MTP Transcript for April 8, 2007

MR. TODD:  It really is.  This is a genuine three-way race.  It’s stunning that there’s no front-runner.  It’s stunning that Hillary Clinton is not the front-runner.  I mean, I don’t think we’ve stepped back here in Washington and just sort of appreciated this meteoric rise by Obama, this—the steady support that John Edwards has.  You know, John Edwards has, for some reason, is not a—very popular inside the Beltway with sort of the Democratic elite.  But this guy has lived in Iowa for the last, I’d now say, six years.

MR. RUSSERT:  And New Hampshire.

MR. TODD:  And New Hampshire.

MR. RUSSERT:  And Nevada.  And South Carolina.

MR. TODD:  And they’ve got enough money to run a four-state race.  They don’t have enough money if this thing got—gets to February 5^th, and they know that, but they don’t think that this race gets to February 5^th.  Winner of Iowa, it’s probably winner take all.

MR. RUSSERT:  Kate O’Beirne, Hillary Clinton wanted to emerge from this as inevitable.  She was going to lock this nomination up, drive everybody else out, hopefully starve them with money.  That hasn’t happened.

MS. O’BEIRNE:  No, but the campaign veterans I’ve spoken to are more—are more interested in her failure to out-distance Senator Obama than in his incredibly strong showing.  She and her husband have been raising money on a national basis for 16 years, and they’re quite interested to see how much of what she’s raised this quarter is for the primary and how much she can’t spend until later.  George—I mean, the overall amount is not very impressive for somebody like Hillary Clinton, the presumptive front-runner, as you said. George Bush, in 1999, in the first reporting quarter, he had raised $30 million, more than she has, and it was probably smaller amounts per donor than she was able to do.

MR. RUSSERT:  But she has moved over $10 million from her Senate account. She probably has more money than any other candidate right now.

MS. WOODRUFF:  And, Tim, the people you talk to—even though, yes, Obama was almost up with her, everybody you talk to says she is going to be able to continue to raise money.  I have to share with you what Haley Barbour, the governor of Mississippi—Republican—said.  He said, “You look at Hillary Clinton, you look at that machine,” he said, “she can raise more money”—he, he said, she’ll raise enough money to, to beat a mule.  I mean, this is a Mississippi expression.  I’m not sure what it means, but I think it means she’s going to raise a lot of money.

MR. RUSSERT:  On Easter Sunday, I got this.  Before we go, I want to end with this, because it’s quite striking to me.  This was a poll about attitudes towards a Republican candidate, Democratic candidate, generic.  Who would you support?  And let’s look at it.  The Democratic candidate people say 47 percent, that’s who we want.  The Republican candidate, 29 percent.  And yet, when you do the horse race between a specific Republican and a specific Democrat, look at this.  McCain-Clinton, 47-43, the Republican.  We do Giuliani-Clinton, 45-44.  Giuliani-Obama, 43-43.

Chuck Todd.

MR. TODD:  I think I had one Democratic operative from one of the second-tier Democratic candidates, he said, “Could it be that Clinton and Obama are the only two Democrats that can’t win in 2008?” But I think, when you look at this, it does show a weakness in the Republican Party.  Look, every—even blow-off presidential elections are still decided within a margin of eight to 10 points, as far as a national vote’s concerned.  So you’re going to have a case where it’s—whoever the Republican nominee’s always going to be sitting in those mid-40s.  The problem is, for the Republican candidates, that there clearly is a change movement inside with, with sort of swing independent votes, and independents look like they’re going to largely, right now, go Democratic.  Generically...

MR. RUSSERT:  We saw—we saw that in ‘06.  Will we see it in ‘08?

MR. TODD:  ...will be Democratic.

MR. GREGORY:  Well, I think there’s also a carryover of Bush’s strength in the Bush years, which is management of foreign policy and management of the war on terror.  And I think Democrats, one of the reasons they do want to assert themselves on foreign policy, is to persuade voters that we can own this issue and we can be trusted with it.

MS. O’BEIRNE:  Well, by traditional advantage, Republicans have enjoyed the help so much in presidential races, national security.  National security has become a rock.  So I don’t think it’s the advantage it once was.  The Republicans have a real brand problem, brand name problem.  It used to be people thought they might not much like big government, but they can run it. Now they seem to like it fine, but not be able to run it at all.  A Democrat has to be favored in ‘08.

MR. RUSSERT:  No matter who it is?

MS. O’BEIRNE:  I think any Democrat has to be favored in ‘08, yeah.  I think Republicans have a real brand name problem.  It—it’s become a competency problem.  We see a competency primary going on on the GOP side.

MR. GREGORY:  But the Democrats haven’t closed the deal, and I think that’s what you see in that..

MS. O’BEIRNE:  Oh, by no means.

MR. GREGORY:  ...in that first round of voting.

MS. O’BEIRNE:  But I think they’ve got to be favored.

MS. WOODRUFF:  And so much hinges on the war in Iraq.  If there were a dramatic turnaround of some kind that would inevitably take that issue away, that’s something that’s weighing heavily on these Republican candidates.

MR. RUSSERT:  Everybody keeps saying, “We’ll know more in the summer.  We’ll know more in the early fall.” We have to watch the Republican Congress.  How do they react towards their own president?  If they lose patience with Iraq, then all bets are off.

MR. TODD:  You know, there are already Democratic interest groups running ads against Susan Collins, John Sununu, Mitch McConnell, Republicans up in ‘08, senators up in ‘08.  And at some point, you’re right, they’re going to lose patience and they’re, they’re going to stop hanging with the president.

MR. GREGORY:  And after the summer and into the fall, you’ve got another appropriations bill for the war effort that this endgame will come up again.

MR. RUSSERT:  To be continued.

And, Chuck Todd, what’s that rule about don’t trust anybody over 35?

MR. TODD:  Yeah.  Apparently.

MR. RUSSERT:  Happy birthday, old man.

MR. TODD:  Thanks.  I prefer to remember this as the 33^rd anniversary of Hank Aaron becoming the home run king.

MR. RUSSERT:  Amen, amen.  Thank you all.  Coming next, our MEET THE PRESS minute.  Fifty-nine years ago, Whittaker Chambers said on this program Alger Hiss was a Communist.  On Thursday, Hiss’ son and stepson said it’s just not true.  All coming up right here on MEET THE PRESS.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT:  And we are back.

On August 3^rd, 1948, Whittaker Chambers, a Time magazine editor and one-time Soviet agent, appeared voluntarily before the House Un-American Activities Committee and testified that former State Department official Alger Hiss was a Communist.  An outraged Hiss denied the charge.

(Videotape)

MR. ALGER HISS:  I am not and never have been a member of the Communist Party.

(End of videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  He challenged Chambers to repeat it outside the protection of the immunity granted witnesses before the congressional committees.  Chambers did just that on the radio edition of MEET THE PRESS, Friday night, August 27^th, 1948.

(Audiotape, August 27, 1048)

MR. EDWARD FOLLIARD:  Mr.  Chambers, in the hearings on Capital Hill, you said over and over again that you served in the Communist Party with Alger Hiss.  Your remarks down there were privileged.  That is to say, you were protected from lawsuits.  Hiss has now challenged you to make the same charge publicly.  He says that if you do, he will test your veracity by filing a suit for slander or libel.  Are you willing to say now that Alger Hiss is or ever was a Communist?

MR. WHITTAKER CHAMBERS:  Alger Hiss was a Communist and may be now.

MR. FOLLIARD:  Mr.  Chambers, does that mean that you’re now prepared to go into court and answer to a suit for slander or libel?

MR. CHAMBERS:  I do not think that Mr.  Hiss will sue me for slander or libel.

(End of audiotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  Alger Hiss did sue Whittaker Chambers for slander for what he said on MEET THE PRESS.  In a deposition in the case, Mr.  Chambers broadened his allegations and accused Alger Hiss of outright espionage, stealing state and navy documents.  Chambers produced some microfilm documents after hiding them in a hollowed out pumpkin on his Maryland farm.  Because the statute of limitations on espionage had expired, Alger Hiss was indicted on two charges of perjury, accusing him of lying under oath about meetings with Whittaker Chambers and stealing documents.  A first trial ended in a hung jury, but on January 21^st, 1950, Hiss was convicted and sentenced to five years in prison. He served three years and eight months at Lewisburg Penitentiary with time off for good behavior.  Hiss continued to proclaim his innocence right up until his death in 1996 at the age of 92.  His son, Tony Hiss, has made his father’s vindication a focus of his life.  And on Thursday at a New York University symposium about the Hiss case, his stepson, Timothy Hobson, spoke publicly about the case for the first time.

(Videotape)

MR. TIMOTHY HOBSON:  This is the first chance that I’ve had to publicly share my side of the story.  My version of what truth and reality really are.  The bottom line of my story is that I lived with the Hisses from the age of three to the age of 14, when I went to high school.  I was there during all of the years and moments that these alleged incidents of espionage were supposed to have taken place.  I personally know that Chambers was lying in telling the story because he wasn’t there.

(End of videotape)

MR. RUSSERT:  Almost 60 years later, and the debate over Alger Hiss continues.  And we’ll be right back.

(Announcements)

MR. RUSSERT:  Find out who’ll be meeting the press right on your cell phone. Text MTP to 46833, 46833, and receive weekly alerts on Friday afternoon with Sunday’s MEET THE PRESS guest lineup.  That’s all for today.  We’ll be back next week.  If it’s Sunday, it’s MEET THE PRESS.  Happy Easter.

MORE FROM MEET THE PRESS

Meet the Press Section Front

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 Sept. 20: President Obama, Sen. Graham, Rep. Boehner, roundtable Sept. 13: Durbin, Cornyn, Dean, Gingrich, roundtable Sept. 6: Axelrod, roundtable Meet the Press Section Front   Add Meet the Press headlines to your news reader: