Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Crossfire
Berger Under Fire
Aired July 20, 2004 - 16:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville and Paul Begala; on the right, Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson.
In the CROSSFIRE: He was Bill Clinton's national security adviser. He's helping the John Kerry campaign and he's also the target of an FBI investigation.
SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D-CT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, in this town, you never know what you are going to wake up to.
SEN. GORDON SMITH (R), OREGON: In the court of law, Sandy Berger is entitled to that presumption of innocence. But when these kinds of things happen in the court of public opinion, the public is entitled to know this.
ANNOUNCER: Why are we finding out now, just as the 9/11 report is about to be released and a week before the Democratic Convention?
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: Somebody leaked it, obviously with an intent, I think, to do damage to Mr. Berger and I think that's unfortunate.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the CNN Election Express at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Dorchester, Massachusetts, Robert Reich and Robert Novak.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
The CNN Election Express has crossed the border into Massachusetts, but the driver must have taken a right turn along the way. We can't seem to find James Carville and Paul Begala. But no matter. Sitting in on the left today is Robert Reich, who was the brilliant secretary of labor in the first term of the Clinton administration.
Another veteran of the Clinton days is not nearly as lucky. His story is first up in the best little political briefing in politics, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
Samuel Berger was a widely respected national security adviser for President Clinton. So what in the world was he doing when he carried away highly secret Clinton administration documents from the National Archives while he was getting ready to testify before the 9/11 Commission? Officials saw him actually stuffing documents in his coat and pants pockets.
It's just been revealed, but this has been the subject of a criminal investigation all year long and it's all the more serious because some of these documents are missing. Only two explanations. Either Sandy Berger has really lost it or he's desperately trying to get rid of incriminating classified material. And that's against the law.
ROBERT REICH, GUEST HOST: Bob, I think there's another explanation and that is that Sandy Berger merely made a mistake. Mistakes happen.
I worked with Sandy Berger when I was secretary of labor in the Clinton administration. He's an honorable man. And I'm very curious about the timing of this revelation, coming, as it does, just before the 9/11 Commission report and a week before the Democratic National Convention.
NOVAK: Things like that happen in politics, Bob. But the thing that -- I have a lot of respect for Sandy Berger, too.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: I just can't understand how an experienced person like that would make that kind of a mistake. It baffles me.
REICH: Well, we'll find out.
And despite the questionable timing of the leak about Sandy Berger investigation and also all the other hoopla about the 9/11 Commission report, there is something we should not lose sight of. And that's the report itself. September 11 proved our nation's intelligence gathering is broken. But the report goes beyond rearranging federal bureaucracies like the FBI and the CIA.
As one commission member tells CNN, the recommendation also concerned first-responders, like police and firefighters, as well as broader domestic security personnel, such as the Border Patrol and immigration. In short, the 9/11 Commission is recommending things that will touch our lives and communities, no matter where we live. Some like that is important. And it is that important, should not be treated like a political football.
NOVAK: I agree with most of what you said, Bob.
But the problem, I think, we should point out is that commission is filled with very partisan Democrats, Richard Ben-Veniste, who is one of the big hatchet men of the Democratic Party -- nobody's more partisan than him. Jamie Gorelick, assistant -- a big shot in the Clinton administration, your colleague, nobody's more partisan than Jamie. So we have a lot of partisan Democrats on that commission. So you can't ever get rid of partisan politics in Washington.
(BELL RINGING)
REICH: Well, but the fact of the matter is, it is going to be a unanimous report, like the Senate Intelligence report. And you can't ignore a unanimous report, Bob.
NOVAK: Like her show -- other show business pals, the superannuated rock singer Linda Ronstadt imposes her radical politics on helpless audiences.
But she got her comeuppance at the Aladdin Hotel Casino in Las Vegas the other night. She started lauding the leftist agitator Michael Moore and his new propaganda film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." The audience hadn't paid for this and they rebelled, booing, throwing cocktails into the air, storming out and tearing down her concert posters.
Management immediately terminated Linda, not even her letting her return to her hotel suite at the Aladdin. Maybe at age 58, Linda Ronstadt has learned some manners.
REICH: Well, I don't think it's a matter of bad manners, Bob. Expressing your political point of view or suggesting that the audience go see a film, it's entirely appropriate. I think the bad manners has to do with her employer at the time. Throwing somebody out of a hotel because of what they said, well, I'm sorry, that's not the America I know.
NOVAK: Surely, you understand, these people want to hear -- they want to be entertained. They don't want to be brainwashed with all of this left-wing claptrap. Can you understand that or are you just too much on the left, Bob?
(BELL RINGING)
REICH: No, Bob. I think that I've listened to so much right- wing claptrap from talk radio and talk television that it seems to me it's appropriate that somebody counterbalance just a little bit in the entertainment industry.
It looks like the Republican Party will have two presidential candidates on the Michigan ballots this fall. That's because Ralph Nader has decided to accept thousands of petitioned signatures that Republicans gathered in order to get his name on Michigan ballots. Nader needed 30,000 signatures. His campaign only turned in about 5,400. But Michigan's Republicans came to the rescue by submitting 43,000 Nader signatures.
Good job, Republicans. So much for Ralph Nader's professions of being an independent. Maybe Michigan officials should take George W. Bush's name off their state's ballots and give Republicans the candidate that they seem to want, Ralph Nader.
NOVAK: You know, I am just amazed that liberals like you don't want to give the people a complete choice. Let the people decide. Put all the names on the ballot. If left-wingers would rather vote for Ralph Nader than John Kerry, they think there's a difference, let them do it. Why keep him off the ballot? If you want to put some right-wing -- there are going to be conservative right-wing tickets up. I think there's some kind of a Conservative Constitution ticket up. Why not let everybody vote? Isn't that the American way? REICH: Bob, this is the most cynical effort by Republicans in Michigan and elsewhere to get Ralph Nader on the ballot, hoping that some people, in a misguided effort to put Ralph Nader in the presidency, are going to actually take votes away from our man, John Kerry.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: OK.
President Clinton's former national security adviser is the target of a criminal probe. Why is that a potential problem for the Democratic presidential candidate, John Kerry?
And later, my co-host sitting next to me says he has evidence, hard evidence, that proves John Kerry will win the president. I'm skeptical.
REICH: Absolutely.
NOVAK: Let's listen to him, though. Let's give him a try.
ANNOUNCER: Join Carville, Begala, Carlson and Novak in the CROSSFIRE. For free tickets to CROSSFIRE at the George Washington University, call 202-994-8CNN or visit our Web site. Now you can step into the CROSSFIRE.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NOVAK: The revelation that another member of the Clinton administration may have been playing fast and loose with the law isn't really a big surprise. But allegations that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger took home secret documents from the National Archives could have implications for the Kerry for president campaign, because Mr. Berger has been acting as an informal adviser to Senator Kerry.
Will the senator disavow Berger and drop him like a hot potato?
In the CROSSFIRE, two people who have been watching John Kerry for years, Democratic Party Chairman Phil Johnston and Republican Peter Blute, a former congressman from Massachusetts.
Mr. Johnston, I want to give you a question that the speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, Republican, asked today and that he asked better than I can: "Did these documents detail simple negligence or did they contain something more sinister? Was this a bungled attempt to rewrite history and keep critical information from the 9/11 Commission and potentially put their report under a cloud?"
PHIL JOHNSTON, CHAIRMAN, MASSACHUSETTS DEMOCRATIC PARTY: There's a loaded question.
(LAUGHTER) JOHNSTON: I don't think -- as Bob Reich said earlier, I think Sandy Berger has a sterling reputation in this country as a person of high integrity.
And I have no idea and I'm sure that Senator Kerry and the campaign have no idea what happened. All we can hope is that there will be a fair and impartial investigation of whatever happened and that let the chips fall where they may.
NOVAK: That's a good answer. But as a strong Kerry supporter and a powerful figure here in Massachusetts, would you recommend that he drop Mr. Bush from Berger from his list of advisers?
JOHNSTON: I don't think that that's really appropriate at this point. Look, this story just broke today. I don't think we have sufficient information as to what happened. He really has not been a paid adviser. And, as you point out, he's on a very informal basis, like a lot of people.
And, you know, I'd rather be in his position than Dick Cheney's position, who has made a lot more mistakes in terms of foreign policy and cost this country a lot more lives and money than Sandy Berger ever did.
REICH: Peter Blute, as a former congressman and now somebody who is a media personality, let me ask you a question. Don't you think this is a little bit fishy, the timing of this expose with regard to Sandy Berger?
After all, the FBI's been on this trail for about eight or nine months. We don't know exactly who leaked it, but don't you think maybe the Bush campaign might have something to do with this, especially considering, according to CNN this morning, that three separate calls were made even to CNN this morning to pay attention to this story?
PETER BLUTE (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, Mr. Secretary, you know, from being in politics, that these things tend to get out at some point. This is a very serious charge. These were highly classified documents relating to our national security.
Mr. Berger was our national security adviser. He knows about how important these documents are and their safekeeping, and yet he was stuffing them in his pockets. And now some are even missing. And I think it raises a real question as to whether or not these were documents that looked badly for the Clinton administration's handling of the war on terrorism.
And if he did take them, that's very serious indeed.
REICH: But, Peter, surely, you have to admit that this administration does have a record of, let's say, deflecting or distracting the public and public attention from things it doesn't want to pay attention to.
After all, we are on the eve of the 9/11 report. It's certainly going to criticize the administration, as much as the Senate Intelligence Committee did. And we're also on the eve of the Democratic Convention. The administration would like to maybe divert public attention from all the festivities.
BLUTE: Well, we paid a lot of attention to the Wilson book and the Wilson charges a number of months ago. That was very damaging I think to President Bush. Now it turns out that he wasn't being straightforward, that he was actually lying about the connections between his wife and the CIA recommending him to that job and the fact that a British report and the U.S. Senate report now says that the 16 words in the State of the Union were absolutely based on fact.
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, John Kerry is about to be nominated for president in his home state. That's the first time that's happened I think since Adlai Stevenson in 1956 in Illinois.
And the Suffolk University poll which was taken just a few days ago asked, is Kerry is flip-flopper on the issues? Asked Massachusetts voters, yes, 60 percent, no, 31 percent. In his own state, 2-1, the voters think he's a flip-flopper. What kind of indictment is that?
JOHNSTON: I guess it means that they don't care much about flip- flopping, because he's been elected to the United States Senate four times there overwhelmingly. The last time -- he was actually elected two years unopposed. And he won a primary here in the spring by an overwhelming majority as well. He's a very, very popular senator here. He's been a popular figure here for a quarter of a century.
And I don't think there's any question about what the numbers are going to look like -- and Peter will agree with this, I think -- in Massachusetts. I think Bush is now mired in the low 30s here in this state. And I wouldn't be surprised if John Kerry doesn't win this election here by about 20 points.
BLUTE: Well, he's the heavyweight champ here in this state. There's no doubt about that politically.
But it's interesting, for those of us who have followed him here, to see what he's doing now nationally to attract attention and support. For example, I never saw him with a shotgun over the last 25 years and now he's out there shooting ducks and stuff.
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: I thought he looked pretty natural out there with a shotgun.
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: Now, listen, I have a question for you. We are now in the wonderful Commonwealth of Massachusetts, a wonderful state, my home state, your home state Now, you know, probably, because you pay attention to these things, that Massachusetts has lost 54,000 jobs since President Bush became president. And that's not unique to Massachusetts. Those kinds of figures we see, prorated, across the country.
Now, tell me something. How can the president say with a straight face that this economy is coming back with those kind of job losses and also what we just heard from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday, that actually production workers' wages are going down?
BLUTE: Well, it is coming back. All indicators are very, very strong, the strongest growth in 20 years. Look, you know and I know that -- and the economists will tell you that the economy started struggling before Bush was even elected.
It started -- the bubble burst on the boom and it started going down. Then we had 9/11. Then we two wars. We had some energy issues and others and still Bush's policies have caused this economy to start to grow very robustly. Unemployment is 5.6 percent. That is the same level in which Bill Clinton was reelected on.
REICH: Peter, Peter, there's a huge difference. When Bill Clinton had a so-called jobless recovery, those jobs started coming back. The payroll survey started showing a lot of jobs coming back. And wages didn't take a tank, like they're taking right now.
Here's the question for you. This is what I don't understand. Bush actually cut taxes with the promise that a big tax cut was going to generate millions and millions and millions of new jobs. Where are the new jobs?
BLUTE: They're coming. We've had tremendous job growth.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, I have got a political question for you. The Boston police union says, even though the strike is going to be settled by arbitration, there are still going to be protesters throughout.
Your fellow state chairmen in California and Ohio, Torres and White, say they will walk out of the arena when Mayor Menino speaks, that they will refuse to cross the picket -- not refuse to cross the picket lines. They will refuse go to the Massachusetts party. What advice would you give to your fellow state chairmen?
JOHNSTON: Well, I already have given them advice to not do that. I think it's a mistake. I think it would be embarrassing to the city, to the Democratic Party. And I don't think it's helpful to the cause of defeating George W. Bush in the fall.
The focus on Monday night needs to be on President Clinton's speech, not on a local labor dispute.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSTON: And having said that, I just -- I think we all want to make it clear -- and Bob would certainly support this as a former secretary of labor -- that this is a party that's extraordinarily pro- labor. But we have got a big, big hurdle to overcome here. And that is that we have got to beat George Bush and we've got to put progressive Democrats
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: What did they say to you -- what did they say to you when you give them that advice, Mr. Johnston?
JOHNSTON: They listened very, very respectfully. And I think over the next few days that there is going to be some -- there will be some changes on the part of some of the Democratic delegations.
BLUTE: The big issue is the fact that Senator Kerry would not cross an informational picket to address the U.S. Conference of Mayors. He held that group -- was allowed to hold that group hostage, stab Mayor Menino in the back. And then said that he would never cross an informational picket line.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSTON: Well, he didn't stab Mayor Menino in the back, Peter. Menino has been a very strong supporter of John Kerry's. He was up in New Hampshire. He was in Iowa and you know that.
NOVAK: We're going to -- we're going to have to suspend the back-stabbing and take a break.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: And when we come back, we'll have "Rapid Fire" questions for our two guests.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
Coming up at the top of the hour, former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger admits taking top secret documents from the National Archives. Was it an accident or a crime? We'll talk with his lawyer Lanny Breuer in his first television interview since the matter erupted and with former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.
A Filipino hostage is freed following the withdrawal of Philippine troops from Iraq, but is it a dangerous precedent?
And how a state trooper risked his life to stop a mother from killing herself.
Those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
Now back to CROSSFIRE.
REICH: And now it's time for "Rapid Fire," where we ask rapid questions and our guests give rapid answers much faster than the Bush administration has created jobs in the United States.
(LAUGHTER) (CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, the Associated Press has just reported that Sandy Berger has stepped down as an informal adviser to Senator Kerry. Good idea or bad idea?
JOHNSTON: Good idea.
REICH: Well, Peter, not only do you agree with that, but, also, what's the status of an informal adviser? You've been involved in campaigns. Informal advisers are very informal. This doesn't really in any way taint the Kerry campaign, does it?
BLUTE: No, I don't.
I do think it raises questions about President Clinton's role in the war on terrorism during his tenure, which I think has been fluffed over largely by the 9/11 Commission. This may relate directly to some of the decision-making that happened during those times.
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, today, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a constitutional amendment against flag-burning. Your vice presidential candidate, Senator John Edwards, voted against that amendment by proxy. Can we say that Senator Edwards now is definitely a liberal?
(LAUGHTER)
JOHNSTON: Well, is that a dirty word, Bob?
I think he's -- look, John Edwards is a very articulate, eloquent spokesperson on behalf of working families in this country. And I think his message resonated during the primaries and it's resonating now across the country. He's a great asset to this ticket. And I think he's going to make a great vice president. Putting labels on him or John Kerry is really a fool's error, because they're very complex political leaders and have been throughout their careers.
REICH: Peter, just to take that up, the Senate is -- Senate Republicans want to talk about flag-burning. They want to talk about gay marriage. Isn't this an effort again to take public attention away from Iraq and Afghanistan and the bumbling economy and basically go to cultural issues that are very, very incendiary?
BLUTE: No. I think those issues are going to be talked about, but these are important issues also. A lot of Americans are concerned about judiciary -- judges across country writing laws on such important issues such as marriage.
(BELL RINGING)
BLUTE: It's caused chaos here in Massachusetts.
REICH: Peter, I'm going to have to cut you off, because we have to move on.
Peter Blute, Phil Johnston, thank you so much for being our guests.
We'll be back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REICH: Now, I promised you and I promised Bob Novak the key to this year's election.
Here's a historic fact that will explain why John Kerry is going to win, because every time Massachusetts puts up a presidential candidate whose name begins with John, starting with John Adams, John Quincy Adams, John F. Kennedy, whose building anoints this particular -- whose name anoints this particular building, we win. And now we have John F. Kerry.
What do you think about that logic, Robert?
NOVAK: Well, John Kerry could be the exception to the rule.
But I'll tell you that my favorite Massachusetts president and arguably the best president to ever come out of Massachusetts was named Calvin, Calvin Coolidge.
REICH: You know, I may take issue with that, Bob. Calvin Coolidge was a good president. He came out of -- he was born in Vermont.
NOVAK: But he was governor of Massachusetts.
REICH: He was governor of Massachusetts. That's true.
NOVAK: OK.
The CNN Election Express is rolling ever closer to the site of the Democratic National Convention. Tomorrow, we'll be dropping anchor at the Boston National Historical Park, which is the home of Old Ironsides, the USS Constitution. And who knows. Maybe we'll get a chance to keelhaul Paul Begala and James Carville behind Old Ironsides. Wouldn't that be a pleasure?
What a pleasure to be with you, Robert Reich.
REICH: Good to be with you, too.
NOVAK: Always a pleasure.
You can follow the travels of the Election Express at our Web site, CNN.com/bus. That's spelled B-U-S.
HAGER: And that will bring us to the end. From the left, I'm Robert Reich.
NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired July 20, 2004 - 16:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE. On the left, James Carville and Paul Begala; on the right, Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson.
In the CROSSFIRE: He was Bill Clinton's national security adviser. He's helping the John Kerry campaign and he's also the target of an FBI investigation.
SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D-CT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, in this town, you never know what you are going to wake up to.
SEN. GORDON SMITH (R), OREGON: In the court of law, Sandy Berger is entitled to that presumption of innocence. But when these kinds of things happen in the court of public opinion, the public is entitled to know this.
ANNOUNCER: Why are we finding out now, just as the 9/11 report is about to be released and a week before the Democratic Convention?
SEN. TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: Somebody leaked it, obviously with an intent, I think, to do damage to Mr. Berger and I think that's unfortunate.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the CNN Election Express at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Dorchester, Massachusetts, Robert Reich and Robert Novak.
ROBERT NOVAK, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
The CNN Election Express has crossed the border into Massachusetts, but the driver must have taken a right turn along the way. We can't seem to find James Carville and Paul Begala. But no matter. Sitting in on the left today is Robert Reich, who was the brilliant secretary of labor in the first term of the Clinton administration.
Another veteran of the Clinton days is not nearly as lucky. His story is first up in the best little political briefing in politics, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
Samuel Berger was a widely respected national security adviser for President Clinton. So what in the world was he doing when he carried away highly secret Clinton administration documents from the National Archives while he was getting ready to testify before the 9/11 Commission? Officials saw him actually stuffing documents in his coat and pants pockets.
It's just been revealed, but this has been the subject of a criminal investigation all year long and it's all the more serious because some of these documents are missing. Only two explanations. Either Sandy Berger has really lost it or he's desperately trying to get rid of incriminating classified material. And that's against the law.
ROBERT REICH, GUEST HOST: Bob, I think there's another explanation and that is that Sandy Berger merely made a mistake. Mistakes happen.
I worked with Sandy Berger when I was secretary of labor in the Clinton administration. He's an honorable man. And I'm very curious about the timing of this revelation, coming, as it does, just before the 9/11 Commission report and a week before the Democratic National Convention.
NOVAK: Things like that happen in politics, Bob. But the thing that -- I have a lot of respect for Sandy Berger, too.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: I just can't understand how an experienced person like that would make that kind of a mistake. It baffles me.
REICH: Well, we'll find out.
And despite the questionable timing of the leak about Sandy Berger investigation and also all the other hoopla about the 9/11 Commission report, there is something we should not lose sight of. And that's the report itself. September 11 proved our nation's intelligence gathering is broken. But the report goes beyond rearranging federal bureaucracies like the FBI and the CIA.
As one commission member tells CNN, the recommendation also concerned first-responders, like police and firefighters, as well as broader domestic security personnel, such as the Border Patrol and immigration. In short, the 9/11 Commission is recommending things that will touch our lives and communities, no matter where we live. Some like that is important. And it is that important, should not be treated like a political football.
NOVAK: I agree with most of what you said, Bob.
But the problem, I think, we should point out is that commission is filled with very partisan Democrats, Richard Ben-Veniste, who is one of the big hatchet men of the Democratic Party -- nobody's more partisan than him. Jamie Gorelick, assistant -- a big shot in the Clinton administration, your colleague, nobody's more partisan than Jamie. So we have a lot of partisan Democrats on that commission. So you can't ever get rid of partisan politics in Washington.
(BELL RINGING)
REICH: Well, but the fact of the matter is, it is going to be a unanimous report, like the Senate Intelligence report. And you can't ignore a unanimous report, Bob.
NOVAK: Like her show -- other show business pals, the superannuated rock singer Linda Ronstadt imposes her radical politics on helpless audiences.
But she got her comeuppance at the Aladdin Hotel Casino in Las Vegas the other night. She started lauding the leftist agitator Michael Moore and his new propaganda film, "Fahrenheit 9/11." The audience hadn't paid for this and they rebelled, booing, throwing cocktails into the air, storming out and tearing down her concert posters.
Management immediately terminated Linda, not even her letting her return to her hotel suite at the Aladdin. Maybe at age 58, Linda Ronstadt has learned some manners.
REICH: Well, I don't think it's a matter of bad manners, Bob. Expressing your political point of view or suggesting that the audience go see a film, it's entirely appropriate. I think the bad manners has to do with her employer at the time. Throwing somebody out of a hotel because of what they said, well, I'm sorry, that's not the America I know.
NOVAK: Surely, you understand, these people want to hear -- they want to be entertained. They don't want to be brainwashed with all of this left-wing claptrap. Can you understand that or are you just too much on the left, Bob?
(BELL RINGING)
REICH: No, Bob. I think that I've listened to so much right- wing claptrap from talk radio and talk television that it seems to me it's appropriate that somebody counterbalance just a little bit in the entertainment industry.
It looks like the Republican Party will have two presidential candidates on the Michigan ballots this fall. That's because Ralph Nader has decided to accept thousands of petitioned signatures that Republicans gathered in order to get his name on Michigan ballots. Nader needed 30,000 signatures. His campaign only turned in about 5,400. But Michigan's Republicans came to the rescue by submitting 43,000 Nader signatures.
Good job, Republicans. So much for Ralph Nader's professions of being an independent. Maybe Michigan officials should take George W. Bush's name off their state's ballots and give Republicans the candidate that they seem to want, Ralph Nader.
NOVAK: You know, I am just amazed that liberals like you don't want to give the people a complete choice. Let the people decide. Put all the names on the ballot. If left-wingers would rather vote for Ralph Nader than John Kerry, they think there's a difference, let them do it. Why keep him off the ballot? If you want to put some right-wing -- there are going to be conservative right-wing tickets up. I think there's some kind of a Conservative Constitution ticket up. Why not let everybody vote? Isn't that the American way? REICH: Bob, this is the most cynical effort by Republicans in Michigan and elsewhere to get Ralph Nader on the ballot, hoping that some people, in a misguided effort to put Ralph Nader in the presidency, are going to actually take votes away from our man, John Kerry.
(BELL RINGING)
NOVAK: OK.
President Clinton's former national security adviser is the target of a criminal probe. Why is that a potential problem for the Democratic presidential candidate, John Kerry?
And later, my co-host sitting next to me says he has evidence, hard evidence, that proves John Kerry will win the president. I'm skeptical.
REICH: Absolutely.
NOVAK: Let's listen to him, though. Let's give him a try.
ANNOUNCER: Join Carville, Begala, Carlson and Novak in the CROSSFIRE. For free tickets to CROSSFIRE at the George Washington University, call 202-994-8CNN or visit our Web site. Now you can step into the CROSSFIRE.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NOVAK: The revelation that another member of the Clinton administration may have been playing fast and loose with the law isn't really a big surprise. But allegations that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger took home secret documents from the National Archives could have implications for the Kerry for president campaign, because Mr. Berger has been acting as an informal adviser to Senator Kerry.
Will the senator disavow Berger and drop him like a hot potato?
In the CROSSFIRE, two people who have been watching John Kerry for years, Democratic Party Chairman Phil Johnston and Republican Peter Blute, a former congressman from Massachusetts.
Mr. Johnston, I want to give you a question that the speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, Republican, asked today and that he asked better than I can: "Did these documents detail simple negligence or did they contain something more sinister? Was this a bungled attempt to rewrite history and keep critical information from the 9/11 Commission and potentially put their report under a cloud?"
PHIL JOHNSTON, CHAIRMAN, MASSACHUSETTS DEMOCRATIC PARTY: There's a loaded question.
(LAUGHTER) JOHNSTON: I don't think -- as Bob Reich said earlier, I think Sandy Berger has a sterling reputation in this country as a person of high integrity.
And I have no idea and I'm sure that Senator Kerry and the campaign have no idea what happened. All we can hope is that there will be a fair and impartial investigation of whatever happened and that let the chips fall where they may.
NOVAK: That's a good answer. But as a strong Kerry supporter and a powerful figure here in Massachusetts, would you recommend that he drop Mr. Bush from Berger from his list of advisers?
JOHNSTON: I don't think that that's really appropriate at this point. Look, this story just broke today. I don't think we have sufficient information as to what happened. He really has not been a paid adviser. And, as you point out, he's on a very informal basis, like a lot of people.
And, you know, I'd rather be in his position than Dick Cheney's position, who has made a lot more mistakes in terms of foreign policy and cost this country a lot more lives and money than Sandy Berger ever did.
REICH: Peter Blute, as a former congressman and now somebody who is a media personality, let me ask you a question. Don't you think this is a little bit fishy, the timing of this expose with regard to Sandy Berger?
After all, the FBI's been on this trail for about eight or nine months. We don't know exactly who leaked it, but don't you think maybe the Bush campaign might have something to do with this, especially considering, according to CNN this morning, that three separate calls were made even to CNN this morning to pay attention to this story?
PETER BLUTE (R), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: Well, Mr. Secretary, you know, from being in politics, that these things tend to get out at some point. This is a very serious charge. These were highly classified documents relating to our national security.
Mr. Berger was our national security adviser. He knows about how important these documents are and their safekeeping, and yet he was stuffing them in his pockets. And now some are even missing. And I think it raises a real question as to whether or not these were documents that looked badly for the Clinton administration's handling of the war on terrorism.
And if he did take them, that's very serious indeed.
REICH: But, Peter, surely, you have to admit that this administration does have a record of, let's say, deflecting or distracting the public and public attention from things it doesn't want to pay attention to.
After all, we are on the eve of the 9/11 report. It's certainly going to criticize the administration, as much as the Senate Intelligence Committee did. And we're also on the eve of the Democratic Convention. The administration would like to maybe divert public attention from all the festivities.
BLUTE: Well, we paid a lot of attention to the Wilson book and the Wilson charges a number of months ago. That was very damaging I think to President Bush. Now it turns out that he wasn't being straightforward, that he was actually lying about the connections between his wife and the CIA recommending him to that job and the fact that a British report and the U.S. Senate report now says that the 16 words in the State of the Union were absolutely based on fact.
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, John Kerry is about to be nominated for president in his home state. That's the first time that's happened I think since Adlai Stevenson in 1956 in Illinois.
And the Suffolk University poll which was taken just a few days ago asked, is Kerry is flip-flopper on the issues? Asked Massachusetts voters, yes, 60 percent, no, 31 percent. In his own state, 2-1, the voters think he's a flip-flopper. What kind of indictment is that?
JOHNSTON: I guess it means that they don't care much about flip- flopping, because he's been elected to the United States Senate four times there overwhelmingly. The last time -- he was actually elected two years unopposed. And he won a primary here in the spring by an overwhelming majority as well. He's a very, very popular senator here. He's been a popular figure here for a quarter of a century.
And I don't think there's any question about what the numbers are going to look like -- and Peter will agree with this, I think -- in Massachusetts. I think Bush is now mired in the low 30s here in this state. And I wouldn't be surprised if John Kerry doesn't win this election here by about 20 points.
BLUTE: Well, he's the heavyweight champ here in this state. There's no doubt about that politically.
But it's interesting, for those of us who have followed him here, to see what he's doing now nationally to attract attention and support. For example, I never saw him with a shotgun over the last 25 years and now he's out there shooting ducks and stuff.
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: I thought he looked pretty natural out there with a shotgun.
(CROSSTALK)
REICH: Now, listen, I have a question for you. We are now in the wonderful Commonwealth of Massachusetts, a wonderful state, my home state, your home state Now, you know, probably, because you pay attention to these things, that Massachusetts has lost 54,000 jobs since President Bush became president. And that's not unique to Massachusetts. Those kinds of figures we see, prorated, across the country.
Now, tell me something. How can the president say with a straight face that this economy is coming back with those kind of job losses and also what we just heard from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday, that actually production workers' wages are going down?
BLUTE: Well, it is coming back. All indicators are very, very strong, the strongest growth in 20 years. Look, you know and I know that -- and the economists will tell you that the economy started struggling before Bush was even elected.
It started -- the bubble burst on the boom and it started going down. Then we had 9/11. Then we two wars. We had some energy issues and others and still Bush's policies have caused this economy to start to grow very robustly. Unemployment is 5.6 percent. That is the same level in which Bill Clinton was reelected on.
REICH: Peter, Peter, there's a huge difference. When Bill Clinton had a so-called jobless recovery, those jobs started coming back. The payroll survey started showing a lot of jobs coming back. And wages didn't take a tank, like they're taking right now.
Here's the question for you. This is what I don't understand. Bush actually cut taxes with the promise that a big tax cut was going to generate millions and millions and millions of new jobs. Where are the new jobs?
BLUTE: They're coming. We've had tremendous job growth.
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, I have got a political question for you. The Boston police union says, even though the strike is going to be settled by arbitration, there are still going to be protesters throughout.
Your fellow state chairmen in California and Ohio, Torres and White, say they will walk out of the arena when Mayor Menino speaks, that they will refuse to cross the picket -- not refuse to cross the picket lines. They will refuse go to the Massachusetts party. What advice would you give to your fellow state chairmen?
JOHNSTON: Well, I already have given them advice to not do that. I think it's a mistake. I think it would be embarrassing to the city, to the Democratic Party. And I don't think it's helpful to the cause of defeating George W. Bush in the fall.
The focus on Monday night needs to be on President Clinton's speech, not on a local labor dispute.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSTON: And having said that, I just -- I think we all want to make it clear -- and Bob would certainly support this as a former secretary of labor -- that this is a party that's extraordinarily pro- labor. But we have got a big, big hurdle to overcome here. And that is that we have got to beat George Bush and we've got to put progressive Democrats
(CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: What did they say to you -- what did they say to you when you give them that advice, Mr. Johnston?
JOHNSTON: They listened very, very respectfully. And I think over the next few days that there is going to be some -- there will be some changes on the part of some of the Democratic delegations.
BLUTE: The big issue is the fact that Senator Kerry would not cross an informational picket to address the U.S. Conference of Mayors. He held that group -- was allowed to hold that group hostage, stab Mayor Menino in the back. And then said that he would never cross an informational picket line.
(CROSSTALK)
JOHNSTON: Well, he didn't stab Mayor Menino in the back, Peter. Menino has been a very strong supporter of John Kerry's. He was up in New Hampshire. He was in Iowa and you know that.
NOVAK: We're going to -- we're going to have to suspend the back-stabbing and take a break.
(LAUGHTER)
NOVAK: And when we come back, we'll have "Rapid Fire" questions for our two guests.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.
Coming up at the top of the hour, former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger admits taking top secret documents from the National Archives. Was it an accident or a crime? We'll talk with his lawyer Lanny Breuer in his first television interview since the matter erupted and with former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.
A Filipino hostage is freed following the withdrawal of Philippine troops from Iraq, but is it a dangerous precedent?
And how a state trooper risked his life to stop a mother from killing herself.
Those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
Now back to CROSSFIRE.
REICH: And now it's time for "Rapid Fire," where we ask rapid questions and our guests give rapid answers much faster than the Bush administration has created jobs in the United States.
(LAUGHTER) (CROSSTALK)
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, the Associated Press has just reported that Sandy Berger has stepped down as an informal adviser to Senator Kerry. Good idea or bad idea?
JOHNSTON: Good idea.
REICH: Well, Peter, not only do you agree with that, but, also, what's the status of an informal adviser? You've been involved in campaigns. Informal advisers are very informal. This doesn't really in any way taint the Kerry campaign, does it?
BLUTE: No, I don't.
I do think it raises questions about President Clinton's role in the war on terrorism during his tenure, which I think has been fluffed over largely by the 9/11 Commission. This may relate directly to some of the decision-making that happened during those times.
NOVAK: Chairman Johnston, today, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a constitutional amendment against flag-burning. Your vice presidential candidate, Senator John Edwards, voted against that amendment by proxy. Can we say that Senator Edwards now is definitely a liberal?
(LAUGHTER)
JOHNSTON: Well, is that a dirty word, Bob?
I think he's -- look, John Edwards is a very articulate, eloquent spokesperson on behalf of working families in this country. And I think his message resonated during the primaries and it's resonating now across the country. He's a great asset to this ticket. And I think he's going to make a great vice president. Putting labels on him or John Kerry is really a fool's error, because they're very complex political leaders and have been throughout their careers.
REICH: Peter, just to take that up, the Senate is -- Senate Republicans want to talk about flag-burning. They want to talk about gay marriage. Isn't this an effort again to take public attention away from Iraq and Afghanistan and the bumbling economy and basically go to cultural issues that are very, very incendiary?
BLUTE: No. I think those issues are going to be talked about, but these are important issues also. A lot of Americans are concerned about judiciary -- judges across country writing laws on such important issues such as marriage.
(BELL RINGING)
BLUTE: It's caused chaos here in Massachusetts.
REICH: Peter, I'm going to have to cut you off, because we have to move on.
Peter Blute, Phil Johnston, thank you so much for being our guests.
We'll be back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
REICH: Now, I promised you and I promised Bob Novak the key to this year's election.
Here's a historic fact that will explain why John Kerry is going to win, because every time Massachusetts puts up a presidential candidate whose name begins with John, starting with John Adams, John Quincy Adams, John F. Kennedy, whose building anoints this particular -- whose name anoints this particular building, we win. And now we have John F. Kerry.
What do you think about that logic, Robert?
NOVAK: Well, John Kerry could be the exception to the rule.
But I'll tell you that my favorite Massachusetts president and arguably the best president to ever come out of Massachusetts was named Calvin, Calvin Coolidge.
REICH: You know, I may take issue with that, Bob. Calvin Coolidge was a good president. He came out of -- he was born in Vermont.
NOVAK: But he was governor of Massachusetts.
REICH: He was governor of Massachusetts. That's true.
NOVAK: OK.
The CNN Election Express is rolling ever closer to the site of the Democratic National Convention. Tomorrow, we'll be dropping anchor at the Boston National Historical Park, which is the home of Old Ironsides, the USS Constitution. And who knows. Maybe we'll get a chance to keelhaul Paul Begala and James Carville behind Old Ironsides. Wouldn't that be a pleasure?
What a pleasure to be with you, Robert Reich.
REICH: Good to be with you, too.
NOVAK: Always a pleasure.
You can follow the travels of the Election Express at our Web site, CNN.com/bus. That's spelled B-U-S.
HAGER: And that will bring us to the end. From the left, I'm Robert Reich.
NOVAK: From the right, I'm Robert Novak. Join us again next time for another edition of CROSSFIRE.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
