|
SCHIEFFER: And we're back now with Howard Dean, the chairman of the
Democratic National Committee.
Mr. Dean, welcome. Let me ask you something. We talked a lot about Iran and
the threat that it poses to the United States in the interview we just had
with the secretary. What would you do if the administration came to the
American people and said, `There's no other way. We think they've got a
nuclear weapon and we're going to have to take military action.' What would
the Democratic response to that be?
Mr. HOWARD DEAN (Chairman, Democratic National Convention): First, I'd be
amazed because this president I think has been weak on defense, not strong.
He's been in the White House for five years. We have nuclear weapons in North
Korea, nothing's been done about it; making little progress in Iraq, it's been
five years sending our troops abroad with no body armor; misleading the
American people about why we're in Iraq; on and on it goes. I have long
thought and said publicly that this president sent us to Iraq without
justification because the real problem is Iran.
Iran is a terrorist government. We cannot permit them to have nuclear weapons
under any circumstances. The president has said, properly so, that no option
can be taken off the table, and I think that's true.
SCHIEFFER: Elisabeth:
Ms. BUMILLER: Let me go to politics, domestic politics. Senator Chris Dodd
told The New York Times last week that the Democrats seemed to be losing their
voice when it comes to the basic things that people worry about. I mean,
you're the chairman of the party, do you agree with that assessment?
Mr. DEAN: It's certainly not true. I can tell you--I can tell you what our
agenda is for the '06 elections, which we have agreed to go with Senator Reid,
Leader Pelosi and others. One, we want honesty and openness back in
government again. Two, we want a strong national defense, first of all, based
on telling the truth to our citizens and our soldiers before we send troops
abroad to defend America. Three, we want American jobs that will stay in
America using energy independence as a new industry to create millions of
construction and manufacturing jobs. Four, we want a health-care system that
works for everybody, just like 36 other countries have in the world. And,
five, we want a strong public education system so we can have optimism and
opportunity back in America. I think that's a pretty good agenda, and I think
it's one that can win it for us in '06.
Ms. BUMILLER: Do--do you think you've had trouble getting traction on this
agenda?
Mr. DEAN: Nope.
Ms. BUMILLER: I mean, do--I mean, there seems to be a lot of dismay in the
party about its ability to, you know...
Mr. DEAN: Well, I don't think one senator's dismay qualifies dismay in the
party.
Ms. BUMILLER: Well, I think there's more than one.
Mr. DEAN: Well, there may be some, but I think, you know, Senator Reid has
worked hard inside his caucus to get agreement on this agenda. We've for the
first time in a long time had mayors, governors, the Congress and the House
and the DNC all sitting at the same table. We think this is a real agenda for
change.
We're going to win a majority in the House and maybe the Senate if we are the
party of change, and that's what we need to be. We do not need to behave like
the Republicans. We need to be very clear that we want fundamental election
reform and ethics reform. That we're going to turn around our posture on
defense and really be vigorous about the real problems which are North Korea
and Iran and strategically redeploy our troops so they're out of harm's way in
Iraq. We need to reverse the downslide that's happened to this country under
President Bush, and we will.
SCHIEFFER: The chairman of the Republican National Committee, your
counterpart, and the vice president say they believe that this election ought
to be about national security. The vice president suggested last week that
the debate over eavesdropping should be a political issue, basically, in the
coming election. In other words, he said, `We need to put this on the table.
We're trying to protect America, and the Democrats don't seem to understand
that.'
Mr. DEAN: Bob, as you know, there was testimony this week leaked from the
grand jury that it may be the vice president that leaked security information
in a time of war in order to discredit political opponents. I don't think the
vice president has any credibility on national security whatsoever, and I
think he's in deep trouble. If it turns out that Scooter Libby, who said this
week that his superiors ordered him to leak the information for political
reasons, then this vice president may not be vice president very much longer.
SCHIEFFER: And just to make sure everyone understands what we're talking
about, this is that leak investigation about who disclosed that--an
administration...
Mr. DEAN: Right.
SCHIEFFER: ...critic Joe Wilson's wife was an undercover operative for...
Mr. DEAN: Right.
SCHIEFFER: ...the Central Intelligence Agency. And just to make sure
everyone understands what we're talking about, this is that leak investigation
about who disclosed that...
Mr. DEAN: Right.
SCHIEFFER: ...an administration critic Joe Wilson's wife...
Mr. DEAN: Right.
SCHIEFFER: ...was an undercover operative for the Central Intelligence
Agency.
Mr. DEAN: President promised two years ago that he would fire the leaker.
He hasn't kept his promise. Karl Rove is not only still working in the White
House, but he has security clearance. Now it turns out that the vice
president of the United States may have been responsible for those leaks for
political reasons. That is the kind of thing that has not been done to my
knowledge since Aaron Burr was vice president.
SCHIEFFER: Well, what's the remedy here? Should--if it turns out that the
vice president was the one who leaked that information. So far there's been
no indictment.
Mr. DEAN: That's correct.
SCHIEFFER: Are you suggesting indictment or would you suggest impeachment as
a recourse?
Mr. DEAN: Well, I would suggest that we find out if it's true or not.
SCHIEFFER: Well, if it is, what?
Mr. DEAN: If it is true, the president can't remain in office.
SCHIEFFER: The vice president.
Mr. DEAN: The vice--excuse me. The vice president cannot remain in office.
If that's true, the vice president cannot remain in office. And it turns out
if what Scooter Libby's testified, that his superior--and he has only one. If
you're the chief of staff to somebody, that is your superior. Scooter Libby
testified to the Grand Jury that his superior ordered him or suggested that he
leak the information to the press in order to discredit one of their political
opponents, if that happened in a time of war, that--the vice president cannot
sit in the office he now occupies.
Ms. BUMILLER: What does that mean specifically? Are you asking him to step
down? Or are you saying there should...
Mr. DEAN: I'm saying we need find out first if this is true or not. This is
an allegation that was made to the Grand Jury.
Ms. BUMILLER: But what course of action are you recommending here? I to
having the vice president step down or moving toward indictment?
Mr. DEAN: The first course of action I recommend is that we find out if this
is true or not. Because I don't recommend not--I'm not going to recommend a
course of action.
SCHIEFFER: Right. Well, let's...
Mr. DEAN: But if it is true, then the president has to step aside.
SCHIEFFER: What--would you favor an impeachment proceeding?
Mr. DEAN: I think that's getting a little far down the road. I think first
we have to find out if it's true. It's been alleged by Scooter Libby
that--who has been indicted for leaking information, that his superiors
ordered him to leak that information. If that's true--his superior is Vice
President Cheney. If that is true, Vice President Cheney cannot remain in
office.
Ms. BUMILLER: Mr. Dean, let me ask you about Ken Mehlman, the chairman of
the Republican Party, said last week that Hillary Clinton was angry and--too
angry, and that Americans will not elect an angry candidate. What do you say
to that?
Mr. DEAN: Well, first of all I generally don't talk about 2008 because I
have to be the referee in that race and if I say anything about one of them
I've got to say something...
Ms. BUMILLER: Wait, we're just talking about what Mr. Mehlman said. We're
not talking...
Mr. DEAN: I'm going to get to that in a minute.
Ms. BUMILLER: OK.
Mr. DEAN: So I'm going to leave the question of Senator Clinton's remarks
aside. If I recall, Senator Clinton said something to the effect that this
was the worst presidency we've seen. Now, the facts are that they've bungled
the response to Katrina, and they--and there's more evidence now the president
misled the nation about that as well, because this week we see evidence that,
in fact, as he told the American people, he--the opposite of what he told the
American people. He did, in fact, know how bad it was because the White House
was told the night before. He misled the American people about Iraq.
Ms. BUMILLER: But let me just...
Mr. DEAN: He misled the American people about the cost of the drug benefits
for seniors and made a mess of that. What has this president done right?
Ms. BUMILLER: Let me just try to get you to talk about Mrs. Clinton.
What--how do you react to...
Mr. DEAN: Well, I'm not going to talk about Senator Clinton. She's running
for re-election in 2008.
Ms. BUMILLER: Do you think she's too angry? Do you agree with Mr. Mehlman?
Mr. DEAN: She--I said I'm not going to talk about the 2008 race. What I do
agree is that Senator Clinton has said a number of things about the president
which are true and which Mr. Mehlman finds inconvenient because the
president's list of accomplishments is incredibly short.
SCHIEFFER: Governor, time flies when you're on a Sunday talk show.
Mr. DEAN: Yes, it does.
SCHIEFFER: We're out of time. Thank you very much.
Mr. DEAN: Thank you.
SCHIEFFER: Back with a final word in just a minute.
SCHIEFFER: Finally today, I now declare I know all I need to know about the
government bumbling after Hurricane Katrina. When I tuned in to those Senate
hearings Friday, I realized it is now the hypocrisy that is at flood level,
and the wind speed, forget it. There was old Brownie, the former FEMA chief
who became the face of government ineptitude. Now he tells us it was everyone
else's fault. He says he called the White House early to warn it was going to
be bad, talked to the president. Well, check that, he's not really sure the
president was on the line. Give me a break. You called the White House and
you're not quite sure you're talking to the president?
Then there are the Democrats. They blistered old Brownie when the levees
broke, especially after the president said he was doing a heck of a job. But
now old Brownie is blaming higher-ups, so the Democrats are portraying him as
some kind of victim. Give me another break, please. I was beginning to
believe one of the Democrats might actually hug old Brownie last Friday.
Here is all we need to know: Old Brownie may or may not be, well, limited,
but here's the larger point, by now we know this was a failure of government
at every level and that the Department of Homeland Security is a monumental
flop, a bureaucracy so huge it's unable to move in spite of itself. FEMA, the
disaster relief agency that Brownie ran, should be removed from homeland
security, and its chief should report directly to the White House. And God
help us if there is a terrorist attack.
That's it for us. We'll see you next week right here.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
