Hello, im wolf blitzer, reporting from washington. There have been plenty of developments today in the case of missing Malaysia Airlines flight 370. Malaysians Police Inspector general says all 227 passengers have been cleared of any wrongdoing. The investigation looked at hijacking, sabotage, any personal or psychological problems that would have been in play. Also today, the families of 18 of the passengers met with investigators and government officials in kuala lumpur. This meeting was supposed to clear the air and answer families question in the investigation. Meanwhile, this search zone moved a couple hundred miles closer to the australian coast. The hmstireless, a Nuclear Submarine has joined the search to search for pings from the planes black boxes. Lets get more now on the investigation and what police say is the next step. For that we turn to our Senior International correspondent, Nic Robertson in kuala lumpur. Reporter yeah, wolf, 170 reports taken by the police so far as part of this ongoing investigation, ongoing criminal investigation. But now saying that all 227 passengers are cleared of the four aspects of the investigation. The police are looking at. This, of course, not the mechanical investigation of what could have gone wrong with the aircraft. The issues of hijacking, sabotage, personal issue, psychological issue on board the aircraft, all 227 passengers now cleared. The focus does seem to be turning as far as the Police Investigation of those aboard the aircraft towards the crew. And we now hear as well from Malaysian Airlines tightening up security procedures aboard the aircraft. They now say that the pilots cannot be left alone in the cockpit. If either the captain or the first officer leaves the cockpit, another senior crew member must take their place. So there must be two people inside the cockpit at any time. The police have said this is a criminal investigation. Officials have said whoever steered the plane off course knew what they were doing. Was very capable in flying this particular aircraft. So we can really begin to see how the Police Investigation focusing down on whats taken place in the cockpit, Malaysian Airlines themselves concerned about what goes on in the cockpit, if only one of the one of the pilots who is in that cockpit although no one is joining those dots together, it does seem to indicate which way this part of the investigation is going. But all those passengers now cleared of any involvement. This should make the investigation a little easier, although the police chief saying still a long way to go yet, wolf. Nic robertson in kuala lumpur, thanks very much. Lets bring in our panel to talk about the developments. Mark weise is a cnn aviation analyst, former 777 pilot for american airlines. Peter goelz, former ntsb managing director. And tom fuentes, cnn Law Enforcement analyst, former assistant director of the fbi. Tom, let me start with you. They say they have cleared all 227 passengers. So what does that mean . Theyre just looking at the pilots, the crew members, who else are they looking at . Well, thats what it means. But i dont know why they would clear the passengers, unless youve developed a really strong suspect from either the crew members in the plane, the other crew members, or the pilots or ground crew personnel. So to clear the passengers, im not sure that you can investigate for three or four weeks and clear everybody when this investigation, you know, is going on in 14 Different Countries considering the background of all of the passengers. Thats the only explanation i have, they have cleared the 227 passengers, peter, because they are really honing in on someone or some others. At least one individual or a few individuals right now. But theyre not sharing all those details with us. Right. Theyre zeroing in on the flight crew. Thats where they are. The pilot, the co pilot . Thats there is no indication there is no indication there is anyone else in there. And thats where theyre zeroing in. And i think theres a foreshadowing of that over the last week from police spokespeople. And the other foreshadowing of that, mark, is that Malaysia Airlines now, all of a sudden, they have said, weve got new security protocols for anyone coming into the cockpit. Theres not going to just be one person in the cockpit any longer. There is always going to be two people in that cockpit. The timing of that also suggests this the suspicion focusing in on either the pilot, the co pilot or both of them. Or others who may have gotten in there. Yeah. It certainly does. It certainly leads suspicion to the crew. But it also is a bit disturbing that its its so many years past 9 11. Of course, malaysia didnt suffer a 9 11 that the United States did. That its now stepping up to what most countries in this world determine to be standard security procedures for a cockpit. Yesterday we were speculating, we were talking right here, wondering, are they going to move the search zone again . They moved it from the southern part of the indian ocean, moved it north about 700 miles. And now theyre moving it to the east, closer to australia, another 200 or 250 miles. That does not ill start with you, tom, once again, instill a whole lot of confidence these people know what theyre doing right now. No, it doesnt. But as we said yesterday, we wouldnt be surprised. It happened today. And were not surprised. You were none of us are surprised, but, you know, the fact that they have now for a third time said, you know what, we didnt find anything in the south, we didnt find anything in the new location, so were moving the search to a new location. What does that say to you . It just reaffirms that the data is very soft. That theyre working on. And it means that theyre trying everything they can to take one last shot before the 30day clock runs out. And, you know, god love them. I hope they had the right data. I hope it proves fruitful. But clearly desperation. This is really the fourth time they have changed the search area. Originally in the South China Sea between vietnam and malaysia, that whole area that proved to be not an area they really wanted to search. Then they went to the southern indian ocean, moved it up north and now back east. So really four major search areas. Well, we dont even know, wolf, really, what the altitude swings were. If, in fact, were any altitude swings. A lot of reports it went up to 45,000, down to 12,000, 35,000. Right. I mean, and this all has to do now with fuel consumption and distance it would have traveled. Theres so much we still dont know. And presumably, i can only assume and ill ask you, peter, you were involved in a lot of these investigations. They have information that theyre not sharing, whether its sensitive information, submarines may have collected, other information, tom, from interrogations theyre not sharing, because this is now as they say, a criminal investigation. Does that, by the way, rule out mechanical . If they say this is a criminal investigation . Well, it could be a crime to tamper with the airplane and sabotage it. So it could be both still. You agree . I do. But i think theyre looking at the cockpit. And i think one thing with the new policy of not leaving a pilot alone in the cockpit, it may foreshadow something they picked up on the to you we are tapes and why the tower tapes have not been released. And im glad the International Air transport association has said theyre going to have a complete review of International Experts and come up with lessons learned, recommendations. They want this report out by december. This is a very significant development. All right, guys, were going to have much more on this coming up. There are new details coming in. In the meantime, right now about that massive earthquake in chile. The 8. 2 magnitude quake hit just off the countrys northern coast last night and triggered a tsunami and several small landslides. Six people are now confirmed dead. Three of the victims were crushed to death. Crews are out in force to assess the damage, but it appears this powerful quake could have been much worse. Could have done a lot more damage. Rolando santos, cnn Vice President of chile, is joining us now live from the capital of santiago. Rolando, give us a sense, how destructive was this quake . Well, given the magnitude of the quake, actually, not very destructive. And im not minimizing in any way the six people who lost their lives. By the way, of the six people, four of those lost their lives through heart attack. The other two as a result of the earthquake. But if you look at the damage in the region, compared to when you and i talked during the quake four years ago here in santiago, you dont see the wide scale kind of destruction where you have Tall Buildings burning overnight and all of that. A lot has to do with the region, wolf. As you know, in the very northern region, desert country. Not very many Tall Buildings. The biggest problem turns out to be the smaller buildings in the small towns between the two major cities, because theyre not as earthquakeproof. Given the normality, 8. 1, on magnitude, 8. 1, a lot of folks are saying, you know what, this really wasnt the big one that chile had expected, others had expected. Theyre still waiting for what they call the big one. What are folks there saying . Well, the big question is here, what is the big one . If you look at the history of the country, this country back in 1877, had an 8. 3 earthquake. At that point. The biggest earthquake in the history of the United States history of the world, actually, occurred here in santiago in 1960, which was a 9. 5. And 5,000 people died there. So what is the big one . You could argue the 9. 5 was. A lot of scientists are saying that basically it has a lot to do with how far out in the ocean it happens, whether or not the energy has built up or dissipated. We have had 94 aftershocks, and people are saying, well, thats good. Because its dissipating the energy, and some scientists are saying, no, thats not necessarily true. So i dont think anyone has a right answer about that. I think Mother Nature is going to do what Mother Nature does. And quite frankly, and at the risk of being subjective about it, ive lived here for seven and a half, almost eight years. I think we escaped with very little damage, considering the magnitude of the earthquake. 8. 2 magnitude is a huge, huge earthquake. And im glad to hear that from you, rolando. Thanks very much. Rolando santos, reporting for us from santiago. Still to come, if investigators are correct, flight 370 went down in one of the worlds least explored oceans. An expert in underwater recovery joins us to explain the huge challenges ahead. And a new United StatesSupreme Court ruling that equates money with free speech. Were taking a look at how this will affect political races, including the contest later this year. Peoi go to angies listt for all kinds of reasons. To gauge whether or not the projects will be done in a timely fashion and within budget. Angies list members can tell you which provider is the best in town. Youll find reviews on everything from home repair to healthcare. Now that were expecting, i like the fact i can go onto angies list and look for pediatricians. The Service Providers that ive found on angies list actually have blown me away. Find out why more than two million members count on angies list. Angies list reviews you can trust. Check the weather. Borrow teds wheelbarrow. Post big tomato pics. Buy a birdhouse for sparrows. Download gardening apps. Answer my wifes texts. Search how to sculpt hedges into a trex. I can do all that with my android from tracfone for as low as 7 a month. [ male announcer ] unbeatable nationwide coverage, no contract. For a limited time, save 50 on the zte valet. Now just 49. 99. Tracfone. Do everything for less. A Supreme Court decision today that will affect how money flows to political candidates. The court struck down current limits on the total amounts a person can give to political campaigns. The house speaker, john boehner, says the decision is a win for free speech. What i think this means, freedom of speech is being upheld. You all have the freedom to write what you want to write. Donors ought to have their freedom to give what they want the to give. Democratic senator charles schumer, had this to say, and im quoting. This in itself is a small step but another step on the road to unionation. It could lead to interpretations of the law that would result in the end of any fairness in the political system as we know it. So two very different assessments of this u. S. Supreme court decision. Joining us now, our political correspond taters kevin read and Maria Cardona and chief political analyst, gloria borger. Politically, this is a very, very significant rule. Yeah. Its very significant in the sense that it allows a wealthy donor to kind of spread the wealth and to say, okay, if i like these ten candidates, i can give the maximum amount to an unlimited number of candidates. I also think, quite frankly, that it helps Political Parties, because you can give more money to Political Parties and may take some of the emphasis away from the super pacs. We heard so much during the campaign. So if its issues you care about like obamacare, maybe youll give your money to a super pac who wants to stop obamacare. Otherwise you may decide to give it to candidates in committees. Kevin, as you know, until today, and i want to be precise, the limits in a political cycle that you could give to candidates, you could give 2,600 or whatever individual candidates. But the total would be 48,600. Right. The limit as far as Political Parties and political committees was 74,600. So the 48,000 you dloe away and you can give a million. Find enough candidates give the maximum amount. The 74,600 throw away, you can give a lot more money. Right. So in other words, rich people can really unload if they want. And what happened was, those limits before, what they did was create an incentive for a lot of donors who reached those limits to again go to outside groups and those groups became more powerful. What we saw today with this ruling was the pendulum swing back more towards the party committees, not only the federal parties but state parties as well as individual campaigns, federal candidate campaigns. It swung enough. I think the outside groups are still going to remain relevant, but donors arent going to have to rely on them as much. If youre a really rich person, maria, and you love the Democratic Party and i know you love the Democratic Party, you can give the Democratic CongressionalCampaign Committee unlimited sums of money now as a result of the United StatesSupreme Court. So youre thrilled by this decision, right . There are still limits we can give to the committee. But you can give to all committees and you can give to as many candidates. I do think its a bad trend for politics, wolf. Because it continues the notion that you can buy access. And, you know, the supporters of this law will say, this is great for free speech and the First Amendment. I dont think the First Amendment was made to essentially give the wealthiest donors the ability to buy as many candidates and committees as they want. And this is what is happening today. But i will say this. And gloria sort of mentioned this. And kevin, as well. What i think is good about this is that it does, i think, to the extent it will give donors emphasis to give to the committees where there is accountability and where you know exactly who is giving the money, which i think is the big problem with what was happening with super pacs and all of these shady groups, i think that is a good thing. The democrats, like chuck schumer, are portraying this as a complete disaster. And republicans are saying its a huge win. I dont really think its either one of those. Because as you pointed out, wolf, you have those individual limits to candidates that still remain in place. If those caps had been removed, then were talking a different ball game here. But those caps still remain. Specific caps. But you can spread your money around. Sure. So if you want if you have 25 candidates you like, go ahead. But if i think where this is really negative, though, is i think in the public perception. The public already believes that their single vote doesnt count. And, you know, 99 of people dont make more than, you know, 80,000. Its good to throw more money into politics after citizens united. After that decision. Not necessarily a lot, but there will be more money in politics and i think this brings up the fundamental debate, which is there too much money in politics . Absolutely. If you consider the fact that a cola company spends 2 billion a year Just Marketing their product and we spend 2 billion on a president ial election, which one is more important . So i think thats a fundamental question we still have to debate. I would argue, the political the direction of the country is important enough that there is quickly around the table, maria first. Is it too early to see how this Supreme Court decision today, following four years ago, citizens united, will impact the midterm elections this november . I think it will actually hugely impact them. And as you said, as a democrat, i hope that now these wealthy donors will focus their money, not on outside groups, but on the committee. I think it will i agree that it will have an impact. I dont think its going to be hug