>> i am mark halperin. >> i am john heilemann. "with all due respect." ♪ >> happy national blonde brownie day, sports fans. bibi, bandages, and balls. jeb bush and mitt romney are set to meet awkwardly in utah. among those most instructed -- interested, rand paul, who just fired off a series of tweets

mocking jeb and mitt. when it comes to the two, we have no idea what they will be talking about, but it is hard to imagine they will be able to avoid the elephant in the room the fact they want the same job. which of them has the stronger argument for talking the other out of running? >> the easy answer is to say romney has the weaker argument. he ran last time. republicans have not been impressed with his flirtation. they same it -- say mitt can't win. there is an alternative. romney has done it before. people can deride that. jeb bush has quietly done a great job. romney can still argue, i've done it. jeb can't prove what i've done. >> i will ask you later in this exchange which of those arguments you believe. i think the argument against

romney running is much stronger. i know jim bush is rusty. i know he will have trouble getting through the republican nomination, but mitt romney got shellacked in 2012. for all of the reasons he was beaten in 2012, none of the things that kept him from winning has he done anything to fix, including his problem with hispanics. what is your actual answer? >> my actual answer is the tie is broken by this poor rollout. the romney people have conceded to us it hasn't been great. it hasn't improved either. you can imagine a world in which romney did not unveil this in a room with rich people in manhattan. his speech at the rnc meeting was pretty good, and there was a message, but republicans, even the ones intrigued, or not pleased with how it has gone. jeb has the stronger argument. >> i like it when we agree. benjamin netanyahu is coming to washington to address congress. usually president obama would also sit down with the visiting head of state, but this time, no meeting.

the white house says it is too close to the israeli election. the question is whether the white house will exact some kind of revenge on either the republicans in congress forearm netanyahu. from my point of view, i don't know what they could actually do other than not consult john boehner on something. they don't consult him anyway. the relationship with netanyahu is already so bad. there is hard to imagine anything that they could do. the white house can moan about this, but i'm not sure if there is anything they can or will do to seek retribution. >> this relationship with netanyahu and obama has been filled with a history of low points. i think this might be the lowest point.

there are some of the elements most notably the failure to notify the white house, that make this a horrible thing. my gut lately has been that netanyahu would win reelection. the white house, i think they should seek some retribution. i don't know what they could do. this is a huge slap in the face. i can't think of a parallel to this that an american parallel that president has faced. it is 211. if you are the president, from the point of view of sovereignty and decorum, it is a slap in the face. >> a lot of people around netanyahu has said obama hasn't been nice, and there is probably some truth to that. boy, this is a pretty provocative thing to do. i think it's going to be hard for them to have any moral high

ground in saying, why is this relationship bad, going forward. harry reid has had a couple of very bad awful months. he lost his job as senate majority leader in november. this month, he injured himself during exercise. today, still wearing a bandage on his eye, reid made his first appearance at a press conference since his injury. >> it was so minor. i was doing exercises i've been doing for many years with those large rubber bands, and one of them broke and a spun me around. i crashed into these cabinets. it didn't knock me out, but it sure hurt. i have a better understanding of football players and baseball players who have concussions. at this stage, i am fully intending to run. >> it is hard not to see the metaphor, a battered minority leader for a crippled minority. the question is whether and how he might rehabilitate his caucus and keep it relative in the next two years. >> the haters on the left are going to hate when i say this,

but the way is for reid to start making deals with the president and mcconnell. if they are an obstructionist party, if they critique the republican efforts, i don't think they will be particularly relevant. i think there is a possibility of leveraging the president's veto pen, that harry reid could work with mcconnell on some stuff that is going to move. >> i think they are going to be relative in the minute to -- minimum sense that there are going to be some vetoes president obama is going to sign, and those folks will have

to uphold those vetoes. beyond that, i think the minority in the senate and barack obama can work together to put republicans in a bad place headed into 2016. in the annals of the empire state of corruption, there was an added chapter today that makes the activities of tammany hall kuwait. the new york assembly speaker was booked on federal corruption charges. improper payments, improper tax breaks, funneling money to improper people. going to dollars in bribes and such. is this good news or bad news, and should the rest of the country care?

i know you care. explain why the rest of us should. >> there are people in new york who have never heard of sheldon silver. fellow americans, this is awesome. whether he is guilty of what he is being charged up, this is a guy who has been one of the most negative forces in one of the biggest aids in the country. he has been part of a culture of secrecy and special interests. the fact that this guy is being held to account for this kind of insider dealing is fantastic and -- fantastic. >> good news for democracy. irrelevant for the rest of the country. mark halperin, you sound like an insider. >> it is not irrelevant. that the u.s. attorney going after public corruption. there is -- r sheldon silvers in every state in the union. they've got their own north dakota sheldon silver. his name is not sheldon. >> this morning, the nfl's version of richard nixon bill belichick held a press conference to tell the press he

didn't know anything about the patriots to fleeting footfalls. tom brady said, quote, i did not alter the footfall in any way. >> can you answer right now, is tom brady a cheater? >> i don't believe so. i feel like i have always played within the rules. i believe in fair play, and i respect the league and everything they are doing. i have no knowledge of anything. i have no knowledge of any wrongdoing. yeah, i'm very comfortable saying that. nobody did it, as far as i know. >> you were quoted as saying you like throwing a deflated ball. explain that comment in this context. >> i obviously read that i said that. i like it the way i like them. 12.5. that is a perfect grip. >> i've got to ask you. to you think there is any possible reason to think that phil belichick and tom brady are not lying their faces off? >> i don't know anything, i

don't know everything, it's kind of confusing. maybe they are telling the truth. i'm amazed at what it's come to regarding the nfl and a team that has a history of cheating. if you go on twitter and our control room, nobody believes these guys. it's incredible that they could walk out, have joint, sequential press conferences, and lie. it's incredible. >> i never want to believe anything bad about tom brady he seems like a nice guy. bill belichick has a history of lying. tom brady says, things are going to be fine. this isn't isis. if that isn't a guy who is trying to shadow the truth, i don't know what does. >> every time something goes wrong, i'm going to say, this isn't isis. >> set your tv to southern drawl, because haley barbour is here. we will be right back. ♪

>> our guest tonight is haley barbour, former republican national committee chairman and governor of mississippi. governor, great to see you. the last few days have been filled with talk about the

possibility that governor jeb bush and former governor mitt romney might both run for the public and presidential nomination. what do you think that would do to your party? would that be a good thing, or would that be a destructive thing if both of them decide to get in? >> i think it would be destructive, but i'm not so sure it is going to happen. both of them are talking like they might run. i think it is more likely bush will run than romney will run. if they both run, it is going to be a large field anyway. it is going to be a high-quality field, particularly compared to 2012. have governors with real records of accomplishment. it will be a field where there is no true front runner. whatever happens between romney

or bush, i think it will be a large, high-quality field. >> jeb bush gets in and raises the money he's talking about. why wouldn't he be a true front runner? >> we didn't really have a true front runner in 2012. you could see how hard it was for romney to put away the nomination. every candidate got to try on the cinderella slipper at one point. most every single candidate at one time or another lead in the polls. i don't think that you can claim there is going to be a front runner this time when you look at this field. there are a bunch of people who start off with real bases of support from which they can grow. >> governor, i'm curious what you think is motivating the calls on some people's part for

mitt romney to run. as you know, he did not fare very well in 2008, and by many measures, 2012. what are republicans thinking? >> i can't answer that. i am not pretty to those conversations. >> what would you say is the rationale for a romney candidacy? >> i am not privy to that either. >> can you make one up? i have heard you talk about jeb bush and chris christie. >> the mitt romney would have made a great president. he would have been an enormous improvement over barack obama, and many republicans thought he was going to win. >> with all due respect, what with the rationale be this time? >> you've got a very large field, and maybe somebody thinks it is such a large field somebody who loses a couple of times before starts off with some advantage. i don't see that, but again, it is a decision for mitt to make. he is a good man. he would make great president. whether or not he should try for a third time is something you would have to ask somebody other than me about. >> you don't seem wildly

enthusiastic about it. is that fair to say? >> well, when you've been around this business a long time, it reminds you of some of the great truths you were taught. my old granddaddy used to say, you don't learn much from the second kick of the mule. >> i want to play a little soundbite of mitt romney talking about his economic message on friday at the rnc meeting. >> the only policies that will reach into the hearts of the american people and pull people out of poverty and break the cycle of poverty are republican principles, conservative principles. family formation, education, good jobs. we are going to bring them to the american people and finally and the scourge of poverty. >> do you think that is a

message if mitt romney were to build a campaign around that would be an appealing message? >> it has the advantage of being the truth. if we can go back to the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility, strong families, lower taxes less spending, rational regulation, peace through strength, the rule of law, these are the kinds of things tied to what governor romney said, and i think those are the things that would help our country get back the exceptionalism the three of us grew up with event has been missing. >> do you think governor romney would be a suitable messenger for someone who is running on a platform focused on the question of ending poverty? does he make a possible messenger? >> if you talk about the republican candidate for 2016, whoever that is is going to be a candidate who talks to the american people about how we can have more economic growth in our country. this has been the weakest

recovery from a recession since world war ii. the american people feel like the economy is finally getting better, but for most of the obama administration, you couldn't tell the difference between recession and recovery. while it has been great for main street, -- i mean, great for wall street, it hasn't been good for main street. >> if someone is a republican and they want the most electable candidate, the candidate most likely to beat hillary clinton how do they tell which one it is? >> we have a long way to go, and they are going to get a chance to look at these candidates, men and women, people from dr. ben carson who hasn't been elected to anything to people who have served very well as governors, senators, whatever. we will get to hear them a lot see them a lot, see how they develop. i would submit to you, in january of 1979, ronald reagan wasn't the candidate that he was in the fall of 1980.

that is going to be true about these candidates, as well, but they almost all start off with real records of achievement. look at john kasich. here is a guy who was chairman of the budget committee with the first balanced budget in a generation. the left attacked him and said it couldn't be done in seven years. it was done in three. he has been governor of ohio got reelected 64%-30 3% in the quintessential swing state in america. you could make a case for others. >> is governor kasich your candidate? >> i don't have a candidate and won't for quite some time. these are people that are friends of mine that i know well. the point it was going to make was, scott walker, chris christie, rick perry, bobby jindal. you could go through this list. mike pence, mike huckabee -- they've all got stories like john kasich, a different subject matter perhaps, different starting place perhaps.

jeb bush, a tremendous conservative governor of florida with a great record of achievement. this field is going to give something for people to vote for. >> you are a great political handicapper. among all the people you've just named, can you tell us you think are the likeliest three republican nominees in 2016? >> anybody that looks you in the eye and tells you they can do that will lie to you about other things, and i'm not going to do that. i'm going to tell you the truth. i don't know. there are several people here who have real starting places. there is no true front runner. i think we are going to see a lot happen before we really can tell who is likely to be in the top tier and who is likely not to be. >> governor, your friend chris christie has a lot of strengths & weaknesses as a potential residential candidate.

he has a history sometimes of dealing with hecklers in an aggressive way. i would like you to fill in the blank on this sentence. if chris christie told blank to shut up and sit down, his chances of president would be eliminated. [laughter] >> i can't fill in the blank. there are a lot of people who need to be told that. when i think about chris christie, people respect him for telling the truth. he is a straight shooter, and of course, some people who've got accents like i do maybe think that jersey boy has to be cautious. the fact is, when he comes down south, when he goes to the midwest, he's extremely well received. people like him. they think he is refreshing. >> what you put in that blank

the pope? would that be disqualifying? [laughter] >> don't ask a presbyterian something like that. >> governor haley barbour, thank you for doing this. we will be right back. ♪

>> george pataki rocked the political world today with a new super pac, and its name is "we the people, not washington." that may seem like a strange odd, tactical thing, but as matt negra and explains, if you are going to start a super pac, the name is the thing. >> first of all, congratulations on your new super pac. raising a super pac is like raising a child. it won't be successful unless you come up with a good name.

there are lots of super pac's out there, and unfortunately most of the good names haven't taken, like americans for our future cor -- future. step one, keep it simple stupid. use words that a four-year-old might use. words like liberty and now. what you know? that is a real super pac, too. step number two, be vague. remember, the goal is to raise money, and money doesn't care what you think. isn't that right, money? step three, america. you are not legally required to use the word america, but it never hurts. take a look at these examples. america tomorrow. now that you know how to do it

let's give it a try. here are some words that would be great for your super pac. try rearranging them. remember, there is no wrong way. let's say you are afraid that obamacare is shredding the constitution. you might call your super pac "americans for constitutional justice now." what if you are concerned about immigration? move a few words around, and you get "freedom and justice in america now." worried about stem cell research or fracking? how about "constitutional american liberty now"? do any of these names describe what your super pac will do? absolutely not. that is kind of the point. good luck with your super pac, whatever you come up with. [laughter] >> we will be right back. ♪

>> you're only with you have to lower day, but we are live on bloombergpolitics.com. >> check it out. mike bender has a piece on jeb

bush's maneuvering around washington. coming up on bloomberg radio bloomberg law. we will see you back here, same time, same channel. ♪

♪ ♪ >> he is an uncommon breed in the world of enterprise technology. aaron levie is known for his colorful sneakers, his magic tricks and ironic tweets. but there is no underestimating his ambition to dominate business. he started building websites when he was 13, and met the kids who would become his cofounders in middle school. but unlike places like facebook and twitter where early infighting is legend, all four cofounders still work there a de