Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Crossfire
Colin Powell Resigns
Aired November 15, 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: Secretary of State Colin Powell turns in his resignation letter.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: As we got close to the election and the immediate aftermath of the election, it seemed the appropriate time. We were in mutual agreement that it was the appropriate time for me to move on.
ANNOUNCER: Who will replace Powell? And does his resignation mean there will be a shift in U.S. foreign policy?
Also, there's a big shakeup taking place at the CIA. Is it a necessary housecleaning or is politics hurting American's intelligence agency?
Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson.
(APPLAUSE)
TUCKER CARLSON, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
Major changes at the executive branch today. At least four Cabinet secretaries in the Bush administration announce their resignations. There's now jockeying for replacements. And the Democrats are still confused about what to say about Colin Powell. Yes, he helped get us into a war they hate No, it's not really possible to criticize him. A quandary.
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Oh, let me resolve it.
It is possible to criticize him. After watching how President Bush damaged Colin Powell's reputation by sending him out to repeat falsehoods to the U.N., during Mr. Bush's rush to war, that is, will anyone want to take the job after him? And, meanwhile, help wanted signs are out at the Departments of Energy, Agriculture, Education and Commerce. And with America at war with terror, what are so many of the top people leaving the CIA? We'll debate all of that and more. But let's start, as we always do, with the best little political briefing in television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
Well, the very public neutering of Pennsylvania Republican Senator Arlen Specter is indeed a sight to behold. Right-wing Republicans like Pennsylvania's other senator, Rick Santorum, and President Bush himself, for that matter, helped Senator Specter survive a challenge from a conservative Republican primary opponent.
But now some of those very same right-wingers are trying to deny Specter the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee because he supports legal abortion. But they knew that when they supported Specter against a pro-lifer. Look, Specter campaigned honestly as a pro-choice moderate and openly opposing Mr. Bush on issues like stem cell research. So, if our president and his follow right-wingers didn't want a pro-choice senator from Pennsylvania, they shouldn't have supported Arlen Specter.
Apparently, they didn't think Specter actually meant the things that he said on the campaign trail. We'll see now if he did.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: And, look, if Arlen Specter toes the Bush/Falwell/Santorum line, then one of the old bulls of the Senate is going to look like nothing more than just a steer.
CARLSON: Look, the problem with Arlen Specter is not that he's pro-choice, but that he implied that nobody who not pro-choice could be on the Supreme Court, just to be fair, which is an outrageous thing to say.
However, I do -- I must say I sort of agree with you. The Bush administration took a completely unprincipled stand in supporting Arlen Specter over Toomey, how was a much better person.
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: And now they're living with the consequences.
BEGALA: He betrayed the very people who elected President Bush. Those conservative values voters have betrayed already by Mr. Bush.
CARLSON: I actually sort of agree.
Well, you may not have realized it, but today is the end of an era, the Jim McGreevey era. Tomorrow, the disgraced New Jersey Democrat will resign his post to make way for a replacement governor Richard J. Codey, a fill-in who says he never wanted the job in the first place. Historians will look back on the McGreevey era as a time when Democrats not only still existed, but didn't even bother to pretend to be principled, a time when one of the country's powerful Democrats could put his boyfriend in charge of his state's homeland security, get caught, and still not draw rebukes from his own party, an era, in other words, when Democrats officially ceased to believe in anything beyond partisanship. As for McGreevey, his political career is likely over as well, unless he proves an especially good fund raiser. And that's a shame, if you think about it, because, as our colleague and friend James Carville put it yesterday on "Meet the Press," Jim McGreevey may be the only politician in American with a man date.
(LAUGHTER)
BEGALA: I'll let everybody just sort of ponder...
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: I thought it was a great line. I don't care. James said it. I think it was a funny line.
BEGALA: It is...
CARLSON: But I will say, it was a sad day, nothing about -- who cares about Jim McGreevey's sex life? The point is, he was negligent, really outrageous in...
BEGALA: That is what he did wrong.
CARLSON: That's right.
BEGALA: Putting someone he allegedly had a relationship with on the state payroll and, at that, at homeland security. But Democrats did. I did. Other Democrats did, said that was wrong.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: You did. You're right. You did. But very few did.
BEGALA: He does have a right to be gay.
CARLSON: Who cares?
BEGALA: And it's a shame that he conducted himself that way by putting somebody he had a relationship with on the payroll. That was the problem. But Democrats did, I think, help push him out.
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: Actually, they didn't. You did, but almost no one in office had the huevos or the principle to say so. I mean it. And it was sad.
BEGALA: Do you notice a motif from the steer analogy I made with the...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
BEGALA: All right, we're starting in the gutter and heading straight down to the sewer. Let's try to pull out. "Newsweek"'s behind-the-scenes look at the Kerry campaign includes numerous shots at Teresa Heinz Kerry taken by members of Senator Kerry's staff. Now, this tells us something important, not about Mrs. Kerry, who is a national treasure, but, rather, tells us something important about the people stabbing Teresa in the back. After all, it wasn't Teresa who convinced John Kerry not to attack George W. Bush for months while Mr. Bush hammered Kerry every day. It was Senator Kerry's staff.
And it wasn't Teresa who refused to allow Democrats to attack Republicans at the Democratic Convention. It was Senator Kerry's staff. And it wasn't Teresa who refused to give Senator Kerry a clear, focused message.
Democrats believe that President Bush's victory could truly be calamitous for the country that we love. So what's saddening, no, make that sickening, is that some of the people responsible for that calamity are such low-class weasels, they're attacking their boss' wife. If they were as adept at running a campaign as they are at running down Mrs. Heinz Kerry, they would be planning for the Kerry inaugural right now. Shame on them.
(APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: I think that's -- I think that's a good point.
What does it tell you? Step back just two steps here. What does it tell you about John Kerry that he inspires such disloyalty that people are talking to "Newsweek"? No one ever did that Bill Clinton, I will say.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: And I also will say that that "Newsweek" piece...
BEGALA: Loyalty is a puzzle. President Reagan was a very successful president.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: Yet, many of his people were very disloyal. So I'm not quite sure why that is.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: However, Paul, that piece also, and his own staff describes him as completely unable to make a basic decision. His own staff makes it sound like you're glad you didn't elect him president.
BEGALA: I'm pretty skeptical about a lot of those attacks in there.
CARLSON: All right.
Well, almost no one in the Democratic Party emerged from this year's presidential campaign with his reputation enhanced. John Kerry limps back to the Senate defeated and embarrassed. John Edwards is unemployed. Poor Dennis Kucinich seems even odder now than he did when he first ran.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: In fact, the only real winner on the left may be Al Sharpton, who is more widely respected today than he has ever been. Sharpton's new mission is to prevent the Democratic Party from continuing to take black voters for granted, as they do. And it won't be easy.
As a first step, Sharpton's political director, a smart and impressive loyal named Marjorie Harris, is running for vice chair of the Democratic National Committee. And already she faces opposition from the same Washington-based politburo the brought Democrats three ignominious defeats in a row, the same group that loves diversity, as long as it's imposed on other people and not them.
Here's the real problem. Sharpton and Marjorie Harris actually believe in something. And to Washington Democrats, there is nothing more terrifying than that.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: I don't know Marjorie Harris, but...
CARLSON: Well, she's a person of principle.
BEGALA: But you make a good point about Sharpton, believe it or not. As you know, I started -- when Sharpton started his campaign, I was one of the biggest skeptics. Probably the meanest interview I ever did with anybody on this show was with Reverend Sharpton.
CARLSON: That's true.
BEGALA: And yet, by the end of it, he did impress me with his clarity, with -- he conducted himself with great dignity. And I -- you're right. He served our party very, very well.
(CROSSTALK)
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: Will they give him a seat at the table?
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: I haven't the slightest idea who this woman is or who should be the vice chairman of the party or something. But you're right about Sharpton. He did a very good job in the debates.
CARLSON: And I hope they paid attention.
BEGALA: He has a lot to stay. I hope he comes back here and says more on our air.
CARLSON: I hope he runs the Democratic Party from here until forever.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: Colin Powell says it's time for him to leave. What in the world will Democrats say about that? What can they say? We'll debate Powell's effectiveness and a look at who should replace him as the nation's chief diplomat.
And, later, one of our co-hosts finally loses control on live television. You knew it would happen. We have been waiting for years to see it. We have the tape.
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)
(APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Colin Powell heads up the long list of Cabinet resignations announced by the White House today. So who is on the short list for candidates to replace the secretary of state and what will it mean for American foreign policy?
To answer those questions, we're joined from London Jamie Rubin, an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration, and also Congressman David Dreier of California.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Jamie, good to see you by satellite.
Congressman Dreier, welcome back, Mr. Chairman, also chairman of the Rules Committee, an important and powerful job.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Colin Powell, every American, and certainly, I think, Democrats I know admire his patriotism, his service to our country, those many years in the military. But I will have to say, as he leaves, he disgraced himself on February 5,2003, when he went to the United Nations, spoke for all Americans, made 17 charges, none of which panned out.
He said that Iraq had biological weapons -- they didn't -- 25,000 liters of anthrax -- they didn't -- mobile biological weapons labs -- they didn't -- unmanned aerial vehicles with chemical-biological capacity -- they didn't -- 500 tons of chemical agents, chemical warheads. On and on, he went, falsehood after falsehood. (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Didn't he disgrace himself and our country?
REP. DAVID DREIER (R), CALIFORNIA: The answer is absolutely not.
Frankly, I think that it is very clear to me that the questions remain about weapons of mass destruction out there. People are still talking about the prospect of them having been moved to another country. And I do believe that -- we're going to get into this in the second segment, when we talk about the CIA -- I do think that it's very important for us to enhance our intelligence-gathering capability. And, obviously, we want to get to the bottom of this.
But, Colin Powell -- I will tell you something, Paul. Colin Powell is clearly one of the, if not the most, one the most respected people in America. And we have a wide range of Cabinet members who are leaving. And this is standard operating procedure at the end of a four-year term, that people do leave.
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: And I think the American people owe a debt of gratitude to Colin Powell and to all these other Cabinet members who worked so hard.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: We do. But I think we also owe an obligation to the truth.
DREIER: Of course we do.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Secretary Powell went to the United Nations and he helped...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Let me ask the question.
He helped lead America into a war. Eighteen months later, are you still suggesting that there are weapons of mass destruction there? And, if so, what are you drinking and where can I get a case of it?
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
DREIER: Yes, well, I'm drinking CNN water.
BEGALA: Because that's...
DREIER: I didn't suggest that there were. I said that there are still questions.
Let me say this. I think it's very, very important for us to realize that, if you look at the plan in Iraq, we've gone through a really difficult time in Falluja. But I think that we've had great success. One of my great friends, Colonel Mike Shupp, is leading the command there in Falluja. And we get regular e-mails from him. And it's going very, very well.
We are going to see elections take place in Iraq. And that's coming about because of the fact that we have strengthened our resolve and we've put together this broad international coalition. And the Iraqis are, in fact, taking over.
CARLSON: Now, Jamie Rubin, thanks for joining us, by the way.
JAMIE RUBIN, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Thank you.
CARLSON: No matter how you feel about the war in Iraq, I think Paul is right. More than any other person, apart from President Bush himself, Colin Powell got us into that war, which, if you support it, is a good thing. If you don't support it, like most Democrats, it's a bad thing.
And yet, you said this morning, echoing a lot of Democrats -- this is this morning on CNN -- you described Colin Powell as a man of candor, of wisdom, integrity, as a voice of caution and prudence and, again, wisdom.
So, if you're opposed to the war and you think it was reckless and mistaken, how in the world can you be so effusive in your praise of a man who is largely responsible for us being in that war?
RUBIN: Well, I said he was candid because he was one of the few Republicans this summer who admitted that things in Iraq weren't going well.
Few members of the administration -- President Bush was telling us everything was going fine; freedom was on the march. I said he had integrity because, unlike Vice President Cheney, unlike Donald Rumsfeld, when he had to present intelligence information, he threw a lot of it out, the very information that Vice President Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were happy to put out there. That showed some integrity.
Wisdom. I said he was wise because he advised the president, if you go into Iraq, that means, you break it, you own it.
The only thing that Colin Powell wasn't was effective. His arguments never won the day. He was on the short end of the stick on Iraq. He was on the short end of the stick on North Korea. He was on the short end of the stick on the Middle East.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: So he was all the things I said, but he just wasn't effective.
(APPLAUSE) DREIER: Jamie, how you possibly conclude, how you possibly conclude that Colin Powell as secretary of state has not been effective, not only in Iraq, but if you look at our relationship -- as he pointed out today, our relationship with the People's Republic of China, the struggle between India and Pakistan, the developments that we've made, the great strides we've made in the war in terrorism, working with General Musharraf in Pakistan, there are so many areas where we've had Colin Powell's leadership pay off for us.
(APPLAUSE)
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Hold on. Jamie, Rubin, I'm sorry. Let me just make you -- force you to answer this question. Hold on.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: I would really like to answer that. Please let me answer that question.
It's very simple. Whether it's Colin Powell's fault or George Bush's fault, one simple indicator of the success of the secretary of state is America's standing in the world. When he took office, we were the most respected and supported country in the world, by governments, by peoples all over the planet. Today, there has never been a time when America has been so disrespected and so many countries and so many peoples have questions about our policies.
That's a simple calculus. It's an inarguable fact. Whether it's his fault or George Bush's fault, America's standing is low.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: The most important gauge of success, Jamie, is the security of the United States of America. And that's what this president, this secretary of the state have put as the top priority.
BEGALA: But, Congressman, what does it say about the president's lack of faith...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Excuse me, Jamie. Let me -- let me put this question to Congressman Dreier.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: I didn't say it wasn't the most secure. I said the job of the secretary of state is diplomacy.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: What does it say about the president's lack of faith in Colin Powell that he told a Saudi Arabian sheik, a prince from Saudi Arabia, we were going to war before we told Colin Powell?
DREIER: Well, listen, I don't know that that -- we've had reports about that. I will tell you that Colin Powell...
BEGALA: ... Bob Woodward's book.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: ... pretty accurate.
DREIER: I know that. I know that.
But I will tell you that this secretary of state and this president worked very closely together. And Colin Powell has done a phenomenal job, I believe, as secretary of state.
BEGALA: But if he wore one of those big robes and had one of those funny goatees, do you think he would have...
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: Paul, I don't know about the communication and exactly what took place exactly at what point.
BEGALA: OK.
DREIER: I mean, I think Colin Powell knew all along what we were doing.
BEGALA: We're going to have to take a quick break.
Jamie, stay with us from London and Congressman Dreier here in our Washington studios.
And coming up, with a new report documenting that terrorists are trying to get a nuclear bomb, why are so many of the CIA's top people leaving?
And who's using Taser guns against children in South Florida? Wolf Blitzer has more on this very disturbing story next.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer.
Coming up at the top of the hour, Colin Powell, he's bowing out as the secretary of state. We'll tell you who may succeed him.
Police use Taser gun to subdue criminals. But Florida parents want to know, why are police using them on children?
And a controversial pop star is at it again. You'll want to hear what Madonna is saying now.
All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
Now back to CROSSFIRE.
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
The new head of the CIA, Porter Goss, is in the process of making some major changes at the nation's spy agency. While everyone agrees the changes are in order, there is disagreement over whether Goss is making things better or worse.
Our guests today are former assistant Secretary of State Jamie Rubin -- he's in London -- and California Congressman David Dreier, who is here with us on the set at the George Washington University in Washington.
DREIER: Glad to be here.
CARLSON: Jamie Rubin, Democrats have been calling -- with some justification, it seems to me -- for a while that there are major problems at the CIA. We knew that. September 11 proved it.
Now we've seen some resignations and they're whining that things are out of control. Don't we need a reshuffling at the CIA?
RUBIN: Yes, I think what Democrats have been calling for is not a reshuffling of the chairs on the Titanic, but restructuring of our intelligence agencies, so that the Department of Defense's intelligence community, the other intelligence agencies are all under the control of a national intelligence director.
Porter Goss is not that person. He doesn't have that power. The Bush administration has refused to give that power to the new national intelligence director. That's why this bill was held up. What Porter Goss brings to the table, unfortunately, is a little bit too much politics for many of the CIA officials who have been around a long time.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Hold on.
Let me -- Jamie, you know that that's pretty outrageous thing to say. Actually, Porter Goss is not very partisan, as you know.
But isn't the problem -- isn't the problem here that there's a long-going battle between lifers at the CIA and the White House? And isn't that itself a problem? You've served in government. The CIA is supposed to serve at the pleasure of the president. And there's a certain insubordinance. And, actually, it's a problem from the way the executive branch works when you see the CIA or any executive branch organization like that trying to undercut the White House.
Isn't that bad for America, no matter who the president is?
RUBIN: Well, let me answer that directly. First of all, Porter Goes spent a lot of time attacking John Kerry when he was running for president. He was a very political chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
DREIER: He was a Republican member of Congress.
RUBIN: So he does bring a big politics piece to the -- no, but it -- and he came under some scrutiny during his confirmation hearings for those statements.
As far as your question is concerned, Tucker, I agree with you. There is a longstanding for many years now feeling in the CIA that their views have not been taken seriously. And conservatives like you liked that when it was the Democratic administration and the CIA officials were leaking to the Republicans on the Hill that the Democrats weren't doing the job. That's just the way Washington works. And the Republicans ought to learn to live with it.
BEGALA: Congressman Dreier, let me suggest that this is not at all an effort to get better intelligence, that the president believes the intelligent he was getting from the old regime was very good.
Let me call to the witness stand George W. Bush.
Mr. President, how is the intelligence you're getting?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let me first say that, you know, I think the intelligence I get is darn good intelligence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Why this purge?
Well, "Newsday" reported yesterday the White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goes, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the war in Iraq and the hunt for Osama bin Laden. That's why they're doing this. This is a political purge, isn't it?
DREIER: Paul, I've served with Porter Goss for nearly 20 years. He -- just before he went over, he was -- as well as being chairman of the Intelligence Committee, he was vice chairman of the Rules Committee.
And I've spent a lot of time with him focusing on a wide range of areas in the world when he was in the Congress. And one of the interesting things is, exactly what he's been pursuing right now, making sure that we no longer are risk-averse, focusing on human intelligence, these issues are issues which he was discussing with me years ago.
And he's basically carrying forward the plans that he has had in discussion for reform of the Central Intelligence Agency. And we know right now, the blatant politicization of the CIA with the attack...
BEGALA: Under President Bush.
DREIER: Yes, the attacks against President Bush that emanated from the CIA, you know, the strong supporters of the Kerry campaign who are politicizing the CIA, those are the kinds of people who I believe should be out.
BEGALA: That's the last word from Congressman David Dreier, Republican of California.
Jamie Rubin, former State Department spokesman...
RUBIN: That's politicization.
BEGALA: From London, thank you both very much for a spirited debate.
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Well, my old pal James Carville has done it again. We'll show you his latest post-election egg-travaganza -- get it, egg- travaganza? -- right after this.
Stay with us.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Our co-host and friend James Carville is well-known for taking the Election Day woes, the many Election Day woes, of his beloved Democratic Party very hard.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Two years ago, when the Democrats flopped in the midterm elections, James took to wearing a trash can on his head on the air, much to the delight of all of us, particularly me.
So, when John Kerry lost to President Bush, we knew it was only a matter of time. This weekend, the wait was over.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "MEET THE PRESS")
TIM RUSSERT, NBC WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Oh, I see.
JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: You know what I say...
(LAUGHTER)
MARY MATALIN, BUSH CAMPAIGN ADVISER: Oh, my God. (LAUGHTER)
RUSSERT: I don't believe this.
CARVILLE: I've got egg on my face. It was a bad prediction.
MATALIN: I love this man.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: It's brunch at the Carvilles' house...
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: ... any time.
BEGALA: Yes, well, apparently -- apparently, it helps make the hair grow, too. So...
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: It's not working.
BEGALA: From the left, I am Paul Begala. That's it for CROSSFIRE.
CARLSON: And from the right, I'm Tucker Carlson. Join us again tomorrow for yet more CROSSFIRE.
"WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" starts right now. Have a great night.
(APPLAUSE)
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 November 15, 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: Secretary of State Colin Powell turns in his resignation letter.
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: As we got close to the election and the immediate aftermath of the election, it seemed the appropriate time. We were in mutual agreement that it was the appropriate time for me to move on.
ANNOUNCER: Who will replace Powell? And does his resignation mean there will be a shift in U.S. foreign policy?
Also, there's a big shakeup taking place at the CIA. Is it a necessary housecleaning or is politics hurting American's intelligence agency?
Today on CROSSFIRE.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: Live from the George Washington University, Paul Begala and Tucker Carlson.
(APPLAUSE)
TUCKER CARLSON, CO-HOST: Welcome to CROSSFIRE.
Major changes at the executive branch today. At least four Cabinet secretaries in the Bush administration announce their resignations. There's now jockeying for replacements. And the Democrats are still confused about what to say about Colin Powell. Yes, he helped get us into a war they hate No, it's not really possible to criticize him. A quandary.
PAUL BEGALA, CO-HOST: Oh, let me resolve it.
It is possible to criticize him. After watching how President Bush damaged Colin Powell's reputation by sending him out to repeat falsehoods to the U.N., during Mr. Bush's rush to war, that is, will anyone want to take the job after him? And, meanwhile, help wanted signs are out at the Departments of Energy, Agriculture, Education and Commerce. And with America at war with terror, what are so many of the top people leaving the CIA? We'll debate all of that and more. But let's start, as we always do, with the best little political briefing in television, our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."
Well, the very public neutering of Pennsylvania Republican Senator Arlen Specter is indeed a sight to behold. Right-wing Republicans like Pennsylvania's other senator, Rick Santorum, and President Bush himself, for that matter, helped Senator Specter survive a challenge from a conservative Republican primary opponent.
But now some of those very same right-wingers are trying to deny Specter the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee because he supports legal abortion. But they knew that when they supported Specter against a pro-lifer. Look, Specter campaigned honestly as a pro-choice moderate and openly opposing Mr. Bush on issues like stem cell research. So, if our president and his follow right-wingers didn't want a pro-choice senator from Pennsylvania, they shouldn't have supported Arlen Specter.
Apparently, they didn't think Specter actually meant the things that he said on the campaign trail. We'll see now if he did.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: And, look, if Arlen Specter toes the Bush/Falwell/Santorum line, then one of the old bulls of the Senate is going to look like nothing more than just a steer.
CARLSON: Look, the problem with Arlen Specter is not that he's pro-choice, but that he implied that nobody who not pro-choice could be on the Supreme Court, just to be fair, which is an outrageous thing to say.
However, I do -- I must say I sort of agree with you. The Bush administration took a completely unprincipled stand in supporting Arlen Specter over Toomey, how was a much better person.
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: And now they're living with the consequences.
BEGALA: He betrayed the very people who elected President Bush. Those conservative values voters have betrayed already by Mr. Bush.
CARLSON: I actually sort of agree.
Well, you may not have realized it, but today is the end of an era, the Jim McGreevey era. Tomorrow, the disgraced New Jersey Democrat will resign his post to make way for a replacement governor Richard J. Codey, a fill-in who says he never wanted the job in the first place. Historians will look back on the McGreevey era as a time when Democrats not only still existed, but didn't even bother to pretend to be principled, a time when one of the country's powerful Democrats could put his boyfriend in charge of his state's homeland security, get caught, and still not draw rebukes from his own party, an era, in other words, when Democrats officially ceased to believe in anything beyond partisanship. As for McGreevey, his political career is likely over as well, unless he proves an especially good fund raiser. And that's a shame, if you think about it, because, as our colleague and friend James Carville put it yesterday on "Meet the Press," Jim McGreevey may be the only politician in American with a man date.
(LAUGHTER)
BEGALA: I'll let everybody just sort of ponder...
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: I thought it was a great line. I don't care. James said it. I think it was a funny line.
BEGALA: It is...
CARLSON: But I will say, it was a sad day, nothing about -- who cares about Jim McGreevey's sex life? The point is, he was negligent, really outrageous in...
BEGALA: That is what he did wrong.
CARLSON: That's right.
BEGALA: Putting someone he allegedly had a relationship with on the state payroll and, at that, at homeland security. But Democrats did. I did. Other Democrats did, said that was wrong.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: You did. You're right. You did. But very few did.
BEGALA: He does have a right to be gay.
CARLSON: Who cares?
BEGALA: And it's a shame that he conducted himself that way by putting somebody he had a relationship with on the payroll. That was the problem. But Democrats did, I think, help push him out.
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: Actually, they didn't. You did, but almost no one in office had the huevos or the principle to say so. I mean it. And it was sad.
BEGALA: Do you notice a motif from the steer analogy I made with the...
(CROSSTALK)
(LAUGHTER)
BEGALA: All right, we're starting in the gutter and heading straight down to the sewer. Let's try to pull out. "Newsweek"'s behind-the-scenes look at the Kerry campaign includes numerous shots at Teresa Heinz Kerry taken by members of Senator Kerry's staff. Now, this tells us something important, not about Mrs. Kerry, who is a national treasure, but, rather, tells us something important about the people stabbing Teresa in the back. After all, it wasn't Teresa who convinced John Kerry not to attack George W. Bush for months while Mr. Bush hammered Kerry every day. It was Senator Kerry's staff.
And it wasn't Teresa who refused to allow Democrats to attack Republicans at the Democratic Convention. It was Senator Kerry's staff. And it wasn't Teresa who refused to give Senator Kerry a clear, focused message.
Democrats believe that President Bush's victory could truly be calamitous for the country that we love. So what's saddening, no, make that sickening, is that some of the people responsible for that calamity are such low-class weasels, they're attacking their boss' wife. If they were as adept at running a campaign as they are at running down Mrs. Heinz Kerry, they would be planning for the Kerry inaugural right now. Shame on them.
(APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: I think that's -- I think that's a good point.
What does it tell you? Step back just two steps here. What does it tell you about John Kerry that he inspires such disloyalty that people are talking to "Newsweek"? No one ever did that Bill Clinton, I will say.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: And I also will say that that "Newsweek" piece...
BEGALA: Loyalty is a puzzle. President Reagan was a very successful president.
(BELL RINGING)
BEGALA: Yet, many of his people were very disloyal. So I'm not quite sure why that is.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: However, Paul, that piece also, and his own staff describes him as completely unable to make a basic decision. His own staff makes it sound like you're glad you didn't elect him president.
BEGALA: I'm pretty skeptical about a lot of those attacks in there.
CARLSON: All right.
Well, almost no one in the Democratic Party emerged from this year's presidential campaign with his reputation enhanced. John Kerry limps back to the Senate defeated and embarrassed. John Edwards is unemployed. Poor Dennis Kucinich seems even odder now than he did when he first ran.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: In fact, the only real winner on the left may be Al Sharpton, who is more widely respected today than he has ever been. Sharpton's new mission is to prevent the Democratic Party from continuing to take black voters for granted, as they do. And it won't be easy.
As a first step, Sharpton's political director, a smart and impressive loyal named Marjorie Harris, is running for vice chair of the Democratic National Committee. And already she faces opposition from the same Washington-based politburo the brought Democrats three ignominious defeats in a row, the same group that loves diversity, as long as it's imposed on other people and not them.
Here's the real problem. Sharpton and Marjorie Harris actually believe in something. And to Washington Democrats, there is nothing more terrifying than that.
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: I don't know Marjorie Harris, but...
CARLSON: Well, she's a person of principle.
BEGALA: But you make a good point about Sharpton, believe it or not. As you know, I started -- when Sharpton started his campaign, I was one of the biggest skeptics. Probably the meanest interview I ever did with anybody on this show was with Reverend Sharpton.
CARLSON: That's true.
BEGALA: And yet, by the end of it, he did impress me with his clarity, with -- he conducted himself with great dignity. And I -- you're right. He served our party very, very well.
(CROSSTALK)
(BELL RINGING)
CARLSON: Will they give him a seat at the table?
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: I haven't the slightest idea who this woman is or who should be the vice chairman of the party or something. But you're right about Sharpton. He did a very good job in the debates.
CARLSON: And I hope they paid attention.
BEGALA: He has a lot to stay. I hope he comes back here and says more on our air.
CARLSON: I hope he runs the Democratic Party from here until forever.
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: Colin Powell says it's time for him to leave. What in the world will Democrats say about that? What can they say? We'll debate Powell's effectiveness and a look at who should replace him as the nation's chief diplomat.
And, later, one of our co-hosts finally loses control on live television. You knew it would happen. We have been waiting for years to see it. We have the tape.
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)
(APPLAUSE)
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Colin Powell heads up the long list of Cabinet resignations announced by the White House today. So who is on the short list for candidates to replace the secretary of state and what will it mean for American foreign policy?
To answer those questions, we're joined from London Jamie Rubin, an assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration, and also Congressman David Dreier of California.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Jamie, good to see you by satellite.
Congressman Dreier, welcome back, Mr. Chairman, also chairman of the Rules Committee, an important and powerful job.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Colin Powell, every American, and certainly, I think, Democrats I know admire his patriotism, his service to our country, those many years in the military. But I will have to say, as he leaves, he disgraced himself on February 5,2003, when he went to the United Nations, spoke for all Americans, made 17 charges, none of which panned out.
He said that Iraq had biological weapons -- they didn't -- 25,000 liters of anthrax -- they didn't -- mobile biological weapons labs -- they didn't -- unmanned aerial vehicles with chemical-biological capacity -- they didn't -- 500 tons of chemical agents, chemical warheads. On and on, he went, falsehood after falsehood. (CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Didn't he disgrace himself and our country?
REP. DAVID DREIER (R), CALIFORNIA: The answer is absolutely not.
Frankly, I think that it is very clear to me that the questions remain about weapons of mass destruction out there. People are still talking about the prospect of them having been moved to another country. And I do believe that -- we're going to get into this in the second segment, when we talk about the CIA -- I do think that it's very important for us to enhance our intelligence-gathering capability. And, obviously, we want to get to the bottom of this.
But, Colin Powell -- I will tell you something, Paul. Colin Powell is clearly one of the, if not the most, one the most respected people in America. And we have a wide range of Cabinet members who are leaving. And this is standard operating procedure at the end of a four-year term, that people do leave.
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: And I think the American people owe a debt of gratitude to Colin Powell and to all these other Cabinet members who worked so hard.
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: We do. But I think we also owe an obligation to the truth.
DREIER: Of course we do.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Secretary Powell went to the United Nations and he helped...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Let me ask the question.
He helped lead America into a war. Eighteen months later, are you still suggesting that there are weapons of mass destruction there? And, if so, what are you drinking and where can I get a case of it?
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
DREIER: Yes, well, I'm drinking CNN water.
BEGALA: Because that's...
DREIER: I didn't suggest that there were. I said that there are still questions.
Let me say this. I think it's very, very important for us to realize that, if you look at the plan in Iraq, we've gone through a really difficult time in Falluja. But I think that we've had great success. One of my great friends, Colonel Mike Shupp, is leading the command there in Falluja. And we get regular e-mails from him. And it's going very, very well.
We are going to see elections take place in Iraq. And that's coming about because of the fact that we have strengthened our resolve and we've put together this broad international coalition. And the Iraqis are, in fact, taking over.
CARLSON: Now, Jamie Rubin, thanks for joining us, by the way.
JAMIE RUBIN, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Thank you.
CARLSON: No matter how you feel about the war in Iraq, I think Paul is right. More than any other person, apart from President Bush himself, Colin Powell got us into that war, which, if you support it, is a good thing. If you don't support it, like most Democrats, it's a bad thing.
And yet, you said this morning, echoing a lot of Democrats -- this is this morning on CNN -- you described Colin Powell as a man of candor, of wisdom, integrity, as a voice of caution and prudence and, again, wisdom.
So, if you're opposed to the war and you think it was reckless and mistaken, how in the world can you be so effusive in your praise of a man who is largely responsible for us being in that war?
RUBIN: Well, I said he was candid because he was one of the few Republicans this summer who admitted that things in Iraq weren't going well.
Few members of the administration -- President Bush was telling us everything was going fine; freedom was on the march. I said he had integrity because, unlike Vice President Cheney, unlike Donald Rumsfeld, when he had to present intelligence information, he threw a lot of it out, the very information that Vice President Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld were happy to put out there. That showed some integrity.
Wisdom. I said he was wise because he advised the president, if you go into Iraq, that means, you break it, you own it.
The only thing that Colin Powell wasn't was effective. His arguments never won the day. He was on the short end of the stick on Iraq. He was on the short end of the stick on North Korea. He was on the short end of the stick on the Middle East.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: So he was all the things I said, but he just wasn't effective.
(APPLAUSE) DREIER: Jamie, how you possibly conclude, how you possibly conclude that Colin Powell as secretary of state has not been effective, not only in Iraq, but if you look at our relationship -- as he pointed out today, our relationship with the People's Republic of China, the struggle between India and Pakistan, the developments that we've made, the great strides we've made in the war in terrorism, working with General Musharraf in Pakistan, there are so many areas where we've had Colin Powell's leadership pay off for us.
(APPLAUSE)
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Hold on. Jamie, Rubin, I'm sorry. Let me just make you -- force you to answer this question. Hold on.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: I would really like to answer that. Please let me answer that question.
It's very simple. Whether it's Colin Powell's fault or George Bush's fault, one simple indicator of the success of the secretary of state is America's standing in the world. When he took office, we were the most respected and supported country in the world, by governments, by peoples all over the planet. Today, there has never been a time when America has been so disrespected and so many countries and so many peoples have questions about our policies.
That's a simple calculus. It's an inarguable fact. Whether it's his fault or George Bush's fault, America's standing is low.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: The most important gauge of success, Jamie, is the security of the United States of America. And that's what this president, this secretary of the state have put as the top priority.
BEGALA: But, Congressman, what does it say about the president's lack of faith...
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: Excuse me, Jamie. Let me -- let me put this question to Congressman Dreier.
(CROSSTALK)
RUBIN: I didn't say it wasn't the most secure. I said the job of the secretary of state is diplomacy.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: What does it say about the president's lack of faith in Colin Powell that he told a Saudi Arabian sheik, a prince from Saudi Arabia, we were going to war before we told Colin Powell?
DREIER: Well, listen, I don't know that that -- we've had reports about that. I will tell you that Colin Powell...
BEGALA: ... Bob Woodward's book.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: ... pretty accurate.
DREIER: I know that. I know that.
But I will tell you that this secretary of state and this president worked very closely together. And Colin Powell has done a phenomenal job, I believe, as secretary of state.
BEGALA: But if he wore one of those big robes and had one of those funny goatees, do you think he would have...
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: Paul, I don't know about the communication and exactly what took place exactly at what point.
BEGALA: OK.
DREIER: I mean, I think Colin Powell knew all along what we were doing.
BEGALA: We're going to have to take a quick break.
Jamie, stay with us from London and Congressman Dreier here in our Washington studios.
And coming up, with a new report documenting that terrorists are trying to get a nuclear bomb, why are so many of the CIA's top people leaving?
And who's using Taser guns against children in South Florida? Wolf Blitzer has more on this very disturbing story next.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer.
Coming up at the top of the hour, Colin Powell, he's bowing out as the secretary of state. We'll tell you who may succeed him.
Police use Taser gun to subdue criminals. But Florida parents want to know, why are police using them on children?
And a controversial pop star is at it again. You'll want to hear what Madonna is saying now.
All those stories, much more, only minutes away on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."
Now back to CROSSFIRE.
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
The new head of the CIA, Porter Goss, is in the process of making some major changes at the nation's spy agency. While everyone agrees the changes are in order, there is disagreement over whether Goss is making things better or worse.
Our guests today are former assistant Secretary of State Jamie Rubin -- he's in London -- and California Congressman David Dreier, who is here with us on the set at the George Washington University in Washington.
DREIER: Glad to be here.
CARLSON: Jamie Rubin, Democrats have been calling -- with some justification, it seems to me -- for a while that there are major problems at the CIA. We knew that. September 11 proved it.
Now we've seen some resignations and they're whining that things are out of control. Don't we need a reshuffling at the CIA?
RUBIN: Yes, I think what Democrats have been calling for is not a reshuffling of the chairs on the Titanic, but restructuring of our intelligence agencies, so that the Department of Defense's intelligence community, the other intelligence agencies are all under the control of a national intelligence director.
Porter Goss is not that person. He doesn't have that power. The Bush administration has refused to give that power to the new national intelligence director. That's why this bill was held up. What Porter Goss brings to the table, unfortunately, is a little bit too much politics for many of the CIA officials who have been around a long time.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Hold on.
Let me -- Jamie, you know that that's pretty outrageous thing to say. Actually, Porter Goss is not very partisan, as you know.
But isn't the problem -- isn't the problem here that there's a long-going battle between lifers at the CIA and the White House? And isn't that itself a problem? You've served in government. The CIA is supposed to serve at the pleasure of the president. And there's a certain insubordinance. And, actually, it's a problem from the way the executive branch works when you see the CIA or any executive branch organization like that trying to undercut the White House.
Isn't that bad for America, no matter who the president is?
RUBIN: Well, let me answer that directly. First of all, Porter Goes spent a lot of time attacking John Kerry when he was running for president. He was a very political chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
DREIER: He was a Republican member of Congress.
RUBIN: So he does bring a big politics piece to the -- no, but it -- and he came under some scrutiny during his confirmation hearings for those statements.
As far as your question is concerned, Tucker, I agree with you. There is a longstanding for many years now feeling in the CIA that their views have not been taken seriously. And conservatives like you liked that when it was the Democratic administration and the CIA officials were leaking to the Republicans on the Hill that the Democrats weren't doing the job. That's just the way Washington works. And the Republicans ought to learn to live with it.
BEGALA: Congressman Dreier, let me suggest that this is not at all an effort to get better intelligence, that the president believes the intelligent he was getting from the old regime was very good.
Let me call to the witness stand George W. Bush.
Mr. President, how is the intelligence you're getting?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let me first say that, you know, I think the intelligence I get is darn good intelligence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BEGALA: Why this purge?
Well, "Newsday" reported yesterday the White House has ordered the new CIA director, Porter Goes, to purge the agency of officers believed to have been disloyal to President George W. Bush or of leaking damaging information to the media about the conduct of the war in Iraq and the hunt for Osama bin Laden. That's why they're doing this. This is a political purge, isn't it?
DREIER: Paul, I've served with Porter Goss for nearly 20 years. He -- just before he went over, he was -- as well as being chairman of the Intelligence Committee, he was vice chairman of the Rules Committee.
And I've spent a lot of time with him focusing on a wide range of areas in the world when he was in the Congress. And one of the interesting things is, exactly what he's been pursuing right now, making sure that we no longer are risk-averse, focusing on human intelligence, these issues are issues which he was discussing with me years ago.
And he's basically carrying forward the plans that he has had in discussion for reform of the Central Intelligence Agency. And we know right now, the blatant politicization of the CIA with the attack...
BEGALA: Under President Bush.
DREIER: Yes, the attacks against President Bush that emanated from the CIA, you know, the strong supporters of the Kerry campaign who are politicizing the CIA, those are the kinds of people who I believe should be out.
BEGALA: That's the last word from Congressman David Dreier, Republican of California.
Jamie Rubin, former State Department spokesman...
RUBIN: That's politicization.
BEGALA: From London, thank you both very much for a spirited debate.
(CROSSTALK)
(APPLAUSE)
BEGALA: Well, my old pal James Carville has done it again. We'll show you his latest post-election egg-travaganza -- get it, egg- travaganza? -- right after this.
Stay with us.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CARLSON: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.
Our co-host and friend James Carville is well-known for taking the Election Day woes, the many Election Day woes, of his beloved Democratic Party very hard.
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: Two years ago, when the Democrats flopped in the midterm elections, James took to wearing a trash can on his head on the air, much to the delight of all of us, particularly me.
So, when John Kerry lost to President Bush, we knew it was only a matter of time. This weekend, the wait was over.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "MEET THE PRESS")
TIM RUSSERT, NBC WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Oh, I see.
JAMES CARVILLE, CO-HOST: You know what I say...
(LAUGHTER)
MARY MATALIN, BUSH CAMPAIGN ADVISER: Oh, my God. (LAUGHTER)
RUSSERT: I don't believe this.
CARVILLE: I've got egg on my face. It was a bad prediction.
MATALIN: I love this man.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARLSON: It's brunch at the Carvilles' house...
(CROSSTALK)
CARLSON: ... any time.
BEGALA: Yes, well, apparently -- apparently, it helps make the hair grow, too. So...
(LAUGHTER)
CARLSON: It's not working.
BEGALA: From the left, I am Paul Begala. That's it for CROSSFIRE.
CARLSON: And from the right, I'm Tucker Carlson. Join us again tomorrow for yet more CROSSFIRE.
"WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" starts right now. Have a great night.
(APPLAUSE)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
