>> production assistance for "iide washington" s provided by allbritton communications and politico, reporting on the legislative, executive, and political arena. >> i think the public is so far beyond that. >> this week on "inside washington," the super pac flat. the return of the fast exit of jeremiah wright. >> i repudiate that effort. >> jpmorgan chase's multimillion-dollar slip op.

>> you cannot have the fox guarding the hen house. >> we are back to debating the debt limit again. guess who came to speak at georgetown university's graduation? the catholic bishops are not pleased. >> i cannot understand georgetown university. >> i think that is silly. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> this super pac business made the case of be careful what you asked for. thursday, "the new york times" ran a story detailing the proposal tied to a republican super pac that would have tied president obama to his old spiritual adviser and political nemesis, the rev. jeremiah wright. it was submitted by strategist

fredavis. it never r. joe ricketts, founder of td ameritrade and the owner of the cubs, who "the new york times" said paid $10 million to finance the campaign, walked away from it. romney said at first he had not seen the store, and later he said this. >> i want to make it very clear, i repudiate that effort. it is the wrong course for a pac or campaign. i hope that our campaigns can be about the future and issues and a vision for america. i have been disappointed in the president's campaign to date, which as been focused on character assassination. we are wiser to talk about issues of today, what to do to get america working again. >> he is talking about the obama ad painting bain capital as top

killers. -- job killers. >> it is reflective of the influence that super pacs have. they are spending more than political parties. this was an act of greed on the part of the proposers and stability, because the idea of running on -- against president obama on his association with rev. right, which did not turn out to be an issue in 2008 -- to make it an issue in 2012 is analogous to a decision by the money a campaign -- mondale campaign to run against ronald reagan as a warm lockne -- were among corporat -- warmonger. reverend wright has not been an

issue this first four years, it is not going to be an issue. it just feeds of those who despise obama. >> charles? >> it is an example ofhe utter hypocrisy of the mainstream press. it is ok pour "the washington post" to run 5000 words on the front page about a prank romney did when he was a teenager, and yet it is and out of balance to talk about obama's association as an adult with a racist demagogue who married him, baptized his kids, and he referred to as a spiritual mentor. no greater hypocrisy. >> nina? >> i am surprised tt you, charles. this is an example of why when you don't have people who are accountable to you, they can hurt you. that is what happened here. in the case of "the washington

post," you could take or leave the story, and most people left it, including on this show. this really, i think, did hurt romney did not for a long time, but there will be other campaigns like this, certainly from republicans, who raised a lot more money than democrats, and obably frodemocrats, who will get into the super pac business. and we won't know who paid for them, and they will be reprehensible. it is a ruxton reflection of what has happened to a democratic system. >> colby? >> from the point of view of the people who prepared that ad common mission accomplished. if you had not seen it, unless you know what is in it -- i found it ironic that mitt romney was taking the high road,

saying, "i repudiate this," given that in february, he went on the hannity show ended the same thing th -- and did the same thing this d did. >> why is wright off limits? >> he is not off-limits, but he is not relevant anymore. talking about 9/11, somehow the united states was involved, are reprehensible speech in many ways, but, you know, barack obama ordered the killing of osama bin laden. how is this relevant? >> you used the word "reprehensible," in connection with the idea of running an ad about jeremiah wright. it is not at all off limits. tactically, i guess a mistake, and romney is right not to do it

-- it is a mistake, and romney is right not to do it. he doesn't need to. today, obama has a record. you run against his record. he is not a mystery. but the idea that somehow it is off limits or reprehensible as chirac procuracy on the part of the press -- is sheer hypocrisy on the part of the press. >> the reality is that this was not dropped by the press in 2008. it was a central issue which dominated theampaign for close to a week and led to president obama -- then-candidate obama -- giving the most watched the speech of his generation did reverend wright had many shownts, on bill moyers' and many other venues, and john mccain to his credit said that

this was something we would not approach. >> there was a steady drumbeat from rush limbaugh, sean hannity, saying that obama has not been properly vented, we need to explore this reverend wright's story. they were beating the drum to no avail. but they achieved their end by getting the name back in the press. i attended church with a pastor . there were things about him that we found an issue with. he married me and my wife we have been married for over 50 years. there are things that are said in church that would make your hair curl, but you don't go to the church because of what the pastor said.

it is because of the association you have with that church. you can do because of sunday school. to suggest that this guy take a was crazy. >> to suggest that he dropped in occasially -- himself referred to jeremiah wright as a spiritual mentor. it is not a casual association. that is not relevant in looking at a candidate, then nothing is. >> whose campaign is moving in the appropriate direction? >>, romney -- >> forget the paching. >> romney has not changed a bit. he is the same dull, stolid guy has always been paid his numbers are better. mark pointed out during the

break that is personal approval is up. the primaries have ended and he is not being knocked over the head week after week after week. obama in the winter was the beneficiary of a slight uptk in the economy, which might have been a false dawn of another race looks as if it is completely neck-and-ne. -- right now the race looks like it is completely neck-and-neck. >> president obama was on "the view" of those women and his numbers with women look pretty good. --comi romney is out with women. > -- up with women. >> this is hardly an indication of where they will be at the end. >> is will be the most negative

can paint any of us will remember -- negative campaign any of us will remember ted they are beating the blank out of each other. it is not going to be fun. >> let'sj ssay i am an independent voter. why do i vote for barack obama or mitt romney? >> the vote for psident is the most personal vote any of us cast as citizens. you have an information overload. it is no accident that the candidate who is better liked has won the last five presidential elections, and in 2008, we had two candidates who were very well liked, more than any in history, mccain and obama. better than 2-1 favorable going in t. nina is right, we're starting

this camign with the both of them marginally positive. john white catholic university had a good proposition did have a chase between the candidat -- they have a choice between the candidate they white, who they think is not up to handling the most important issue, the economy, versus the candidate dathey don't like particularly who they think would better handle it. >> what tips the balance, col? >> the way it they to define each other. the obama campaign is going after romney on bain capital, because they think that it will show that he is not the successful businessman he claims to bee. there will be a big discussion over that issue. it is the kind of profit during

that romney engaged in. -- profiteering that romney engaged in. getting good returns for his investment did involve fire and some people and shutting down companies. that was the nature of the game he was playing, and he played it well. >> you asked, mark, if you are an independent, or give me a positive reason. i think it could be decided on the negative reasons. the ad on bain is meant to say that he is on caring. -- uncaring. the romney campaign is running ads in which he says he is incompetent. competence against caring is the theme. >> jpmorgan is one of the best managed banks there is.

jimmy diamond is one of the smartest bankers did -- -jamie dimon is one of the smartest bankers we of got rid they still lost $2 billion in accounting. this is whyeassewalter for. >> -- wall street reform. >> smart guy, knows what he's doing. paul krugman says "this is an odd demonstration of white wall street needs to be regulated." do you agree, colby? >> n o. i don't agree on this particular reason. every year without fail some bank gets into trouble because trading losses. but until those losses occurred, the activity is making a lot of money for the bank. along the way, some of its over- aggressive and they -- someone

gets it over-aggressive and they get into trouble. that you cannot regulate trade you will need this kind of trading that is fast paced. you trust the judgment of individuals doing it and somebody gets over-aggressive and you have this trouble. >> the volcker rule has not really been enacted -- with that have stopped it? >> it is two years since they passed this and they still have not enacted it. it is not that complicated. call me old fashioned, but when i put money in the bank -- i.t. is not supposed to be to just play with it. i put money in the bank to be safe. >> how do you do that -- a kind of interest -- >> lousy interest, but it is insured. national capital bank of

washington -- >> oh. >> free checking for you. >> i get free checking, thank you. that aftermazed 2008, what this country went through, nobody has stood for justice publicly in this country. this administration, three years in office, has not brought any of the malefactors of battle and the loss of wealth -- this is 8 little thing. $25 billion in the standing of the company is gone as of this moment. this is not -- what the volcker rule would do -- the bank can

only trade to increase the interest in profit of that depositor, as nina spoke to, not to play games with. >> was the risky business? >> i suggest that at the corner wal atl broad street, the guillotine should be set up and it should be named after shields, the shields guillotined. let me give you one fact, that jpmorgan for this quarter will have a profit of $5 billion, meang ov the year of about $20 billion. this is a loss of $2 billion, $3 billion, up $4 billion, which for you and me would be a lot of money. in terms of what is happening in the financial world, it is could drop in the bucket. . am with colby on this st would you -- the you allow

proprietary trading are not -- if you banned it, fine pri. but there is no way that regulating is going to stop a bad trade. >> something called glass- steagall -- >> we eliminated that and now commercial banks perform the same function that investment banks perform. >> during the clinton administration. >> the clinton administration pushed this. it was a mistake. i've said this many times on this show. as far as the loss of $2 billion or $4 billion, charles is right. the people who take the hit from this is shareholders, not taxpayers. >> let's revisit the debt limit issue, something we've talked about here, what, 30, 40 times? >> a fire of debt is sweeping

across iowa and the nation, and every day that we fail to act, that gets closer to the homes and the children will love. >> my simple principle of cuts and reforms is greater than the debt limit increase. this is the only avenue i see rit now to force the elected leadership of this country to solve our structural, fiscal and bounds. -- inbalance. >> the united states is expected to -- we had the debate this summer and i bet we will have it again this summer. voters will really enjoyed the debate this time around, nina. >> i am like the voters, i am not going to enjoy it at all. the plan in he hse has bee rejected even by republicans in the senate. we are playing with fire here. i wish i thought both sides could sit down and do a grand bargain, but there seems to be a

very little indication that the republicans in the house, or a substantial number of them, want to make the kinds of compromises that are necessary. sure there are democrats and the senate that don't want to, too, but that is what is holding this back. what you see is a faction, a serious, big faction, of republicans preventing a grand bargain. i am afraid there will be a grand bargain this time. -- wont' be a grand bargain this time. >> voters are for expenditures and the economy. that is basically where they corpora -- are. in general economy, the specific expenditures. yes, we have tout, but the exception is what affects me.

what surprised me is john boehner going public. this was a searing, scalding moment for the republicans, and they have not rrecovered in the public opinion polls since last summer, when they took the blame for the deadlock and the united states losing their credit rating. i am surprised that he would even mention this. he is too good politician and too smart and savvy to ise this again. >> is the country in danger of another downgrade, charles? >> no, but if we reelect obama, we will have a downgrade, probably a default -- well, not a real default, but we will head that way, because you cannot sustain trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see tra. if romney wins, this is a moot issue.

there will not be a showdown. if obama wins, it will also be a moot issue, because with the expiration of the bush tax cuts, the payroll tax cut, tsunami of increases and spending. i think that the reason john boehner raised it is to make it an issue, a rhetorical issue. it will only happen after election day. >> colby? >> i agree that he is trying to make the deficit an issue. but people look at the question of greece. they are heading in that direction because of the spending. it is out because of those issues that we are heading in the direction of -- not because of those issues that we are heading in the direction of greece. the inability of leadership to address problems that are well known and right in front of them -- the gridlock you see any

greece is also the political gridlock we have in the united states, and to try to put this on the face of obama is ludicrous. we know what has happened, and the republicans are never going to agree to anything that will allow a compromise. >> democrats had control of the house, senate, the presidency for two years, did nothing on entitlements -- >> how can you -- >> nothing on tax reform to that is killing us economically and destroying our treasury. unless you get leadership on that, you get nowhere. >> the structure of the republican party cannot get anything done. >> the republicans run on the paul ryan budget, they would be committing an act of political self demolition. it is that unpopular tra. >> what they are doing is not

consistent with what they say they are, and it is shocking that they would abandon reality. >> she is obviously a very intelligt, powerful woman. i think her political views should not be a reason not to have her speak. >> kathleen sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, has been invited to t a ton university, and the bishops are not happy about that, mark. why not? >> the bishops are opposed, a, to the affordable care act, and to the provision that would providfor ntraception coverage. at the same time, what seems to be overlooked is that this brings health care to those with disabilities, those without health insurance, and children,

the elderly, destitute. that seems to have been missed in the debate. >> sebelius is also pro-choice. >> absolutely. but this is a university and universities are supposed to have a diversity of ews. god bless the president of the university, who has stood up for the principal. the catholic church can do whatever it wants. it is a jesuit institution, but if it wants to be respected university, it cannot be shutting out people because they don't agree with them all the time. >> secretary sebelius has spoken at howard university, george washington university, this would not be an issue at all. this is a catholic university.

it is between the cardinals and the university, and the cardinals to exercise some kind of authority. >> the cardinals say it is about freedom of religion. >> interesting to hear nina said that universities ought to respect a wide diversity of views. that would be news in harvard, yale, and georgetown. e view that catholic charities have to provide contraception is opposed by the catholic church. >> last word. see you next week.