Transcript for May 28

MR. IGNATIUS: Well, I thought there was some of both. It was, it was, it was telling, two years on that the president looks back and he’s willing to talk, finally, about, about mistakes. In this case, they were mistakes of language. You can say, you know, Abu Ghraib was a mistake, but, frankly, you know, the administration’s response still has not been a vigorous one in terms of holding people account for what happened at, at Abu Ghraib. It’s been the, been the military.

You know, I, I thought that, that Tony Blair’s response to that question was much more substantive. Tony Blair said the problem was that our deBathification effort was too aggressive, that we, that we toppled the basic foundations of this society and we created a vacuum and we haven’t known how to, how to, how to fill it.

But, you know, listening to this discussion of past mistakes, it was a reminder that the past and what you know about it really is not a guide to the future. I mean, the dilemmas going forward in Iraq are as painful today as they, as they were two years ago. Looking at those two men, I thought Tony, Tony Blair looked, looked battered, the British prime minister, Bush less so, but you realized the weight of the decisions they still face.

MR. RUSSERT: Kate O’Beirne, we still have a situation of 135,000 American men and women on the ground. Will the president be forced to acknowledge more misjudgments about WMD, about troop levels, about insurrection in order to maintain public support for the war amongst Democrats, conservatives, liberals, Republicans, mainliners, moderates, whatever you want to call them?

MS. O’BEIRNE: I think there’s a recognition at the White House, Tim, that being candid about mistakes in the past appears to be more realistic. People maybe are more open to listening to your assessment of how things are going now if they, if they see that sort of sense of being realistic.

I thought it was notable during the press conference with Tony Blair that, rather than talk about all the possibilities with this new government or how many Iraqi forces are now standing up, Tony Blair was emphasizing the course of not winning in Iraq. And I, I think that the public is more open to hearing that than updates on progress on the ground when they don’t see a concrete progress—meaning, it seems to me, withdrawing troops, or at least a scheduled withdrawal of troops, capturing Zarqawi. In the absence of that kind of concrete evidence, I don’t think the public is open to assessments week by week that they have no way of judging. I think there’s just more candor involved when, in lieu of that, you’re admitting past mistakes and reminding people of the course of failure and how resolute the enemy is. And I thought Tony Blair and the president both made clear we’ve got to be equally resolute. I think the public’s more receptive to that.

MR. RUSSERT: Eugene:

MR. ROBINSON: You know, the, the difference in tone is really amazing when, when you go from “Mission accomplished” and “Bring it on” to, to the way the president sounds now. And if you put this together with, with other things he said recently, it all seems to be an acknowledgment that, you know, not only is Iraq not the, the Athenian democracy it was supposed to be, but, in fact, this is going to be a messy situation for a long time beyond his term in office. There’s no easy resolution, there’s no easy answer. And there’s a—he seems to be looking ahead, you know, toward the verdict of history.

MR. RUSSERT: Enter Iran. The new Prime Minister Maliki sat down with Richard Engel this week, of NBC News, and said, “Iraq will not be used as a base for any military operations against Iran.” That is not what we’re here for.

David Ignatius, you wrote an interesting column where you said, and I’ll read it, “Amid all the debate about intelligence, there has been surprisingly little focus on the question the average citizen (and average policymaker, too) would probably have at the top of the list: Will these guys get it wrong again? Will they tell the world that something is a ‘slam-dunk,’ only to discover later that it didn’t exist? ...

“So how can [Director of National Intelligence John] Negroponte ... be sure the analysts are getting it right this time on Iran? How can they remake the analysts’ world so that their human judgment is again ‘the intelligence device supreme,’ in the words of their patron saint, Sherman Kent, who headed CIA analysis during the Cold War?” Big challenge. Will the world, will the country listen to an American president saying, “Iran is dangerous. We must do something”?

MR. IGNATIUS: Well, that’s obviously the biggest nightmare that anyone in the intelligence community could have, that the country will so fundamentally have lost trust in their judgments that when they warn of, of a real crisis, they won’t be believed. We have a new CIA director, Michael Hayden, who was confirmed this week, who’s going after the agency with a mission of restoring morale, of trying to do analysis in a different way, much more careful look at sourcing, much more transparency so that analysts know who these sources, who typically have been hidden from their view, are. Much more competition and really argument about, about hypotheses for what’s going on. So they’re going at Iran in a, in a different way.

On the Maliki comments about Iran, where he says, “We will not allow Iraq to be used as a base for attacks on Iran,” you know, obviously that, that would worry Americans who’d hoped that Iraq would be an aircraft carrier for us in the Middle East. But, you know, this is an assertion of Iraqi sovereignty and independence, and that should not frighten Americans. Quite the opposite, that’s actually good news.

MR. RUSSERT: We have 20 seconds, David. Senator Hagel calling on the president to negotiate directly with the Iranians.

MR. BRODER: I think that’s questionable, because we have committed to the Europeans that we would work with them. For us to go off on our own now would leave them in a—wondering can the Americans keep their own commitments to us?

MR. RUSSERT: To be continued. David Broder, David Ignatius, Gene Robinson, Kate O’Beirne, thanks very much.

Coming next, our MEET THE PRESS MINUTE with former vice presidential candidate, treasury secretary and U.S. senator from Texas, the late Lloyd Bentsen.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT: And we are back. Former U.S. senator of Texas, Democratic vice presidential candidate, and Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen died this week at the age of 85. During his long career, he appeared on MEET THE PRESS 18 times. This 1994 appearance with NRA chief Wayne LaPierre stands out for what Mr. Bentsen brought to the MEET THE PRESS table. Let’s watch.

(Videotape, May 1, 1994):

MR. RUSSERT: We’re back with the secretary of the treasury, Lloyd Bentsen.

Mr. Secretary, you heard Mr. LaPierre’s challenge. Will you go to the range on Wednesday and experiment with his guns?

SEC’Y LLOYD BENTSEN: I tell you, that’s funny, because I went to the range this last week and fired some of those guns. Let me give you an example. When I heard him say that these were not used in crime, that’s a street sweeper, 156 instances in the last three years this gun involved in crime.

And I was amused to hear that I’m not supposed to know anything about the guns. I’ve had guns all my life. I qualified as an expert on the range in the military. I went to the front lines and fired guns in World War II. I fired .50-calibers. In addition to that, I flew 35 missions over Europe. I’m also a quail hunter. Can you imagine that thing being used in...

MR. RUSSERT: Is that Dan Quayle?

SEC’Y BENTSEN: No, no, no.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: That reference, of course, to what The Washington Post called “the perfect put-down.” Mr. Bentsen’s famous exchange with Dan Quayle during the vice presidential debate, October 5, 1988.

(Videotape, October 5, 1988):

SEN. DAN QUAYLE: I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration if that unfortunate event would ever occur.

MODERATOR: Senator Bentsen:

SEN. LLOYD BENTSEN: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy.

Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.

(End videotape)

MR. RUSSERT: Lloyd Bentsen will be laid to rest this Tuesday in Houston, Texas. He and his family are in our thoughts and prayers.

And we’ll be right back.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT: Every American president since John F. Kennedy has been a guest on this program during his political career. Now, you can watch complete episodes of some of the most historic MEET THE PRESS presidential appearances: John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. “Meet the Presidents,” and other NBC News programming now available on iTunes. For more information and a preview of what’s available, check out our Web site mtp.msnbc.com.

That’s all for today. We’ll be back next week. If it’s Sunday, it’s MEET THE PRESS.

And this weekend we honor all those brave young men and women in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the world, and we remember all those in our nation’s history who’ve paid the ultimate sacrifice so we all could be free.

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

Nov. 29: Rick Warren, Bill & Melinda Gates Nov. 22: Senate roundtable, Brinker, Snyderman Nov. 15: Clinton, Duncan, Gingrich, Sharpton Nov. 8: Casey, Barbour, Rendell, roundtable, Brokaw Nov. 1: Tim Geithner, David Plouffe, roundtable Oct. 25: Cornyn, Schumer, Burnett, Sorkin, roundtable Oct. 18: Jarrett, Dodd, Kyl, Shriver, Podesta Oct. 11: Levin, Graham, McCaffrey, Myers, roundtable Oct. 4: Ambassador Susan Rice, roundtable Sept. 27: Bill Clinton, Paterson, Kyl, Webb Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: