mcchrystal, and bob gates. also on tomorrow's agenda, the senate finance committee will continue its work marking up that health care legislation. the big piece on the item, agenda item, will be an amendment vote on that so-called public option. and then finally, first lady michelle obama heads to copenhagen tomorrow night. and her husband will be joining her on thursday night. all in the effort to have chicago win the olympic bid for 2016. >> and mark, what about the people who say the president would not be going to copenhagen, it was not pretty much known that chicago would be winning this, that it would be an embarrassment for him, and is he certainly had taken some hits on the head with health care, and far more serious topics, like afghanistan? >> there are two schools of thought here. one, you had jim warren who knows chicago, and chicago politics really well, and he was telling you guys a couple hours ago, that chicago seemed to be in fourth place and is creeping up. although for someone who has

known that the olympics tends to take place in the united states, one every three or every four olympic cycles, remember, we haven't had one since 1996 in atlanta, it does seem that the united states is due, perhaps, for one in chicago. so it all depends on whether or not you actually think that chicago is going to get it or not. i think all signs are pointing that may be the case. >> mark murray, thank you very much. check back often. nice show. nora, thank you for joining us. appreciate it. i'm tamron hall. >> and i'm norah o'donnell. that's it for today. "hardball" with chris matthews starts now. >> will israel attack iran? let's play "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews in washington. leading off tonight, will israel attack iran? that's the question. yesterday iran fired long-range missiles capable of reaching

israel in a show of strength and will that raises the prospect that israel will strike first. will they? can they do without our help, without our okay? would they? and what ais the consequence if israel does strike at facilities to israel, to the united states? and what will the consequences be if iran gets nuclear weapons? would that mean the end of israel as a safe haven? next. do you remember what mill re clinton said the monkey lewinski story was a frame-up to make her husband look like he had a sexual entanglement with the white house staffer? now bill:ton says that conspiracy continues. he is trying to spin away his scandal by identifying with president obama? and if so, is he a good attack dog? and famed director roman polanski in switzerland, more than 20 years after he was charged with statutory rape including a 13-year-old woman or girl at that time in california. is this a case that should be

prosecuted? especially now that france and poland are urging secretary of state hillary clinton to grant clemency to the 7 6-year-old film maker. also, should president obama go to copenhagen this thursday to pitch for chicago to get the 2016 olympics, with all of the other stuff boiling in the pot right now? that's in the politics space. and those so-called birthers aren't giving up. they have an infomercial and are giving out gifts if you can add your name, if you will, to a petition for the president to produce additional documents he was born in hawaii. more on the crazies and the "hardball" sideshow. michael reuben is president, a resident scholar with the american enterprise institute. and bob bear is a former cia officer and intelligence columnist for time.com. gentlemen, this couldn't be a hotter question. michael rubin, is it plausible that within the next year or so, israel will strike at those nuclear facilities in iran? is. >> absolutely plausible. it is.

they view iran and the iranian nuclear threat as an extension threat, meaning if they don't feel if diplomacy fails, they can live with iran. their assessment is different than ours on this. >> the odds are? >> 50/50. >> rob bear, is it plausible, same question to you, that israel will strike at iran? >> i think it's 50/50 or better. i agree with michael. they look at the -- the complete picture on this, they look at lebanon, they look at the fact that the islamic revolutionary guard corps has the missiles, and they have to do something now. i don't think sanctions are going to work. >> do they -- bigger question to you, because it's about the united states. does the united states have to give them its compliance, its help, its okay, or can israel strike on its own? do we have to be party to this, or won't they do it? >> israel can strike on its own, but they can't finish the job on their own. it would take over a thousand sources to do it right. the worst possible scenario for us would be that israel starts something, and then the region

becomes so messy that we feel we have to finish it. >> so you feel we should help them. >> i think the idea is, if you're -- if the worst-case scenario is military action, then we really have got to ratchet up the other forms of coercion right now, and we certainly have to be prepared. we've got to have sanctions alongside -- >> i'm just trying to get to a question. does israel need our help to do the job? >> no. >> okay. let me go to bob bear. do they need our okay to give them, for example, to push iraq to give them air space and that sort of thing, to get to the target in iran? >> if you are sitting on the ground in iraq and you're an american air controller and you see israeli airplanes coming your way, how many minutes is the white house going to say yes or no? and the chances of saying no are zero. i don't think they need our help, but we will be drawn into a war, as a caonsequence. >> so you both say technically they could carry out the mission. >> they could certainly start the mission. >> okay. let's go to the question. should we help them? if we decided -- bee-bee net

india hue makes the decision -- he makes an existential threat to the future of israel and he decides to make an attack, should we help him? >> if the region is going to get messy, we've got to do what we need to do to protect the united states' interest once iran retal it's a. >> if you were asked by the president right now, should we help them, yes or no? >> i don't think now is the time. >> you wouldn't say yes now. >> no. >> what do you think, bob, should we say yes to the israeli attack? >> absolutely not. >> much more difficult for them to do it by themselves. your thought is not to help them. >> we can't help them. we don't have the troops. we would need a million troops in the gulf. we would have to do something about the oil facilities in saudi arabia to protect them. can we afford oil at $400 a barrel, can we afford the mischief making they would do in iraq and the answer is no. let's get to that point now. you both agree israel might do it. you both agree it's difficult to do without us, but could do it. right?

>> yes. >> and both of you think right now the answer is we shouldn't encourage them to do it. >> we should not. >> fourth question. if they attack the nuclear facilities, as he threatens to do, by the way, sometime next year, at this point, because he is only giving our government up to the end of this year, what will be the consequence in order of importance -- i'm going to get the consequence of not attacking later. what are the consequence of attacking israel facilities. >> it would delay iran's program, that's what israel -- >> meaning? >> enough to outlast iranian regime. >> so the first instance, it would have a good effect. >> the first instance, it would have a good effect. >> what are the bad effects? >> the bad effects, nothing like a military strike would rally people around the iranian military flag more. >> i just talked to an iranian emgrate, he lives in america now, he believes we give a 20-year life span to the ahmadinejad crowd. >> i think that's possible, yes. >> okay. the first thing is good, puts

them off for maybe a long time. number two, they rally behind ahmadinejad. the first two scenarios you see, bob, if they attack facilities. >> i think, again, it's the gulf. it's the security of our oil. i harp on this, but that's what the iranians have said they're going to do. if they're attacked, no matter how minor the attack is, they're going to respond against oil. there is nothing we can do about it, and that's what worries me. in iraq, as well. >> they shut off all oil shipments, right? >> they hit up cake. it takes 16 barrels off instantlily, and we can't defend it. >> doesn't that strangle hold, that choke hold, have a life span of itself? can they keep doing that without committing suicide economically? i mean, how long can they raise -- >> they can. they're ready to. >> i absolutely agree. iran is not as a democracy. it doesn't matter what the ordinary people think in the government's calculation. they will look at it -- this --

the leadership of iran is the leadership that grew up in the irany/iraq war. they say vegetables were expensive? when i was your age, i was fighting mustard gas. >> the look on your face -- i know you're passionate, not emotional. is it possible that the threat to carry out if we don't do something could be the beginning of a horrendous amount of action in the world, not just the end, but the beginning of spiking prices for oil, of hezbollah acts? what do you think? >> absolutely. and you've got to balance that with if iran does go nuclear, you're going to have an end of the nuclear nonproliferation regime and a cascade of proliferation throughout the world. that's the choice. >> let me ask you the final question tonight, and then i want to get to some of these quotes by people here. bob bear, what happens if we discourage israel successfully, and even then the right wing

faction running the country, he decides not to move, because he decides we don't want you to move. if if he doesn't move, what happens to the world if israel is faced with a neighbor that hates it, wants to destroy it? does that basically kill the notion of israel as a safe haven for world in the long run? in other words, young people in their 20s, young engineers, would no longer want to live in that country because it's under nuclear threat. do you think that's a real prospect? >> i think it's -- israel is under extensional threat. i think if iran continues to grow, it's a super power, or the hedge monday in the gulf, it will effect survivability, no doubt about it. the israelis have aa point. >> michael, and that point is strong enough that it effects their life. do you buy their argument that their life is at stake, and not over the year or two, but eventually you cannot have an israeli jewish state if you will, succeed, if it's under the

nuclear threat of a country that hates it. >> there is a psychological threat, and with iran -- >> yes, it's not in the head. >> but just as important, is the uncertainty over who would control a nuclear bomb, should iran achieve that capability? >> who has button. >> who was the button, and under what circumstances would it be used? >> who do you think is in charge in iran right now? i want to get back to you. who is making the decision to fire off these rockets? who is making the decision to proceed in a way that looks like they're going toward weaponization? who is calling that shot? is it homeni, the boss, the supreme leader, ahmadinejad, a back room faction of old men, religious people? who is it, bob? >> the islamic revolutionary guard corps, and new defense ministers from the irgc, and don't forget, he blew up the embassy in argentina. these guys have blood on their hands, and we can't predict what they're going to do. michael. >> the supreme leader has

ultimate control with the revolutionary guard, but the problem is, no one knows about the factions inside the revolutionary guard corps, it's still a black bock. politics, we talk about reformers, hard liners, but the real decision making is inside that islamic revolutionary guard. >> a fellow i know in hollywood, said to me the only smart israeli action is not just to blow up the facilities, but to take out the leadership. is that a feasible israeli and teba-style possibility? can they take out the leadership faction, kill them, decapitate this government? >> the country is too big. israel's air force is too small, can't do it. 71 million people. we're talking about the result would be a conventional war. it would look like world war iii. >> i would agree with that. you go after the leadership if it can prevent the war. >> but you see you've written along those lines in terms of knocking out one person, killing one person, like a really bad

guy out there. but is it feasible for israel to do an intebi style assault, find ahmadinejad and kill him. >> well, it's much more feasible if iran has buried facilities under mountains, they don't need to destroy the facilities, the entrances to them. >> how long do they keep those sealed? >> they set the program back a year or two and hope the international community actually -- actually becomes active. >> yeah, the trouble is the international community goes the other way. >> yeah. >> what's your thought -- >> the intelligence isn't good enough. >> yeah. what i've heard is a scenario, they blow up and in the short run do the best they can, and say more coming if you keep going. have you heard that argument? >> i have heard that argument. and what's interesting is the same argument that was made when the israelis went over after the iraqi reactor in 1981, critics said -- >> how much longer do you both have, not me, i'm watching you guys, you're the experts. how long are michael, and how long are bob, do we have to keep

netanyahu from acting? >> i would say months, if not weeks. >> how long does the united states have leverage over netanyahu, the head of israel, to attack iran? have we got a year? >> he's giving three months. he has got to see something happening in three months. they've already started planning. >> i think we're on the same page on this. pretty scary. thank you bob and reuben. coming up, bill clinton that says the conspiracy that he says created the monica mess for him. i wonder if that's helpful. you know what i think. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. always my favorite day. with all the pet hair in the air, i'd spend class preoccupied, bothered by itchy eyes. but now i have new zyrtec® itchy eye drops. it works fast, with just one drop, to relieve my itchy eyes from allergies for up to 12 hours. no other allergy itchy eye drop works faster or longer.

which is good, 'cause there's a lotta paws to shake. with new zyrtec® itchy eye drops i can love the air™. (announcer) find it in the allergy aisle next to other zyrtec® products. chef's meal with pommes frites perhaps a night at the theater with extra special seats additional hotel night, our treat your world in perfect harmony: priceless look for world on your mastercard to get rewards and offers that matter to you.

(announcer) we understand. you need to save money. (announcer) we understand. you've only got so many hours in a day to get your five servings of vegetables. consider this... the express route. v8. what's your number? but what we can do is arm ourselves... for the ones we love with a flu shot from walgreens. ♪ ( coughs ) ♪ ( sneezes ) we're making it easy for everyone to get their flu shot, no matter how small their motivation may be. ♪ come get yours for just $24.99.

welcome back to "hardball." former president bill clinton weighed in on president obama's right wing critics, likening them to the critics he faced in '98. this is "meet the press." >> talking about the right wing conspiracy targeting you. did you look at this opposition on the right to president obama, is it still there? >> oh, you bet. sure it is. it's not as strong as it was, because america has changed demographically, but it's as viral as it was. they're saying things about him -- like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did. >> joining me is the real expert on the man we just saw, former clinton white house press secretary dee dee myers, and msnbc political analyst pat buchanan. first of all, the word that jumps out at me is "conspiracy." let's take a listen to when that word was first used in '98 by -- we don't have. then first lady when she talked about -- i think we're the only

show on television who doesn't have it. it's been playing all day today. the '98 -- it was playing all day, we know hillary was on with matt lauer, i believe after the monica story broke, and she said there was no truth to it, implied it was a con if he can shun of the right. is this good for the clintons to bring back the word conspiracy? >> of let's be fair. david gregory asked the question, which included the phrase vast right wing conspiracy, and then he said, that opposition, is it still out there. >> but is it a conspiracy, or is it just a bunch of crazies out there obviously doing what they're doing, attacking his citiship, etsz, et cetera. >> i'm not a big conspiracy theoryi theoryist. is it vast? yeah, it's big. is there a connection? these people have connections through professional associations. yeah. >> is it helpful for barack obama to be identified as the victim of the same forces that brought bill clinton to

impeachment? is it helpful? >> i think it helps shore up the base, reminds people out there this isn't the first time we have seen this movie before. we have seen a lot of this movie before. organized opposition. >> that's the new phrase, isn't it? >> the movie? >> well, i think -- >> at the end of the day, is one of the phrases -- >> yeah. one of my favorite. >> let's go to pat -- pat buchanan, your thoughts about this vast right wing conspiracy, which hillary clinton blamed for the trouble her husband got in. i don't buy that. i think he got into his own trouble. they exploited -- obviously ken star loved it, and i think probably went well beyond their brief to nail the guy, by having -- setting him up in that paula jones depth deposition that caught him. they set up a fly trap and caught a fly. your thoughts, pat. >> come on, chris, there is no right wing conspiracy. is there a conservative movement that disagrees on the war in afghanistan, which is united on

health care? i would say talk show hosts, columnists and commentators, bloggers, political activists, some of the more hawkish fellows in congress? sure there is a conservative movement, and sure it involves barack obama, because he thinks he's a liberal. but good heavens, 60 votes in the senate, a bullet-proof majority, he's got a 75-vote margin in the house. and they're wailing and crying that the conservatives oppose him? chris, there ain't any conservative conspiracy. most guys i know couldn't organize a softball team. do they really think they're getting forget with rush, and handy and george? and we all get together every day? >> but dedehas been wise to offer the queen sacrifice three minutes ago, when she said all right, i'll give you the word conspiracy. >> and i think pat is right. most of the people we have worked with in these kind of organizations couldn't organize a softball team. >> and by the way, they want credit for what they do. >> right. >> they want everybody to know everything they do. you know. if bill crystal has got a point

of view he's pushing about bringing down health care again, he wants us all to know. frank lunds wants us all to know he coined the phrase. these guys are marketers. >> chris, let me ask you something, if richard nixon got caught in the oval office with a 21-year-old intern, it would not take a conspiracy to get all of the liberals coming down on him with both feet. >> pat, you and i are married to the truth of that. i am absolutely convinced that at the time of any -- when nixon was president, if he had been involved with anybody -- of either sex, anybody of any age, in fact, that wasn't pat, you know, anybody but pat, he would have been taken out in a stretcher. i'm sorry, even taken out in a straight jacket. and the media would have been saying it was a psychological thing, they had to assert the 23rd amendment, and they had to haul him out of there. you know that's true, dee dee. there is a standard here for a popular president. by the way, the economy was so good in '98, that's the reason

bill was able to escape. >> well, i think it's almost the opposite. i think that we were in a time of peace and prosperity, and the country had the luxury of elevating this. >> oh, i'm sorry. >> to an impeachment. are you kidding me? >> i'd like a fact here. in the newest book called "the clinton tapes," which are actually not the tapes or about the tapes, bill clinton points out that his big mistake was thinking that he had impeachment beat when he did so well in the '98 elections when the congressional republicans did so badly. and he thought he had it beaten. and he the tide of public disapproval was his phrase. he was wrong, because they had a party -- pat, that's remained his mistake. he thought he had it beat in the electoral situation. what he didn't realize, the caucus on capitol hill was loaded for bear and wouldn't stop. >> he was not entirely wrong. the house went ahead with it, but they walked it over to the

senate and the senate wanted no part of it, chris. they wanted that thing out of there, because they thought it was responsible for the defeat. but again, president clinton was doing fairly well, as dee dee said. he brought that on himself. anybody that had gotten in a mess like that, especially clinton, because of his history, i mean, he just -- he dealt these cards right into the hands of his opposition, and he shouldn't have been surprised they ran with them. >> is it helpful -- not pat buchanan. everything is helpful to you, pat, whether anybody wins or loses in any election. and you should, of course. let me ask, dee dee, is it helpful to barack obama to have bill clinton out there comparing his problems of 1998 with monica with barack obama's problems -- is it helpful -- >> i didn't hear president clinton do that, but i think what is helpful -- >> he's playing a game. i know -- >> what's -- what he points out, as he did, that the republicans don't have a plan, they don't

have any alternative, they're just out there, they're not acting the best interest of the country in their -- of barack obama. where is their health care plan? >> i think our colleague, david gregory, was smart enough to know that bill clinton would go for the bait if he asked him, weren't you really unfairly -- >> wow, that's a really high standard there, chris. come on. dangle right wing conspiracy in front of bill clinton, see if he'll bite. wow, let's lay the odds. come on. i think the president was trying to be helpful. i think he said times were a little tougher for me. i wasn't trying -- >> nice thing to make -- i think we have agreed this is probably not helpful. >> i think there are elements that are helpful, though, when he talks about the republicans -- i think president clinton, one of his great strengths, always brought it back to the country. let's debate the issues. >> and -- >> i think he has always brought it back to policy and that's why he survived. >> you know what he had going for him, bill clinton, i sentenced that no matter how many problems, as a human being,

obviously. i think people thought he was looking out for the average person. >> i agree. >> pat, that was his great appeal. a sears robuck, working class, middle class guy who remembered where he came from. and in the end, that's what kept him in office. the people thought he was with them. they were maybe right. >> well, i'll say this, he also was kept in the office by the fact that he has a tremendous coalition behind him that stood with him during the hard times and fought very hard. but what david gregory's question showed, chris, it's only about a quarter of an inch below the surface, he felt they were all out to get him, and david gregory popped it right up to the surface. >> and pat, that's so noosh unusual for a president. >> i want you to admit this on camera. one time you said to me, everything you believe is true about bill clinton. i think that's true. the good, the bad, the everything. it's all true. dee dee myers here with us from "vanity fair" and pat buchanan from the conservative movement.

could we see another cheney in the office? and film maker michael moore joins us. we couldn't get polanski. we got moore. you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. (announcer) romano's macaroni grill has a way to get things cooking..... at home. they're macaroni grill dinner kits, the restaurant favorites that'll ignite your senses. you get the pasta, special sauces and seasonings.

add your grilled chicken, cook for 20 minutes then top with our cheeses. for a meal that'll make any night feel special. romano's macaroni grill dinner kits. the restaurant favorites that let you.... stay in, and go all out. [screeching] [dejectedly] oh. [screeching] [barks] (man) if you think about it, this is what makes the ladders different from other job-search sites. [screeching] we only work with the big talent. [all coughing] welcome to the ladders-- a premium job site for only $100k-plus jobs and only $100k-plus talent.

back to "hardball." time for the sideshow. first up, it doesn't end. remember the birthers, that group of right wing crazies, claiming that barack obama was not born in america, and therefore isn't a legitimate president? in fact, claiming he is an illegal immigrant who should be deported? well, the fundamentalist website, liveprayer.com has put out a birther infomercial, which, according to talking points memo, is playing in seven states right now. let's take a listen. >> where was president obama born? why does he refuse to produce

his official state of hawaii birth certificate? what's he hiding? now your voice can be heard in this matter. go to your phone and call 1-800-321-[ bleep ] and have your name added to a petition to force president obama to obey the law. join hundreds of thousands of americans who simply want the truth. as a thank you for being part of this petition drive, you will receive a specially created, got a birth certificate bumper sticker. act now, call 1-800-321 [ bleep ] and tell president obama to prove where he was born. >> how about this? how about if the obama people go dig up additional documentation these people want to prove that he's not in the country illegally, they agree to leave the country! they agree to leave! how about giving the president some bonus points for offering up more documentation than anyone else born in hawaii is asked to do? he stays, they leave.

next up, passing the torch. here's the front page of today's "new york times." new cheney taking stage for the gop. it spot lights dick cheney's daughter liz as a rising star in the republican party. the in holds barred defender of cheney's policies. this is from "the times." like her father, miss cheney states in almost academic cadences, head veering down into her notes. she also shares his willingness to pummel the president in stark, disdainful tones, not so much criticizing as taunting him. well, the "new york times" piece made one error. the reporter, mark lebow very much, an excellent reporter otherwise says liz uses her maiden name. that's not technically correct. she has adopted the more cheney. that's one case of like father, unlike daughter. finally, batter up. justice sotomayor threw out the ceremonial first pitch for the

yankees. hero for issuing an injunction that headed off the baseball strike of the yankees beat the sox 3-0. not that that's good for the country. we learned today president obama will be traveling to copenhagen to especially make the case for chicago to host the 26-team olympic games. according to the traders over in dublin-based entree.com, what are the chance the president will win over the olympic committee? well, 65% chance and rising. if he wins, so does tip o 'neill's old rule that all politics is local. 65% chance of the second city becoming the first city of the world in 2016. that's tonight's "big number." up next, why was 76-year-old filmmaker roman polanski arrested now, more than 30 years after he was charged for statutory rape? american authorities push for his arrest. europeans are mad about it. but is justice being served

here? that's our debate, coming up. you're watching it. "hardball," only on msnbc. when we spend a billion dollars a day buying foreign oil... we don't just waste our money... we put our economy in the hands of hostile nations. we let big oil make record profits... while we struggle. and we lose new energy jobs, that go overseas. but we can take charge of our economy... by passing strong clean energy legislation. 1.7 million new american jobs. less carbon pollution. and a cleaner america for our children. it's time for clean american energy. so, at national, i go right past the counter... and you get to choose any car in the aisle. choose any car? you cannot be serious! okay. seriously, you choose.

go national. go like a pro. it was tough news to hear. everything changed. i didn't know what to do. right about then, our doctor mentioned the exelon patch. he said it releases medicine continuously for 24 hours. he said it could help with her cognition which includes things like memory, reasoning, communicating and understanding. (announcer) the most common side effects of exelon patch are nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. the likelihood and severity of these side effects may increase as the dose increases. patients may experience loss of appetite or weight. patients who weigh less than 110 pounds may experience more side effects. people at risk for stomach ulcers or who take certain other medicine should talk to their doctor because serious stomach problems, such as bleeding may worsen. mom's diagnosis was hard to hear, but there's something i can do. (announcer) visit exelonpatch.com for free caregiving resources.

i'm jane wells with your cnbc market wrap. stocks managed to hold on to big gains today after rallying on a wave of activity. dow jones industrial added 124 points. the s&p 500 up 18 points. and the nasdaq jumped almost 40. a true m & a monday, as xerox announced plans to by affiliated computer services, or acs for more than $6 billion. xerox shares falling while shares in acs up 14%. more m & a mania. adam labs will pay for a belgian con glam rat. abot shares climbing.

johnson & johnson added 1% after it bought a $444 million stake in a dutch biotech company. and shares of jen tech soared almost 40% after the chemical company agreed to a takeover bid from a private equity firm. and it's only monday. that's it from cnbc, first in business worldwide. now back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." as you have no doubt heard by now, filmmaker roman polanski has been arrested in witser land, 30 years after he fled the u.s. after pleading guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl. polanski directed some of the most acclaimed movies of the '60s and '70s, "rosemary's baby" his first american feature film, "china town" nominated. he had a brief appearance

alongside jack nicholson. let's listen. >> very nosey fellow. know what happens to nosey fellows, huh, want to guess? he is presently in a swiss gail. joining me is prosecutor wendy murphy, and san francisco mayor and friend of polanski. wendy, for the prosecution, go ahead. >> this is an easy one. this guy admitted to raping a child. we are not talking about sex. and we're certainly not talking about statutory rape. the 17-year-old boy had sex with his 14-year-old girlfriend. he was in his mid 40s, gave her drugs, booze, raped her in a lot of different ways. we're talking sodomy and other styles of rape. then pleads guilty. decides he shouldn't have to pay with the real kind of punishment people face when they rape kids. takes off and then thumbs his nose at this country's legal system, going to parties,

hanging around on the west bank, doing whatever he felt like doing for 30 years. that's the sort of guy who deserves not only to be extradited, but when he gets here, he gets extra punishment, no discounts. i am sick to my stomach to hear people say, well, he's really a smart guy. a brilliant director. and terrific artist. since i read the constitution, i didn't see a brilliant director exception to the punishment part. >> just to get the facts straight, you say that he admitted all of those charges, all of the drugs and the -- >> no. >> he pled guilty to all of that? >> no, he did not. no, no, no. he admitted his guilty to raping a child. he was charged with six felonies, he admitted to one. that's already a big discount, chris. >> i'm not arguing, just trying to get the facts. did he admit guilty to the way you describe it, giving her booze, drugs, did he admit all those factors, did he or did he not? >> i don't know if he admitted to the drugs or the booze. i said he was charged with six,

he admitted to one. that was already a discount. they sent him to a rubber room for 42 days, they were going to send him to jail, he said i don't think i deserved that, and he booked it. he deserved to go to jail for a long time. >> the prosecution, did they accept his plea of consensual sex with a 13-year-old, not that i agree there is such a thing as consensual sex, but did they accept that plea? >> there was a guilty plea, yes. they accepted it. in other words, he was going to be punished for raping a child. you can't claim consent. it doesn't matter. >> right. i know that -- i know the law. >> not party of the story at all. he admitted raping a child. >> he jumped bail on the issue of -- of a deal that had been struck, whereby he would get -- what kind of a sentence? >> i don't know what the deal was that he thought he was getting, except it's been reported he thought he was going to get out of the mental ward and walk home. and then it's been reported that he then heard the judge was not going to go along with the deal. maybe it's because when they

checked him out in the mental hospital, he didn't come out real good. maybe they thought he was a little more dangerous than they believed when they sent him over. i don't know. and i don't know what he was facing. but it was a two to four year maximum penalty at that time. and he thought that was too much for what he did to that child. are you kidding me? >> fair enough. let's go to willy brown for the defense. should this man be extradited to the united states and face charges and perhaps as wendy murder faye said, face additional charges for escaping justice? >> no, he should not. as a matter of fact, chris, the deal in los angeles at the time between the prosecution and mr. dalton, the defense lawyer for roman polanski, was agreed to by the judge. he was sentenced to an evaluation facility at chino in california. at that facility, they made the appropriate recommendations, consistent with what the judge had agreed to. the judge, on the other hand, began to be pilloried with information and nonsense, similar to what wendy is

offering to the public here. and as a result of that, he wanted to back out of the deal. the prosecutor was kind enough to tell mr. dalton, the lawyer for roman, that, in fact, the judge was reneging on the deal. the deal was a very simple one. whatever the recommendations apparently would be from chino would be what the sentence would be. the recommendations from chino was, he needed no further incarceration. the judge apparently said, i won't do that, and with that, mr. polanski left. but let's talk clearly about what occurred in switzerland. mr. polanski has a residence in switzerland. he's been living there, during the ski season for the last 20 or 30 years. he was over there for about ten weeks already this year. the question is, how is it that on this occasion, he is grabbed at the airport? well, it's very simple. there was a film done. a documentary done on this case. and in that film, it was clear,

from the evidence collected by the film makers, that there had been some hanky pan key carried on by the prosecution in order to get the judge to back out. the prosecutor, who had made the deal, was not involved in that nonsense, and so said it on that film. the woman who was the victim, the child, as is being described it here, says very clearly that this is not something that we should reopen. she is perfectly satisfied 30 years later with what would have been the disposition. all of that was done. the minute the film was done, of course, mr. polanski's lawyers moved to court to see if they could not, for misconduct, get this whole matter -- that's why the los angeles district attorney's office went to the u.s. attorney's office, and got them to issue that warrant, that has resulted in mr. polanski's being arrested.

>> okay, let's let wendy in here. your reaction to what mr. brown just said. >> well, due respect, sir. the defense filed a motion, wanting to raise exactly those questions about some grave miscarriage of justice, and thus his plea apparently should be withdrawn because of the judge's misconduct. what matters is, the judge said, i'll hear you. i believe you. come on, let's have a hearing. come back to this country, and let's have a hearing. and guess who didn't show! that would be mr. polanski. which tells you a lot about whether he really thought he had a case on that score. and, you know, look, the bottom line is, sometimes people do things for political motivation. let's not distract the public from the fact that he pled guilty to raping a child. so all of the shen dance you allege, you want to make something of that, bring him back, talk about it, but don't forget he admitted his guilt to a very serious crime. none of that other stuff

matters. as much as you want to make that a smoke and mirrors game, so that the public doesn't remember what he did to a child, 13 -- he was in his mid 40s, drugs, alcohol, multiple types of rape. you can talk all you want about the political motivations of the people involved, and i don't particularly care what the victim wants. she is not the government. it is not her responsibility. and isn't it funny that she decided to forgive him after she cashed the big fat check he handled her in the settlement. you don't indulge payoffs in the capitol hill justice system. face the music. that's when i'll have mercy for the guy. >> let me ask the mayor. was roman polanski actually guilty of the charge of statutory rape? was guilty? >> he entered a plooi plea of guilty. i was not there. i assumed that if he entered a plea of guilty, he was, in fact, guilty. there is always, in any criminal proceeding, an opportunity to

settle the matter. it's called plea bargaining. and in this case, the plea bargain occurred. some prosecutors, as evidenced by this prosecutor's expression, don't like plea bargaining. plea bargaining is done by the prosecutor who has the case. in this case, the prosecutor who had this case is now saying very clearly, this was not something that should be done. i.e., mr. polanski should not be grabbed. in addition thereto, there is absolutely no requirement that mr. polanski show up for the process that is being addressed where a question of misconduct may be involved. the witnesses for that are the ones who are required to show up. prosecutors, like the one on this station, doesn't like that. but that's a reality. >> don't mischaracterize what i say. >> quickly now. >> i was just going to say, look at, sometimes the judge does disagree with the deal, and that's okay.

here's what defendants are allowed to do when that happens. they withdraw their guilty plea, and they go to trial. they don't go to france. >> okay of. well, thank you very much, wendy murphy. thank you, willie brown. it's been a great extradition of both sides of the arguments. next, president obama will go to copenhagen to try to win the olympics for the city of chicago this week. but with everything else on his plate like health care, afghanistan and iran is that a good move for our president? and by the way, is it important enough to do it? the "politics fix" is up next. this is "hardball," only on msnbc.

how to get rich, by america's health insurance companies. raise health insurance premiums 4 times faster than wages. pay your ceo twenty four million dollars a year. deny payment for 1 out of every 5 treatments doctors prescribe. if the insurance companies win, you lose. tell congress to rewrite the story. we want good health care we can afford with the choice of a public health insurance option. coming up, remembering william safire. when "hardball" returns. (announcer) regular kool-aid. goes almost three times further than soda. kool aid. delivering more smiles per gallon. as the decades have past, the promise of medicare has always been there. and aarp has fought to guarantee

none of the benefits you earned were ever taken away. today we're continuing that fight by protecting your freedom to choose the doctors and treatments you need. and to have your tax dollars go towards your care-- not insurance company subsidies. you've done your work. and we'll keep doing ours. learn more at aarp.org. what? we don't need these minutes anymore. we got that calling circle thing everybody else has. it's at&t's a-list, don, and it's not the same. we get unlimited calls to any 10 people on any network, but unlike everyone else the minutes we save, we keep. so? so why save minutes with your calling circle if they just expire at the end of the month? you're using that one.

(announcer) introducing a-list with rollover. unlimited calling to any 10 numbers on any network and keep the minutes you save. only from at&t. thinking about mutual funds-- think about this: the best place to buy one may not be a mutual fund company at all. instead of emphasizing their funds, td ameritrade has tools that can help you choose funds from the leading fund companies. there's even a "recommended" list by the independent experts at morningstar associates. so you can get a fund that matches your objectives instead of someone else's. announcer: before investing, consider the fund's investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. contact td ameritrade for a prospectus containing this and other information. read it carefully before investing.

we're back and it's time for "the politics fix" with usa today's susan page. and tom defrank. two of the real pros. it seems like people, i don't want to say our age except tom and i. this seems to be the summer of death. so many people we know, not just movie stars, people in our start of the world are dying. when i got the word the other day from one of my produces that bill safire died. on top of buckley and crystal and novak. one of those real guys. all the years before as a speechwriter for nixon. years before that is one of the best show boating men who created the kitchen debate with nixon and crew chef.

he cooked that event up where we got to show our commercialism at its best. >> you know, chris, i was smiling because i met bill safire in 1971 as a fill in white house correspondent for "news week" magazine. i was 25 years old. he was part of that row of speech writers for richard nixon. pat buchanan, bill rice, bill safire. what struck me was here was this guy who already had a reputation because of the kitchen debate there but he was gentle, mild mannered, soft spoken. then as we later learned, well, his writing for -- >> susan, i want to show you this. i'm showing a book i used to use. oftentimes -- safire political dictionary that explains the language we use on shows like this. we came up with the term back then. i developed, obviously, use on

that term. your thoughts on the passing, the loss of one of the real mansions in american political life, bill safire in. >> i have that political dictionary on my desk, too. i remember when hifs hired by "the times" lots of concern he was going to be a nixon apologist. he turned out to be a nixon defender but also a good reporter. you know, he kept using -- he had a terrific sense of humor. i remember those year-end columns every year with predictions where he'd have a lot of outlandish predictions. he'd always be predicting his side was going to win. >> he was a columnist who knew how to report. a good guy. this guy brought him down. he won the pulitzer prize for commentary but really for reporting. the late great friend of mine and all ours, william safire, what a great -- can't be another guy like them for a while. we'll be right back with susan page and tom defrank to talk about something a lot more fun. the president is going to

koeppcopenhagen to pitch his ci. he wants to go to copenhagen. e t but a whole panel in creating an anti-aging breakthrough. introducing olay professional pro-x wrinkle protocol. as effective as the leading prescription wrinkle brand. challenge pro-x yourself, we guarantee the results. campbell's tomato soup. we've added a unique sea salt. it helps us use less salt than before without changing our famous flavor. that means it's healthy... along with over 65 others and more to come. campbell's.

[screeching] [dejectedly] oh. [screeching] [barks] (man) if you think about it, this is what makes the ladders different from other job-search sites. [screeching] we only work with the big talent. [all coughing] welcome to the ladders-- a premium job site for only $100k-plus jobs and only $100k-plus talent.

how you could start saving. back with "usa today" susan page and tom defrank of the "new york daily news." the president of the united states announced he was inspired at the meeting of the g-20 to go out and hawk his city. i think it's a case of all politics. it's local, he's guarding his

base. the state of illinois and the city of chicago and the country of the united states. is this something he'll be rewarded for in years to come if we get the olympics in 2016, susan page? >> yeah, recorded for it if it works. it would be a little embarrassing if the u.s. president goes on this red eye to copenhagen and doesn't bring back the olympic games. i assume they're confident he's going to be able to deliver it. the olympics are great. americans love to host them. for them to go to the president's hometown, that would be pretty cool. >> i'm not optimistic. i think you go to one sort of white european country, western country, go from london to chicago, doesn't that turn off the rest of the world? isn't it more likely to two to a latin country like rio? >> or madrid. >> sometimes not part of the white world, if you will? >> i don't think it's going to be tokyo. my sense, chris, this is classic damage control. i think if the president were not to go and it doesn't become chicago, then i think he might