Guests: Jenny Craig, Mary Schiavo, Gail Dunham, Anna Marxson, Brian Farley, Marc Malkin

******** Excerpt *********

ANNOUNCER:  But next, a piece of wreckage from this deadly terrorist attack ends up in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld‘s office.  A thoughtful reminder or a thoughtless insult?

DEBORAH NORVILLE TONIGHT is coming right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ABRAMS:  Remember the Justice Department investigation that led to some hot water for FBI agents who took debris and other items from the crime scene at the World Trade Center?

Well, now we learn the report that revealed that 13 FBI agents took rubble, debris, also found that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is keeping a piece of the plane that hit the Pentagon inside his office. 

The still unreleased report makes clear, federal agents have routinely taken mementos from other disaster scenes, including the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, and the East African embassy bombings in 1998. 

The latest disclosure has left some surviving family members from 9/11 angry. 

Mary Schiavo is a former federal prosecutor and former inspector general of the Department of Transportation.  She‘s also an attorney for several 9/11 victims‘ families.

And Gail Dunham is president of the National Aviation Disaster Alliance, which represents families from over 100 aviation disasters, including 9/11. 

Thank you both very much for coming on.  We appreciate it. 

Ms. Dunham, let me start with you.  When you heard about Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld having this item in his office, what were your thoughts?

GAIL DUNHAM, NATIONAL AVIATION DISASTER ALLIANCE:  That it was terribly wrong.  We would like the federal government to comply with federal laws. 

The—Anything to do with the airplane should still be part of a federal investigation, and the attorneys should have access to it.  My concern, representing family members, is that the personal effects should never have been taken. 

We passed the family—The aviation does—family members passed the Family Assistance Act in 1996, and that guarantees that family members must be consulted about the disposition of remains and personal effects. 

They‘re personal effects; they‘re personal possessions.  They‘re not mementos.  They‘re not artifacts.  It‘s not debris.  They‘re personal effects, and they should be returned to the family members that own them. 

ABRAMS:  And does that include the pieces of the plane?  I mean, for example, we heard about that Tiffany globe, et cetera.  I get that.  I mean, that‘s an item that I don‘t think anyone should have on their desk.  It doesn‘t belong...

DUNHAM:  Exactly. 

ABRAMS:  ... to that—I think that one‘s kind of a no-brainer. 

But what about is there a difference for you with a piece of the plane, for the secretary of defense wanting to have it on his desk, as a reminder.  The Pentagon says it reminds foreign dignitaries and others, and he Pentagon serves as kind of a museum?

DUNHAM:  No.  No, Rumsfeld should not be having parts of the airplane. 

First of all, I think it‘s rather ghoulish to want pieces of the actual aircraft‘s debris.  The wreckage for the airplane technically would belong to the airline or their insurance companies, but it‘s still part of a criminal investigation.  And those parts should be kept intact, pending the criminal investigation. 

There‘s ongoing litigation.  We have attorneys like Mary Schiavo prosecuting these cases right now, and that‘s what should be done in the court of law. 

ABRAMS:  Mary Schiavo, the secretary of defense‘s office says if it‘s needed in terms of any investigation, they, of course, would return it.  Is this really being blown out of proportion?

MARY SCHIAVO, ATTORNEY FOR 9/11 FAMILIES:  No, unfortunately for the secretary of defense, and also for the FBI agents, there are federal statutes that cover this.  And others have actually been prosecuted for this kind of behavior as a crime. 

For example, 49 United States code, and 18 United States code forbid this.  And both pertain to the wreckage of aircraft or the evidence in a case. 

It‘s also very serious, because there are federal court orders now concerning the display of records or the disposition of airplane wreckage, because it is evidence not only in an ongoing civil case but in an ongoing criminal case. 

And everybody remembers the case a while back on the TWA 800, where a journalist was prosecuted for receiving a piece of evidence to do further testing and to write on it.  So a very serious offense. 

ABRAMS:  But isn‘t that different?  I mean, talking about giving something to a journalist to do testing on it that could potentially be a piece of evidence, versus a piece of the plane that no one seems to need right now, in the secretary of defense‘s office?

SCHIAVO:  Well, actually, the pieces of the plane are needed.  There‘s a current order.  An order was just issued out of the court in New York pertaining to the wreckage, and it has been requested, and it‘s very important in the cases. 

And the other important thing to remember is that, because it is ongoing, there are current uses of the wreckage.  And in many ways, the government has brought this problem on themselves. 

There is—there are federal regulations that say in the aftermath of aviation tragedy, the National Transportation Safety Board is supposed to take control.  And indeed, they control it very closely.  Here the NTSB did not get a chance to do that. 

So because they have not applied the rules and they apparently have overlooked the United States code, they‘re getting themselves in trouble by literally picking up souvenirs of a crime scene. 

MATTHEWS:  Pat Buchanan, MSNBC political analyst, joins us.  Pat, what do you make of this?

PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST:  I think it‘s a lot of carping and whining. 

Look, Donald Rumsfeld is the secretary of defense.  He was there when that plane went into that building killing scores of his comrades, people who worked for him.  He rushed to the scene of that to help out. 

He went back, took command of America‘s armed forces.  We had been attacked. 

And now he has taken a shard of metal from that plane and put it on his desk as a reminder to him what happened to this country and as a reminder to all of his visitors of exactly what took place on September 11. 

That piece of plane is available to anybody that wants it.  It belongs to the Pentagon.  They‘ve got every right to have that at the Pentagon. 

SCHIAVO:  It does not. 

BUCHANAN:  They are the guys that suffered. 

ABRAMS:  Pat, is there any difference?

SCHIAVO:  Dan. 

ABRAMS:  Go ahead.  Who wants to get in?  Mary?

SCHIAVO:  I do. 

ABRAMS:  Or Gail? 

DUNHAM:  Dan, we‘re not talking about only a Tiffany globe or only a shard. 

BUCHANAN:  I‘m not talking about a globe. 

DUNHAM:  We don‘t know how much was taken.  These are personal effects that by federal law should be returned to the family members. 

BUCHANAN:  Dan. 

DUNHAM:  We‘re talking about...

BUCHANAN:  Dan, I‘m going to take...

ABRAMS:  Hang on. 

BUCHANAN:  I‘m going to take the floor back, Dan. 

DUNHAM:  The least we can do. 

ABRAMS:  Gail, hold on a second.

BUCHANAN:  Hold on, lady. 

ABRAMS:  Gail, hang on a second. 

BUCHANAN:  Hang on, Gail.  If you‘re talking about a man or a woman who died in that tragedy, their personal effects, you‘re exactly right.  If you‘re talking about things that belong to a business, you‘re exactly right. 

This is part of an aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon that killed the people who were working under Donald Rumsfeld for this country.  So he puts a memento up as a reminder to all of them there, in the Pentagon, what happened to them.  A reminder to him. 

ABRAMS:  But Pat, how do you set a standard?  Pat, how do you set a standard, though?  I mean, and why can‘t, for example, any FBI agent who works, any rescue worker who worked at the site, can those people...

BUCHANAN:  Dan, let me give you an example. 

ABRAMS:  Go ahead. 

BUCHANAN:  Let‘s suppose they found a helmet with the name of one of the fellows from one of those firehouses, and those fellows in the firehouse either offered it to the family or took it back to the firehouse and put it in a glass case as to what happened that day when they were heroes.  I have no problem with that at all. 

What is the matter with these folks they can‘t understand something about a scavenger hunt for something that belongs to someone else, and someone who is paying homage and honor to the people who died here?

ABRAMS:  Based on your...

DUNHAM:  There was never a scavenger hunt...

ABRAMS:  Hang on a second.  Hang on a second. 

BUCHANAN:  I am not saying everybody should take something. 

DUNHAM:  That‘s outrageous. 

BUCHANAN:  FBI agents—FBI agents when they take this stuff, all this evidence in there, they should check it in.  But if the evidence has been used, and someone in the case says, “Joe, it‘s not needed anymore.  It‘s gone.”

And an FBI man says, “Well, I want this as a memento of the work I did that day, to keep it in mind.”  If they were given that and allowed to do that, I would say fine.  They shouldn‘t take it without permission. 

DUNHAM:  Wait a minute.  There‘s a federal law. 

SCHIAVO:  There‘s a law. 

DUNHAM:  To return personal effects. 

BUCHANAN:  Go take them to court, for heaven‘s sakes. 

DUNHAM:  Not a scavenger hunt. 

ABRAMS:  Let me just say.  The Defense Department spokesman, Eric Rolf (ph) has said it‘s not a souvenir, it is a memento on display in Secretary Rumsfeld‘s office.  It‘s hard to imagine there‘s something wrong in trying to remind people of what happened on 9/11. 

Mary Schiavo, go ahead. 

SCHIAVO:  Well, actually there are laws that cover this, and there is a difference, I‘m afraid.  Pat is just a little bit wrong, because there are laws that cover the airplane wreckage.  And airplane wreckage is very special, because we are still doing a lot of investigative discovery and work. 

BUCHANAN:  Let me...

ABRAMS:  Pat, let her finish. 

SCHIAVO:  I am speaking, Mr. Buchanan.  I did not interrupt you. 

ABRAMS:  Go ahead, Mary.  Mary, go ahead. 

SCHIAVO:  Yes, and there are—right now the court in New York, if you want to have a piece, Pat, you may say, that‘s OK, he can have a piece of the wreckage.  The law doesn‘t allow you to do that, just as you cannot dip in the evidence vault if you‘re a prosecutor.  As a former federal prosecutor... 

BUCHANAN:  I know. 

ABRAMS:  All right.  Pat, go ahead.

BUCHANAN:  That piece of metal, Donald Rumsfeld will send it up there in a Pentagon plane.  They have not asked for it.  They know it‘s there.  Rumsfeld has showed it to people. 

They can have it if they want it.  They obviously don‘t want it, Mary. 

If they wanted it as part of the case, I‘d agree with you 100 percent.

Give it a rest. 

DUNHAM:  Wait a minute, Pat. 

SCHIAVO:  Actually, we have asked for it, and we want more.

DUNHAM:  Personal effects. 

ABRAMS:  Go ahead, Mary.  Go ahead.  You want to respond to Pat. 

SCHIAVO:  Well, actually, we do want that, and I will appreciate Mr.  Rumsfeld‘s offer, because we do need it in the case.  And thank you very much, we‘ll be taking it.  Thanks.  We need it for evidence. 

BUCHANAN:  Good luck. 

DUNHAM:  And we‘ve had two and a half years to return personal effects to family members.  It hasn‘t been done. 

BUCHANAN:  Nobody is arguing about personal effects.  Nobody is arguing about that.

DUNHAM:  It was up to the FBI to secure the scene, not to take things. 

Nothing is a souvenir. 

BUCHANAN:  Look, there‘s not...

SCHIAVO:  The court has ruled. 

BUCHANAN:  We are not talking about personal effects.  We‘re talking about a part of the plane.  If a prosecutor wants it, investigator wants it, they should have it.  He will send it to them.  Right now, it is sitting secure in his office, where it belongs. 

ABRAMS:  All right.&n