>> this week on political capital -- we debate the cia versus diane feinstein. vernon silver reports on the pope. we begin with two of the smartest political minds. john sununu. the president has to get off the sidelines.

>> the administration wants this information declassified. this is about an investigation that resulted from the enhanced interrogations that this president has stopped. i have worked closely with john brennan. he has made strong declarative statements here. i believe he is speaking true. they will work this out. for the american public, they get caught up in the nsa thing and it is a murky story. but it is in everybody's interest to bring this to a close.

>> the administration is giving the cia veto power. why not release the senate studies? the panetta review? put it out next week. >> ultimately having all that information out is useful. >> you think it will all come out? >> eventually. >> it all comes out eventually. >> your point is a good one. trying to get ahead of this, very soon, will be important. >> the president is not doing this. i don't think he can. this is where lame-duck status makes a difference. he doesn't have the authority within his own party to step in and shape where diane feinstein is headed. i think director brennan does not have a lot of credibility among those same senators. there is division in the senate on this issue. this has got to be worked through. he does have the confidence of his republican senators. senator feinstein has been a strong leader of the committee.

>> a supporter of the cia. >> that puts her in as good a position as anyone in the senate. director brennan has to participate and come to some accommodation. >> whatever we think about the senate -- there is accountability. we give the cia latitude because they are accountable. the senate intelligence committee is the oversight committee. >> this is a question of making sure they have access to the documents needed to conduct an independent investigation. it has to do with the cia and the agency, allowing them to do that in an unfettered way. not obstructing it and appearing to obstruct it. when they looked at the data logs, the computers, they raised suspicion and undermined their own credibility. >> the acting counsel is the one that referred to what he referred to as misconduct.

isn't that a conflict of interest? >> i think it is. again, the staff misconduct, how did they handle the documents? did they take a document even though it was leon panetta's assessment? this is a document that is central to the investigation. whether that was done or not, it is understandable -- that is going to happen anyway. >> let me circle back to you, david. you say the president wants this out. john brennan is an honest and forthright guy. but what gives? he doesn't want stuff out. >> as the other guest talked about, there may have been some occupants that might not have

been -- it is in everybody's interest to move past the episode and move on. diane feinstein -- the people believe in what the cia does. this doesn't help anybody. >> let's switch to florida. many democrats thought you were going to win the special election. not by much. you lost. that is a harbinger for the year? >> i don't think this is an obamacare problem. we have a turnout issue. the same problems that affected us in 2010 and we have had tougher off years than presidential years. the problem is bad turnout. >> we have a bunch of red states

like louisiana and arkansas where you have minority populations. we have to work overtime on turnout. the candidates are going to have to do a good job. >> there were 25,000 fewer votes in this election than 2010. but are the republicans doing what the democrats are doing? they are portraying it as a mona lisa? >> you can see where the trend was going. we sat here and david said, the republicans will run on obamacare and will not be successful. agreed, we want a broader message than just obamacare, but

this election was about obamacare. >> he prevailed against the democrat that was more widely known. >> you should offer a more broad message. we can and should offer different alternatives for improving access to health care. this is an indication that the issue will drive the elections and it is a loser for democrats. the president does not have any clout in an off year. >> you thought democrats should embrace obamacare. >> they are not going to embrace it now. this swing voter handled herself fine. the problem was turnout. we have elections, 2006 and 2010.

what was different? republicans have terrible numbers. in 94, they were seen as a safe alternative. right now, both parties are not held in high regard. at the end of the day, those conditions -- we are playing a lot of away games. to win the senate, the republicans have to have a clean sweep. i'm not a believer in colorado. udall is strong. this is a huge warning for our democratic campaign. that turnout will be harder than they thought. >> we have another eight months to revisit this. thank you so much. ♪

>> welcome back. we are joined by bloomberg's john. john, let's start with ukraine. crimea votes to lie with russia on sunday. will they pay a price? >> not enough to do what they want to do. that is the question. ukraine is gone. >> ukraine or crimea?

>> probably ukraine. crimea is already gone. the next question is the cities in eastern ukraine. that is what the u.s. intelligence people are watching right now. a lot of russian forces on the border. putin talking about the government being illegitimate. >> is there any way for him to get to an off ramp? >> there are a lot of off ramps. but i don't know anybody that thinks he is going to take one. >> this is not going to stop. >> there is no way to stop it. no way for the west to stop it. that is what encourages putin. >> let me turn to the cia versus congress. give me a portrait of john brennan.

>> he is a longtime officer. he was involved in the bush administration's war on terror at the cia, before the white house. he is deeply involved in what most people call torture. not just the cia, but the obama's refusal to give up documents to the senate about what happened during the bush administration. that is one of the things diane feinstein is concerned about. not just the agency but the current white house. >> whether it was in the 70's or barry goldwater, the cia -- when they take on congress, usually they do not win. >> we are giving our age away talking about barry goldwater.

they almost always lose. they lost in the 1970's. big-time. with the church committee, the pike committee. they cannot win this one either, whatever the truth is. congress has the power of the purse. >> edward snowden. the controversies over the drones. is the intelligence agency a rogue elephant? >> it has to be. what they do is by definition not exactly legal. you don't want people to know about it. did they go too far and lie to congress? how credible is the oversight? is this agency really does it really answer to its overseers in congress? or has it been lying to them and hiding stuff from them?

>> julianna, has obama and edward snowden -- they cannot keep stonewalling. >> they are treading so lightly. you can sense their frustrations. what about the timing? they say, you will have to ask her. they made a point of telling reporters at the press briefing, you might be asking about this, but of the 41 questions, there was just one on this issue. >> this is the first time i have seen the -- >> it depends on how you ask the question. let's take health care. if you are a likely voter, and you favor repealing obamacare, you're more likely to vote. but only 30 some percent favor

repealing it. >> how about looking ahead to the elections? >> there are more likely voters for republicans. the good news for democrats, looking up to 2016, hillary clinton is the strongest candidate out there. chris christie has been hurt by bridgegate. >> he had a guest. who was it? >> barack obama. this is the last month to sign up for health care. they need young people to balance out the risk pool. if you look at the numbers in february, the pace of young

people declined. this is something they have been encouraged to do for months. at one point, the funny or die website was the single biggest driver to healthcare.gov. >> let's take a look. >> what did you come here to plug? >> i wouldn't be here if i didn't have something to plug. healthcare.gov works great now. >> was that impromptu or rehearsed? >> so much was ad-libbed. the writers went back and forth on the script. there was a whole page that said, zach jokes tbd. the white house is giddy it is beating justin bieber.

>> even if i called him nick, if you want to reach young people, you have to go where young people are. coming back, the pope's first year. ♪

>> welcome back. we will go to phil mattingly. but first, we will discuss the pope one year later. you were in st. peter's square a year ago when they announced that the new pope -- did you have any sense that he would become a rock star? >> expectations were so low. he started out his remarks in a monotone, saying my dear brothers and sisters. he took a beat and then smiled. he said good evening, like a "how you doing."

from that moment, the expectations were he would be different. it has turned out that way. >> he has not changed the doctrine, but he is changing emphasis. he is a reformer. >> is he going to do stuff about doctrine on gay issues? child abuse? hot button issues? he can't change that. those are church issues. but establishing a financial ministry for the vatican -- these are real internal governance changes that he is doing. that has substance. >> in america, every american is

riding his coattails. barack obama will visit. john boehner is inviting him to address congress. >> is a blank slate for people. he can be the issue people want him to be. it if you want to help the poor, he is there for you. if you want to have dialogue across different religions, he has that. he has something for the traditionalists. he can't back down on a lot of that stuff. everybody that he meets is going to find something in him they can latch onto that supports their agendas. >> he may be the most captivating man on the planet. thank you very much. we will talk about him again. we are turning to something i would call almost sleazy. it is not uncommon for rich interets to higher rich -- hire lobbyists.

he had a $1 billion bet that the firm herbalife would go under. he hired big democrats. there's something unseemly about this. >> he is following a traditional advocacy playbook. you see big interests, big trade groups do this. you have never seen one man with a big bet in place take on one company and start pulling the levers in washington. the question becomes, is this a paradigm shift? will we see short-sellers do this all over the place? >> whether they are good or bad, they sell supplements. we will see. the question is -- these rich guys, an obama fundraiser. the democrats are the ones with dirty hands. he is paying people to destroy the company.

>> his perspective is the company is hurting people. the problem is, he is paying and running up interest groups to do his bidding. this is his money and his firm's money. he benefits from it. he benefits if the ftc finishes the investigation and finds out they are an illegitimate company. >> he is a guy that makes a lot of money, not a guy that has worried a lot about poor people. his billion dollars would seem to matter more than his compassion. >> he plays the game to win. not for charity. he doesn't put these bets on because it is fun. he puts these bets on to win. >> members of congress who gave speeches against herbalife -- i have no idea whether it is good or bad -- these were written by this guy and his cronies.

>> this is interesting. we have seen this for years where trade groups have their policy experts right legislation or letters. they give them to congressional staff and get their lawmakers or buses to sign off on them. again, a bigger and broader issue. this is one individual with a bet on. he had lobbyists that were connected. lawmakers responding. if you didn't think money and politics was a problem, this certainly raises one. >> is not just an interest group. a guy who stands to make $1 billion. whatever he does with that, his clients will make a lot of money. i think it takes the sleazy money race to a new level. phil mattingly, you covered it beautifully.

thank you for watching. we will see what you next week. >> political capital is a production bloomberg television. ♪ . .

>> we are finding it, we are testing it, we are there as they build it. we are on a quest to show you the most cutting-edge companies on the brink of the future. >> tonight, i will step into a tinkerer's paradise. techshop is democratizing invention. >> techshop changes the nature of the innovation process. >> i will get a taste of the miracle berry with an all-star chef who is taking on obesity. what you are basically describing is eliminating sugar. >> and i will take local motor'' crowd-source rally fighter off-roading in the desert. >> "bloomberg brink." ♪ companies that break the mold, convention, boundaries. ♪