can use less gel. log on now to androgeloffer.com and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news.

tell me you have good insurance. yup, i've got... [ voice of dennis ] ...allstate. really? i was afraid you'd have some cut-rate policy. [ normal voice ] nope, i've got... [ voice of dennis ] the allstate value plan. it's their most affordable car insurance -- and you still get an allstate agent. i too have... [ voice of dennis ] allstate.

[ normal voice ] same agent and everything. it's like we're connected. no we're not. yeah, we are. no...we're not. ♪ ask an allstate agent about the value plan. are you in good hands? >> welcome back. let's check in with isha. >> temperatures hit the mid to hoo ig 90s in if new york, philadelphia, boston and washington today. eight states are under heat advisories. the heat wave is expected to continue through friday morning. too much rain is the problem in duluth, minnesota, flash flooding has destroyed roads, forced evacuations and left homes under water. the national weather service said up to nine inches of rain fell between last night and this morning. a fire has damaged a warehouse at a pier in san francisco that's supposed to host an event

for the america's cup yacht race. the cause of the fire isn't known. and anderson, big bird may soon be back on the big screen. the hollywood reporter says 20th century fox has picked up the rights to make a "sesame street" movie. two other skes m"sesame street"s have already hit the screen. >> you don't need to tell me. >> i know, because my personal favorite, you. there. airing in 2007. coops in a trash can. >> yes. >> classy stuff. >> oscar the grouch and the other grouches. i didn't know there were so many. in my day, there was just oscar. now there's walter cranky and -- back in my day. all right, coming up, should dogs be allowed to vote in the election? "ridiculist" is next. from at&t, with its built in beats audio, every note sounds amazingly clear.

...making it easy to get lost in the music... and, well... rio vista?!! [ male announcer ] ...lost. introducing the musically enhanced htc one x from at&t. rethink possible.

begins with back pain and a choice. take advil, and maybe have to take up to four in a day. or take aleve, which can relieve pain all day with just two pills.

good eye. an accident doesn't have to slow you down. with better car replacement, if your car is totaled, we give you the money for a car one model year newer. liberty mutual auto insurance.

time now kwr "the ridiulist." a guy in virginia recently received a voter registration packet in the mail addressed to his dog. here is his dog. cute little guy. his name is mozart. mo for short. mozart's owner said he was surprised to see his dog taking such an active role in democr y democracy. >> i opened it up and looked at it. i just laughed. i thought it was a joke at first. turns out it's real. >> turns out it calm came from a private nonprofit group trying to register more voters. not only is he a dog, he's unfortunately been dead for quite a while. what amazed morris is if mozart was human, he would have been eligible to vote this year. >> he would have been 18, 19 years old this year. and he passed away two years ago and i still have no earthly idea how they got his information. >> not to get too gary larson on you now, but why shouldn't dogs be allowed to vote?

frankly a solid dog constituency be just what is needed to knock out one certain candidate. >> vote hank. >> he's got ads, stickers, signs, even a facebook page. >> he's running as an independent. >> here's the thing. if you gives dog the vote and let cats run for office they're going to have to be active citizens. a few years back, a cat got a summons for jury duty. he did not get picked for the actual jury. must have been some kind of conflict of interest. maybe it was a petty larceny trial. who knows. but when it comes to how cats and dogs figure into the justice system, i think the most cogent comment came, apparently you morons didn't understand me the first time. i would wrather count the wrinkles on my dog's [ bleep ]

rather than sit on a jury. sometime soon every dog will have its election day. that does it for us. we'll be back one hour from now. "pirs morgan tonight" starts now. tonight, politics. why some say this country needs attack ads. the dirtier, the better. >> one is going to come up with a fear-inducing ad that works. >> i'll ask him how this could possibly be good for america. plus, eric holder, a house panel wants the attorney general cited for contempt. will fast and furious go higher? >> who knew about it this? how high did it go? did it go to the attorney general or the president of the united states? >> the man who defended president clinton about that. also a man not afraid to speak his mind. the front man of the smashing