or a sensation. any sense of that? >> the big story here, absolute absolutely. whether used as a mop. a ginger head mop. >> we'll have to leave it there. i'm matt miller in for dylan. "hardball" starting right now. so what's the deal? let's play some "hardball." good evening. i'm in for chris matthews tonight. leading off, deal or no deal. all day long there's been word that a deal between president obama and speaker john bane zer boehner is in the works to save the u.s. from default. pub lkly both sides are denying it. it's clear adults on both sides are trying to avoid default.

how do you get to an agreement when pea tae tea parters are saying no deal with tax increases and democrats are saying, no deal without them? we crunched numbers and default would seem to affect almost every american home. also, does michele bachmann have mi have migraines? may be debilitated for days at time or something we would have never mentioned about a male candidate? how did an anti-american terrorist become so trusted by u.s. officials in afghanistan he was allowed close enough to kill seven cia agents? finally, let me finish with a second look at most memorable moment of the week when rupert murdoch's wife wendi supposedly saved him from a pie throwing comedian. call me skeptical but i'm calling it piegate. we start with deal or no deal. the "new york times" reported this afternoon, the obama

administration has informed democratic congressional leaders that president obama and speaker boehner were about to close in on a major deal that would enact substantial spending cuts and seek future revenues through -- the administration on wednesday night notified top members of congress that an agreemd between the president and mr. boehner could be imminent. but white house spokesman jay carney was quick to knock down the story. let's listen. >> the breaking news reports you all have probably received is incorrect. there is no deal. we are not close to a deal. we are obviously -- the president is in discussions with all the leaders of congress, as well as other members, and exploring the possibility of getting the biggest deal possible, which is the position he has held for a long time now, as you know. the fact is that there is no progress to report, but we continue to work on getting the

most significant deficit reduction package possible. >> now, likewise, speaker boehner's spokesman put u statement saying while we're keeping the lines of communication open there is no deal and progress to report. we're focused on the cut, cap and balance bill that passed with bipartisan support and hope the senate will take it up as soon as possible. steve israel of new york is the chairman of the democratic congressional campaign committee. surely he will know. congressman is there a deal that's imminent? >> well, there's no deal, because we're having a hard time negotiating with one side. look, you've got -- i like what you said, michael, there are adults who understand we cannot default, and you have got the gang of six in the senate that is seeking a compromise. mcconnell's seeking a compromise. the president seeking a common sense compromise, and then you've got this small group that is absolutely isolated, about 60 republicans in the house who have already signed a letter saying, under no circumstances will they vote for an increase

in the debt limit, no matter what is in it. they are isolated by themselves, obstructionists. you cannot get to a deal unless you have some somebody to make a deal with and right now these extremist republicans will not even get into a room and negotiate. >> congressman, one of the reports out today says there was as 3ds trillion proposal in the works that would be all cuts and no revenue enhancements. meaning no new taxes. is there any truth to that rumor? >> you know, there are a variety of options circulating. and house democrats agree with the president that at the end of the day, here's what we need. we need a balanced package. you cannot tax your way out of debt. can't cut your way out of debt. you need to grow your way out of debt. a balanced package that fairly increases revenues on people making over $1 million that does involve spending cuts and promotes growth that doesn't hurt the middle class. that's where wla we're insisting on and cannot balance the budget

on the backs of seniors and veterans. if we can get that without hurting middle class, ending medicare and reasonable taxes on the wealthiest we canny void this default. >> relative to increases, would explanation of the bush tax cuts themself be sufficient in your view to fit that piece of the puzzle? >> if you do not extended bush tax cuts, just for people making over $1 million that creates very significant revenue. extending the bush tax cuts, puts $700 billion on the table. democrats have said that should be part of the deal. we're also willing to discuss common sense spending cuts, but at the end of the day, michael, it's unfair to ask somebody in my district, in rhode island, to bear the brunt of this. they might want to send their kids to college. give up pell grants and don't send your kids to college. if you're making over $1

million, you get your tax cut. that's not a deal we could support. >> my question, couldn't the gop declare victory and go home if there were no revenue incruises beyond allowing the bush tax cuts to expire? apparently giving a green light by grover norquist? >> he's back pedaled from what he said just this morning. a sense of how much disarray they're in. them tell us one thing and then do another. grover norquist said what you suggested and with hours he debated himself. grover norquist can't even agree with himself. how can these republicans come to an agreement with us? >> what i'm taking away from you is that the sell is all on the gop side of the aisle and i'm interpreting you have your duck fls a row? is that a fair statement? >> we've said from day one we will produce the votes necessary to pass an extension of the debt ceiling so long as it is balanced, doesn't hurt seniors on medicare, doesn't hurt the middle class, and involved the

right balance of revenue adjustment and spending cuts. and we will provide those votes along those lines. and the american people are with us. look at every single poll it says the same thing. republican, democrat, independents agree with our balanced approach. >> i was going to say according to the latest nbc news/"wall street journal" poll 5 percen58t the president's plan. 36% side with republicans in congress, and their proposal with just cuts to spending and no increase in taxes. and i sense, my day job is one of being talk radio host. i sense a shift just in the last three weeks as more people have come to the recognition that if there's skin in the game from all, it's going to be a salable package. final word from you? >> skin in the game for all is exactly what we have called for. protecting and defending tax loopholes for millionaires and big corporations is what republicans have called for. they need to meet us somewhere.

>> thank you, congressman steve israel. >> thank you. joining me now, "washington post's" chris, author of "the fix". a managing editor also. let's visit this grover norquist issue. i think on tuesday in an interview with your "washington post" editorial board, grover norquist, the man famous for his anti-tax pledge, said that not renewing the bush tax cuts would not violate his pledge. listen to some of that audio released. >> not continuing a tax cut is not technically a tax increase. >> stow does not violate the pledge. >> we wouldn't hold it that way. it would be a very bad thing to do. it would raise taxes from where they are today. >> who don't follow the inside baseball the way you and i eat, drink and sleep it. what is the significance of grover norquist saying that? >> for people who don't know,

grover norquist since 1985 has run a group called americans for tax reform pap d.c.-based group that does a lot of thing. basically, to holded line on no tax increases for republicans. every time someone runs for office, grover and his group get them to sign a pledge essentially saying they will not raise taxes or revenue increases at all. the result of that is, it's been a rite of passage. hard to win a republican primary for house senate, if you don't sign the pledge. your opponent makes an issue out of it. the end game, 240 members of congress, the vast majority, about 95% republican, who have signed it saying we will never vote to increase taxes, or revenue. it's hard to make a deal. look, this is a problem john boehner's running into. hard to make a deal with that number of people on record saying they won't do it. >> it turns this bush tax cut extension into, depends on the definition of "is." one more thing.

today on msnbc, grover backtracked, in an interview with chris jansing from this morning. >> -- wouldn't pass the last test to go to the american people and tell them you just allowed $4 trillion in higher taxes by allowing the 2001, 2003 lower rates to last and tell people that's not a tax increase. it clearly would be a dramatic increase on taxes. so i can be clear. americans for tax reform would oppose any effort to weaken, reduce or not continue the 2001-2003 push tax cuts and, in fact, any changes of taxes should be kept separate from the budget deal. >> okay. so, chris, if i'm a gop member of the house a freb freshman with tea party support. what am i able to do to no incur the wrath of grover norquist? how can i vote on this? >> the question, trying to distinction with a difference or without a difference. it seem hess said not allowing

the bush tax is not technically a violation of the pledge. meaning they couldn't be attacked in a republican primary, for example, of breaking their pledge on taxes. what he said to chris jansing today is, this is bad. we don't think it should happen and americans for no taxes as group doesn't support it. it have a gray area? is not supporting it, same as being in violation of the pledge? that's what i think a lot of republican members are worried about, because, look, we know how campaigns work. go back -- george h.w. bush, read my lips. no new taxes. we know how that turned out. even governors, i'll throw in, worry falling victim poor that same thing and that's why grover norquist retains the amount of hauer he does over the house republican party. >> reading the tea leaves from a distance, seems to me boehner is more inclined to strike a deal than eric cantor. what's the dynamic as you see it now between the two of them?

>> they insist publicly and their aides generally insist privately there is no space. but, michael, you and i both get paid to pay attention to this stuff, on a minute grain or basis, if you look at it, it certainly seems like john bane z boehner wants to do something big. whether he thinks it's important for the country, whether he think it's it's important for his speakership, or just the right thing to do. he seems more incline dod do that. eric cantor has more held back tea party line that there cannot be tax revenue increases. it's just going to be hard. it doesn't mean a deal can't happen if there are no revenue tax increases but i will tell you, you just heard steve israel, nancy pelosi, chuck schumer, harry reid, they're going to howl if there is a deal made in which there are spending cuts in which medicare or social security comes in for cuts and there are no significant tax or

revenue -- meaning, barack obama, not good if you're a democrat running for the house or senate. >> when you say no significant tax increases, you're talking something beyond the expiration of the bush tax cuts? >> i think so. you know -- what's hard about this. >> now you're grover norquist hedging. >> i'm a reporter. i live in the gray area. >> thank you for being here. coming up, what happens if the country goes into default? tea partiers want you to believe it wouldn't be a big deal, that the president's crying wolf, but the reality is much different, and that lies just ahead. you're watching "hardball." only on msnbc. so benny, i'm proud of you. welcome to the 21st century. thank you very much. you're on e-trade. huntin' down stocks, bonds, etfs. oh i love etfs. look at you. why don't you show me your portfolio? i'd love to... i already logged out. oh no, it's easy, actually, to get back... see where it says history? there's a history? yeah, it'll take you right back to the site you were just on.

well the last site... [ british vo ] and now, cycle complete. the male wildebeest returns to propagate the herd. [ animal grunts ] can you forward me this link? [ male announcer ] e-trade. investing unleashed. more trouble for john edwards. forcing him to pay back $2.3

million in federal matching funds. the sec found his 2008 presidential campaign exceeded the amounted of money it was allowed to spend. the latest setback for edwards who was indicted last month after allegedly using campaign funds to cover up and extramarital affair. we'll be right back. we're having mexican tonight, so another pill then? unless we eat later, then pill later? if i get a snack now, pill now? skip the snack, pill later... late dinner, pill now? aghh i've got heartburn in my head. [ male announcer ] stop the madness of treating frequent heartburn. it's simple with prilosec otc. one pill a day. twenty-four hours. zero heartburn. no heartburn in the first place. great. not that long ago, many families were priced out of an overheated housing market. but the times have changed. get the facts at remax.com. it's a great place to see all the listings in thousands of cities and towns. with lots of houses to chose from and down-to-earth prices

the dream of owning a home seems more attainable than ever. find out what an experienced re/max agent can do for you. nobody sells more real estate than re/max. visit remax.com today.

we have to write 80 million chu checks to the americans. benefits and ammunition for our troops fighting wars outside of the united states. there is no plausible way to run a country in the situation for an extended period of time. we're not paying our obligations. it's not feasible. >> welcome back to "hardball" nap was treasury secretary tim geithner on cnbc monday sounding the alarm bell that this country could be in real trouble if the debt ceiling has not been raised by august 2nd. here to talk about what that means for real americans, from reuters, and former under

secretary of the treasury under president george w. bush. mr. secretary, i tend to be a knucklehead. dumb it down for me. what would be the steps you expect will transpire if they can't strike this accord? >> what will happen is, after august 2nd, the government will wake up on the morning of the 3rd and have nowhere near enough cash to pay the bills and will have to leave approximately half of our non-debt related bills unpaid. now, we believe that the debt, of course, will be paid. we don't think there's an issue of likely bond default. but many, many benefit checks and important payments won't be made because there simply won't be enough cash. >> behind closed doors, some prioritization is being done so there's a plan to know who gets paid and who doesn't get paid? >> that's achb issue. everyone assumes the administration will pick the winners and losers. they may decide they don't have the legal authority to do that and allow the bills to be paid in the order they're due and do

it out of cash flow and not their decision. we don't know. >> in the doomsday situation, the u.s. credit would be downgraded. what does that mean? >> the rating agencies put a label on us. we are the best credits in the world. aaa. every other credit is inferior to ours. s&p, one of the three big rating agencies said they're likely to gro down it grade us if we don't come up with a huge deaf ted reduction package which doesn't seem that likely now. there aren't obvious and tremendous near-term consequenceses from that. it's a really bad thing. a harbinger of worst things to come if it happens. >> let me include chris with the second step. the markets would react. what does that mean for individuals? >> a very big question, we don't know what would happen. that's part of the risk. if 2008 has taught us anything, we live in a volatile world and one economic shock, like letting lehman go bankrupt, can have

devastating consequences. i think that jay portrayed what would happen very well. i think you would, if you had the u.s. starting to default on its obligations would you have a downgrade of u.s. government debt. it has been the gold standard for the entire financial system and i think some of this, the consequences, would be first of all, the entire financial system, mutual funds, banks is based on the basis of u.s. treasury being the equivalent of, you know, the very best credit you could have. if that stops being the case, you start having these financial institutions having to do crazy things to their portfolios. >> would not another step be that the cost of borrowing would then go up? trying to understand what this means to someone like me, just a random person, who's trying to sort it out at home. >> for you as a random person, if you have the financial system start to be knocked into disarray, you have a lehman-type situation. the potential of a real global

crisis. the next big deal, jay talked about this in a great piece he published today. where he talked about the other big thing that has to happen in august is the u.s. has to roll over a lot of its debt. the question is, would the borrowing costs go up? would creditors be willing to lend money to the u.s. government knowing that it's not paying all of its obligations? the answer is, probably yes, but probably at a higher cost, and a gain, the consequences for the entire financial system, not just with the u.s. but in the whole global economy are really unpredictable. i do think that looking back to what happened with lehman and the financial crisis and the global recession that that caused is not extreme. >> jay powell, interest rates, presumably they, too, would go up? another part of the doomsday snare dwlee would affect everybody? >> yeah. i think cristea saidwell. interest rates are likely to go up because some buyers go away. rates have to go up. those play out.

if it happens any period of time those play out at a consumers rates, mortgage rates, that sort of thing. i would add in the absence of an actual bond default you're not looking at lehman. the real chaos is in the economy. in people who aren't getting their payments and really significant negative shock to the economy rather than in the markets. >> the other thing, if i could add there, jay, is what we don't know is the unknown unknown. so there are so many dominoes in the world economy that are connected to u.s. treasuries and that are built around a aaa rating for u.s. treasuries and we can't predict the link in the global chain to could break, should the u.s. default. >> should someone who's at home and watching this play itself out, the news is full of reports of what's going on behind closed doors, whether it's the government preparing. whether it's the ratings folks preparing. whether it's wall street preparing. what about a typical american? any level of preparation that they should be undertaking or is this completely out of their hands? jay, you start, and then

cristea, follow up. >> nothing comes to mind. i wouldn't change my investment to things like that. the issue if you're a beneficiary, you may be getting your benefits late. they will be paid, maybe a few days late. there's still a real hope. i talk a lot to people on the hill. there's a lot of hope this will get done to raise the debt creeling in one way or another? >> take money from und ever the mattress? people at home what should they be doing? >> smart people on wall street are moving into cash and people are moving into other currencies they think are more credit worthy. pimco, bill gross says he has a lot of faith in the canadian dollar, for example. >> secretary powell, in the end, are the states getting whacked? >> rates go up, affecting states significantly. more importantly, the federal government won't be able to pay quite a lot of money. one of the things that will get

cut, could get cut, medicaid. they're single biggest expense. the states could be very much a victim of these spending cuts that will have to happen in august if we don't raise the debt ceiling. >> every anticipate on your watch and while you were paying attention in the bush years that there would be such a debate that would ensue about the raising of the debt ceiling? >> i had the job in '93 under bush senior. we had some debt ceiling flights. nothing like this. ours were private behind the scenes hair pulling. principally my hair. nothing like this. there have been escalating episodes of this and it gets worse every time. this has all the earmarks of the worst one so far. >> thank you very much. appreciate you're both being here. >> pleasure. >> thank you. up next, we've heard the debt fight caulked about in band-aids, even jell-o. a new analogy. stick around for the "sideshow."

somewhere in america, there's a doctor who can peer into the future. there's a nurse who can access in an instant every patient's past. and because the whole hospital's working together, there's a family who can breathe easy, right now. somewhere in america, we've already answered some of the nation's toughest healthcare questions. and the over 60,000 people of siemens are ready to do it again. siemens. answers. is now honey nut cheerios! yup, america's favorite. so we're celebrating the honey sweetness,

crunchy oats and... hey! don't forget me!! honey nut cheerios. make it your favorite too! about how older people are becoming more and more antisocial, so i was really aggressive with my parents about joining facebook. my parents are up to 19 friends now? so sad. ♪ i have 687 friends. this is living. what!? that is not a real puppy. that's too small to be a real puppy. [ male announcer ] toyota venza. keep on rolling. ♪ or will soon, you're starting a whole new journey. and, like many people, you're probably wondering,

where do i go from here? consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. call now for a free information kit and guide to medicare to get started. basically, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. a medicare supplement insurance plan helps cover some of those expenses. and that can save you up to thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket costs. plus, you can keep any doctor who accepts medicare patients. together with medicare, an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan could be the kind of coverage you're looking for. in fact, it could make a world of difference. call now for your free medicare guide and information kit about aarp medicare supplement insurance plans, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company.

welcome back to "hardball." now for the "sideshow." first up, what's with all the analogy? as the deadline to reach a deal on the debt ceiling gets closer, president obama offered comparisons to ripping off the band-aids and talking turkey. speaker boehner compared the whole situation with dealing with jell-o. yesterday press secretary jay carney tried a new one. let's listen. >> we need to -- need to talk, consult, narrow down what our options are and figure out in fairly short order urs know, which train we're riding into the station. right now there are multiple trains heading towards the station. it's a decision about which train we'll be riding when we get to the next station? >> the food analogies just weren't working out. next, former campaign manager david plumb is caught dishing out words of wisdom to

the other side. nick heirs for pawlenty recounts what happened when they crossed paths recently. let's listen. >> the most real assessment of what i would be dealing with came from david pluf who pulled me aside at the white house correspondents' dinner and said i want to congratulate you on your job. did a good job in 2010. i can't wish you the best cut can tell what you the next year or two of your life would be like. okay. what's that? a lot of people will tell you your going to have a blast. he said, they're all lying to you. 234is is going to be the worst year of your life. >> i guess he's glad he handed off the ropes to somebody else for this campaign. finally, julianne moore will star as s&p in "game change" about the election campaign claims she'd had a hard time masters palin's alaskan accent. her solution, delete all her

songs from her ipod. >> i erased all music. don't want it on there. >> if that doesn't work, there's always tina fey. up next, michele bachmann's migraines. is it fair to question harry fitness to the president, or is this something we would never have mentioned about male candidate? that's ahead, and you're watching "hardball," only on msnbc. [ male announcer ] this...is the network --

a network of possibilities. in here, the planned combination of at&t and t-mobile would deliver our next generation mobile broadband experience to 55 million more americans, many in small towns and rural communities, giving them a new choice. we'll deliver better service, with thousands of new cell sites... for greater access to all the things you want, whenever you want them. it's the at&t network... and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say.

i'm lampton pearson with your cnbc market wrap -- ishs solid gain ace cross the board. the dow jones industrials soaring 152 points. the s&p 500 surging 17. the nasdaq adding 20 points. investors focusing on strong corporate earnings and upbeat reports on mid-atlantic manufacturing and signs of progress on u.s. and european

debt deals. banks were big gainers for the second day in a row as washington inched closer to ta deal on raising the debt ceiling and cutting the defendant sit. meanwhile, overseas european shares closed it's a two-week high after euro's on leaders gave a response to the debt crisis in greece, and boundsing back in positive territory showing negative growth last month. they liked what they saw from at&t, morgan stanley, nokia and travelers to name a few. microsoft, bet tlaern expected revenue delivered after the closing bell. that's it in cnbc first in business worldwide. now back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." congresswoman michele bachmann is back in the headlines after it was reported earlier this

week she siffers from migraine headaches which at times incapacitated her for days. is this a valid campaign issue or an instance of sexism? joining u.s. to talk more about that and a nasty feud between debbie wasserman schultz and congressman allen west, clarence, i'm trying to think of the analogous situation historically speaking for when the health of someone running for president has been questioned, and i can't quite find it. you know, it's not exactly tom eagleton. a far more extreme set of circumstances. it doesn't feel quite like questions about ronald reagan's age, either. how do you see this in a historical context? >> as long as it's not as questionable as tom eagleton, because he was -- it was revealed he had taken shock treatments for depression, and in those days, that was very scary to many people. the public didn't understand it, and that really resulted in his

dropping out of the race. dropping off the ticket. with michele bachmann, i think all of us have somebody in the family, if not ourselves who suffer from migraine, but that can work for or against her, because many times people will have debilitating migraines that can be so severe they can't work, and questions will be raised as to whether she can handle the job just physiologically. i don't think it's fair. i think -- it is something she's going to have to campaign against. >> alex, to clarence's point, yesterday i solicited calls only from those who suffered from migraines and asked how much of an issue do you think this is? the they feel lines melted down but they were divided. some said i have them, someone in my family has them and they are debill dating and it's an issue. others said i have them, but she can deal with it. how li legitimate is this? >> it is legitimate.

different than say roosevelt living with prap sis. neurological condition. one of the things not serving michele bachmann well is that she isn't being forthcoming with information. we're left to rely on accounts of former staffers who say she's miss add series of votes. out for weeks and days at a time. really curbing her ability to serve as an elected member of congress. the presidency, we've done a great job of den denigrating the importance it. she is the person picking up the red phone in the middle of the night. there is legitimate concern about her ability to serve if she were to be elected, and neurological conditions, there's a lot of mystery around them and sometimes unduly so. in this case, i think being more transparent about it would be -- behoove her. >> on the issue how this get handled politically, clarence, yesterday in iowa, tim pawlenty had this to say about michele bachmann's migraines. >> i don't know enough about her

particular medical situation to comment. i just don't have enough facts on that and certainly would defer to the judgment of the medical professional. but setting that aside, all the candidates i think are going to have to be able to demonstrate they can do all of the job all of the time. all of the job all of the time and on fox news walked it back slightly. here it is. >> i think it's mostly a side show. i've observed congresswoman bachmann, never seen her have a medical condition or impairment that would seem to be a concern. >> it's not something raiseed by political opponents, well, exterior political opponents, and not by the media. these are former staffers who brought this up, and i'm wondering if that somehow legitimizes it, clarence? >> well, whoever brings it up, it is a legitimate issue. it is one that people would namly be concerned about. i'm thinking about john kennedy. we have learned that he was doped up most of the time he was president.

but the word didn't get out nap was different day. nowadays you can't keep secrets like you used to be able to. so i think, pawlenty's second response was smarter than the first. put it that way. other candidates are wise just to stand back and not even give a hint of trying to get some political advantage out of this. >> alex, i don't know that we know the full story of brian ross? >> holding on to that to release it when the rating -- the idea there was a physical kerfuffle, is that the word? i don't know. >> kerfuffle. >> a kerfuffle. you know, sharon angell, pursued by the press, not wanting to deal with it and if not physically putting a reporter in his place. you know, again i don't think this is the tactic you want to use. she should not be on the defensive about this. this is something i think she wants to get ahead of the media

cycle. >> the letter from the attending physician of congress, which the bachmann campaign released in response to the charges. you are overyawall in good general health. your migraines occur infrequently and have known trigger factors of which you are aware and know how to avoid. you have note needed medical attention for me regarding migraines with use of the above mentioned commonly used therony. what caused me to think this was an issue when i found she had three different occasions that were sufficient to put her on her back, so to speak. which necessitated medical treatment. despite what that physician is saying, seems it has been a real issue? >> seems like that, and you know, like alex was saying thshgs can be scary to people wondering what happens in some critical time when we need the president to make a decision and that kind of red telephone scenario is something these got to deal with, but all candidates have to deal with it. i have a feeling if she doesn't

get the nomination or if she gets the nomination and doesn't get "leecelected i think it's g to be for reasons other than that migraines. >> some saying sexism for moammar gadham michele bachmann and this kun involves congressman allan west and debbie wasserman schultz. you know the background on this by now. is sexism an appropriate charge in this case? i. mean, allan west i think took it there calling into question debbie wasserman schultz' ladyship but it bears basically nothing on the argument. from what i understand, wasserman schultz remarks were partisan ted for tat over or the republican position on entitle reform, and the way he volleyed back, accusing her of being a vile member of congress, it seemed really unnecessary, and if we're talking about the general tenor in congress, the last thing we need is people

ratcheting up the rhetoric. >> an excerpt of congressman allen west's e-mail to debbie wasserman schultz which set off the war of words. the most vile, unprofessor and despicable member of the u.s. house of representatives. if you have something to say to me stop being a coward and say it to my face and otherwise, shut the heck up. my view, in the draft, not the word placed there. doesn't it speak to the whole instability that's become so part and parcel what goes on in partisan politics? >> the other party, too. the rsnds and the tea party and allen west is a hero of that movement. beloved because he is so outspoken and so brash and got that manner of an army officer who's not accustomed to being confronted. even verbally. and this is -- we've become co-dependent. the system made us all

co-dependent of this kind of behavior. "the washington post" spoke recently about money blurts. every time certain politicians say something outrageous like this they get a million dollars or two in the mail the next day? >> it was the same kind of a scenario. >> right. >> that's another problem with what we've got. >> exactly. >> right. >> i was going to say, allen west is someone who's built his city on this kind of inflammatory rhetoric. look back a host of videos to watch on youtube. he has no problems making outrageous statements how smirk at war with islam. questioning the genetic capabilities of people who are obama supporters. i mean, just out there on this. on a certain level it's not surprising. it's part and parcel of who he is. >> unfortunately, i think it sums up where we are. thank you clarence page and alex wagner. appreciate you being here. >> thank you. up next, how can an al qaeda

terrorist in afghanistan, a triple agent, if you will, manage to infiltrate the cia and kill seven operatives? author of a hit new book that takes us inside the 2009 attack. that's next, and this is "hardball" only on msnbc.

the u.s. government's remaining shares in the company meaning the government'ses 12ds.5 billion bailout ended up courting taxpayers $1.3 billion. we'll be right back.

welcome back to "hardball." it's been more than two months since u.s. special forces shot and killed osama bin laden. in the wake of that success, it's easy to forget the long, hard road to get there. back in debt of 2009, the cia thought he had the ultimate double agent who would lead them to the top echelon of al qaeda but turn out to be a triple agent, buried so deeply into the cia when he detonated the bomb he was wearing he killed seven cia agents as well as limbs. "washington post" national correspondent jody warrick writes an that and how the cia was duped in his new book calmed "the triple threat: the al qaeda mole who infiltrated the cia." it's terrific and glad you wrote it. reads like a summer spy novel. sad thing it really happened. >> i don't think hollywood could have scripted a character with an unlikely journey.

a plain doctor working in a refugee clinic two eye years ag. a blogger for jihadists, take up arms against the west and do dangerous things. in a very short period ended up being discovered, arrested, interrogated and flipped, we saw, into becoming an asset for the west. next thing we know, in pakistan helping with bomb strikes. >> his initial reports are accurate? he's talking, as you say, about damage done by the drones. then he sends a piece of video that shows him in the company of a top al qaeda. somebody we've been looking for for a long time, and then the motherload of information. he claims he's now rendered medical services to ayman al zawahiri. correct? >> how clever he was, weaving in between two worlds, the cia and al qaeda and convincing everyone he's on their side. but ultimately, as we discover

later, he's actually on al qaeda's side in this elaborate plot, an incredible lure was set up by al qaeda using theirqaeda their own video equipment, their own knowledge of how it works, to create something so attractive that the cia couldn't say no to. >> the reason the cia found it credible through the jordanians is that he knew the medical history of zawahari and now the objective becomes, well, let's bring him in. we americans need to set eyes on him and allow him to lead us to the al qaeda leadership. that's why things got lax. >> remarkably, if you think about it, this is the most exciting thing that happened in the search for bin laden and his deputies since 9/11 and yet it occurs to everyone we've never even met this guy. he could be a con artist. there are doubts and questions raised. but it becomes imperative to meet him.

they need to get into into a place it look at him, poke him, broad him, and look him in the eye and determine if he is real or not. they decided to set up a meeting, bring the guy into the secret cia base, confront him and see what he is all about. >> when he comes, he is waved through three security checkpoint at this uber secret location. when he gets out of the car, he debt nats the vest and skills seven members of the cia. >> the great irony of all this is lots of planning and preparation went into keeping this guy safe. making sure he wasn't discovered on the way in. making sure no taliban soldiers saw him so he could be outed to the taliban. instead his intent all along was to kill people. so he seemed to good to be true in some ways, and in fact he was. >> joby, i wonder, between the events of september 11th or the battle of december '01 and take down, did we have a line on bin

laden al zawahari, but the coldness of the trail allowed us to be dropped. we were so dress pratt for the right reasons yet either of them that we wanted it believe this guy was legitimate. >> yes. if you think about it, there are many people that claim that, yes, we know where osama bin laden was hiding. this trail went cold for years. this was an accident to get close to him, or at least to his deputy, perhaps days way from a really important strike. so yes, everybody was excited and not just to the cia but to the white house. and there was, as we look back, quite a rush as we meet this guy and see what he had to say. >> the book is titled the triple agent. he started out blogging as a hater of all things western and wanting blood on his own hands of us.

comes over to our side or so we think, ends up back on their side. here's my question for joby, warrick, was this all of malice of forthought. did this man always know, as he was blocking, that he was sucking us in to play this triple routine? >> i think the most important clues from that come from the man's own writing. when he was writing on the internet as a secret pundit for al qaeda back before his arrest, he was saying things, like when will my words taste my blood. when am i going it take action myself. he was looking for wayes it become more active, to become involved. he was looking to go to iraq and become a soldier but he was too puny. when he offered to become an informant for our side, it is clear that all along he planned to do damage to the west in any way he could. maybe not as a suicide bomber but he was intending to strike hard and as often as he could. in that sense i think he was a triple agent gr the beginning. >> what the impressive about the

book, is joby, you were able to get cooperation from all sides. congratulations on the book. i hope it does well. it deserves to. >> thank you. >> when we return, let me fin wish a lk at rub etake a look a rupert murdoch's pie gate and why i'm a bit skeptical. i need to reach peter, who's falling behind. and push janet who's 6 chapters ahead. ♪ [ male announcer ] with interactive learning solutions from dell, mrs. davis can make education a little more personal. so every student feels like her only student. dell. the power to do more. impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain, and the use of medical technology in the u.s.?

at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything.

in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you up to thousands of dollars. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, i can keep my own doctor and choose my own hospital. and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. as with all medicare supplement plans, and help pay for what medicare doesn't. call this toll-free number now...

allow me to share a lingering thought that what happened in the uk with the

testimony of rupert and james murdoch. i'm not a conspiracy guy. i think oswald killed kennedy and acted alone. i think 9/11 was an inside job and i'm closing a chapter today in our space program because i know man walked on the moon. having said this, i'm having some doubts about the heroic efforts of rupert murdoch's wife to thwart the pie thrower. parliament was gathered to learn about the hacking and when they knew it. the testimony didn't go so well. both rupert and james murdoch apologized repeatedly but steadfastly refused it take the blame. but the most that maze the news is the pie and the woman who made the delivery. instead of the veracity about murdoch's testimony there is question about a man with a checkered shirt and took a pie slammed into murdoch's face only to have murdoch's wife thwart

the attempt. don't mess with murdoch's 43-year-old chinese born wife. what should have been an analysis of the moguls han been obscured of the coverage of mrs. murdoch. what do we know of the pie-thrower? his name is johnny marbles. johnny marbles? i may have lost mine. but come on, this comedian's name whose real name was maybe els, was able to get within inches of murdoch? let me let know know that murdoch once set up formula 1