♪ i don't think the loss can be bad at all. i think we're going to shock the heck out of everybody. i am absolutely confident when people take a look at what has happened since we've taken office in november and comparing it to the alternative, we're going to be in great shape. we're going to win the house and we're going to win the senate. we're not going to lose either one of those bodies. >> all right. there is our vice president on abc yesterday. once again, proving once again, he is the most effective

communicator for their message. every time i hear him, we like to make fun of joe here, but we actually, i got to tell you, got a great deal of respect for him and his ability to get the point across. he is our guy. welcome to "morning joe." he is our guy. 6:00 on the east coast. i'm mika brzezinski. joe is off today. with us on the set is mark halpern also the author of the best seller "game change." and we also have perfect timing today, the president of the council on formulations, richard haass. he wrote the cover story in "newsweek" magazine. "rethinking afghanistan nation building isn't working. new strategies for the war on terror." richard is also the author of "war of necessity war of choice." we will talk about that and great to have you here. willie geist is joining us. quite a show you did. my daughter is here and watching and thought it was amazing. >> why is she up at this hour?

>> i have no one. i have no help. just me. that's it. >> nobody home? >> my husband is out so whatever. we'll figure it out. >> you could make $50 an hour. >> do you need a baby-sitter for the day? she's here. we have a lot to talk about. i'm getting into news. want to get to afghanistan with richard. but also this front page of "the washington post" story, dana priest cowriting an article with william markham on, wow this is a big deal. a hidden world, growing beyond control. whether or not the top secret government agencies are so big they have ineffective raising a lot of questions about whether or not we are taking on the war on terror and other issues, threatening this country or if we just have such a huge organization that we can get nothing done. we'll get to that in a moment. first, federal officials are raising concerns this morning about a possible oil and methane

gas leak near the well in the gulf of mexico. over the weekend, bp had expressed hope that a newly installed lid could stop the flow of crude until a relief well can permanently seal the pipe next month. but, yesterday, coast guard admiral thad allen demanded the oil giant intensely monitor the situation and be prepared to reopen the well if new leaks spring up. although the government is allowing bp to keep the well sealed for now, officials are worried if engineers confirm a leak it could make the seabed unstable. talk more on that coming up. this morning "the washington post" reports that since the 9/11 attacks, u.s. intelligence operations have spiraled out of control and that no one knows how much it costs and how many people it employs or how many programs exist. this is the result of a two-year investigation. the post discovering that the system put in place to keep the united states safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine. among the findings, over 1,200

government organizations and nearly 2,000 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence and about 10,000 locations ais kro the u.s. over 800,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people who live in washington, d.c., hold top secret security clearances. richard. and in washington and surrounding areas, 33 building complexes top secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since september of 2001. together, they occupy the equivalent of almost three pentagons or 22 u.s. capital buildings, about 17 million square feet of space. we're going to talk to dana priest who co-wrote the article coming up later in the show. first of all, richard, i was looking at the reporting on the piece. a lot of people quoted in the people are people who have been tasked to look into this. and address it and assess it.

so to an extend, this isn't like something that nobody knows about, that this is a huge organization with many tentacles across the globe and across our country. and isn't that not surprising in light of 9/11? >> it's exactly right. after 9/11, essentially we threw money at this problem. we threw people at this problem and we threw buildings at this problem but it was done without a plan. it just happened and happened and happened. this is the new national security state. we had one national security state for the cold war and things after 1947 the post-9/11 national security state is what "the washington post" is writing about it and it is somewhat out of control and tremendous amount of overlap and at some point it gets dysfunctional. the christmas bombing and everything else, the problem is almost never we don't have the information. the problem is almost always we can't get the information shared and transferred to the right people. is this essentially is the problem. we have thrown so much at it without design that we're working against ourselves in many areas. >> doesn't the time square

bomber speak to this a little bit? you can have all of the bureaucracy in the world and build all of these buildings but if a guy puts gasoline and fertilizer in a car and drives to times square and information not shared about the guy what is it all for? >> we made it worse. after 9/11, we layered the problem. it's exactly what business tells you not to do. american business is going in the direction of flattening. government is going in the opposite direction of flattening. we're actually increasing the layers of bureaucracy and the numbers of organization. >> i want to talk about what is surprising and what is of real concern, mark halpern. when i look at this, it's, obviously, as they have in a title of web of agencies with redundant functions. clearly, you have layers there that can lead to misunderstandings. they talk, for example, retired army lieutenant general john vines who was asked last year to review the method to tracking the defense department's most defensive programs. he is looking into this.

they want to make it more effective and synchronize information so it can be more effective. this isn't -- i mean, i guess what i'm trying to say is this is an evolving problem. >> it's evolving and everyone knows it's going to be a problem. after 9/11, vice president cheney and president bush made it their highest priority not to have another attack on american soil during their watch. this president and this vice president have taken up the same cause. there is no higher priority. congress has written basically a blank check and so they are going to have redunnedancy. i don't think there is any evidence people have said no to much of anything in terms of adding to the democracy. it is what it means to be president of the united states and what it means to be congress and not have much oversight. >> it's safer politically to pass the bill. to create a new agency, to spend the money. the default option is to do something and what we now have the net result of doing all of

these things without a plan. >> did you look at this wheel, richard? look at the ouija board. where do you begin in streamlining something like that? >> you want to know the most depressing aspect of this piece? >> they are watching us. >> they are watching cable tv. they are watching cable on massive big screens. a couple of points about the piece in "the post" today. boys and girls out there at home, it is not a blog. this is a newspaper story. done by respected newspaper reporters. >> what is that? >> who gather the information over two years, and assemble it in a newspaper. no matter how much we spend and no matter how politically efficient it is in terms of covering yourself, i voted for that, you can still get the guy down at ft. hood who walks in and kills, you know, several people at once. you can still get the times square bomber.

i don't know how, how in the midst of all this bureaucracy you can never get one element talking to another, sharing the information. i don't know how you do it. it seems impossible. >> you're exactly right. again, we've made it worse by having so many elements out there. you're basic point is right. there is no such thing as invulnerability here. we remain vulnerable whether lone gunmen or this or that organization. the odds in that sense are always against you. remember the ira after they tried to kill mrs. stature. we didn't kill you tonight. we only have to succeed once. the odds are in that sense there will be successors whether like ft. hood as awful as that or something bigger. >> richard, does it bother you 854,000 people have top security access? tell us what that means. >> top secret means the top set of levels and hundreds and hundreds of what are called compartments and that is more specific information based on more of a need to know basis.

still nearly a million people, that's a lot of people having access to that sort of information. again, this is the post-9/11 equivalent of the cold war. this is now the pervasive thing that is animating the american national security response. >> but the cold war was easier because there was basically one enemy. >> right. >> now we focus a lot on the 9/11 related threats but there's cyberterror and all sorts of new threats out there. i think you need more people, because there is a more diverse and complicated set of enemies to track. >> i know. the question is how to synchronize all of those people. >> there is, within this piece, the news that they have in existence what they call scif rooms. >> yes. >> oh, dear. >> sensitive compartmented information facility. >> is that where you've been the past week? >> at the end of the day you don't have to put your stuff away. it's like this a teenager because the entire facility is secure so you don't have to put

everything in a safe at the end of the day. >> you leave it there in that room? >> yes. >> that is exciting. the things that excite richard haass. dana priest will join us coming up in the show and we will talk more about the content of the article. i believe it's a series of articles so this should be interesting. >> tomorrow and wednesday. >> one issue that dominated the sunday talk shows is the naacp's recent condemnation of racist elements within the tea party. over the weekend the leader of the tea party express was expelled from the national tea party federation after he posted a satirical letter what he called these are his words, colored people to president abraham lincoln praising slavery. he said we colors have taken the vote and decided we don't cotton to that whole patient thing. this is ridiculous. freedom means having to work for real. think for ourselves and take consequences along with rewards that is just far too much to ask

of us and uses the word again colored people. on "face the nation" yesterday naacp president ben jealous faced off benefits webb who is part of the national tea party federation. >> if you look selectively, you, bob, can find, you know, single examples in than movement. mark williams is not a tea party leader although he is perceived as such by some in the media and by mr. jealous. >> you are being disingenuous when you say a founder of tea party express who is on tv as a national spokesman hasn't been a tea party leader. he absolutely was and he was the data he wrote that vile note pending my -- penned in my name saying president lincoln was the biggest racist ever saying slavery is a gig. >> what a stupid letter, really. but, again, where are we with

this story, mark halpern? the bottom line tea party holding strong and no racist elements or should they keep it real and condemn some of the activities when the people who claim to be tea party activists? >> like any diverse group with a lot of independents within the organization, i think it is incumbent upon them to speak out when there is language like that. they need to define themselves. they can't just be passive and saying we're the tea party and whatever our members do, we are responsible or not. they need to figure out what they stand for and they might like to be kind of diverse but they need to pay attention to their own public image. they are a huge part of the debate in this country right now in the midterm elections and beyond and they need to take command of their organization in a way that's responsible. >> sometimes that means condemning certain people and actions within it. >> the interesting thing about the tea party, it's like a massive suburban softball team. sometimes, the members show up. >> right. >> sometimes they don't. but you cannot typecast it. >> no. a good point. we will talk about this more.

west virginia a lot of other things to get you. more joe biden bringing it this weekend. talking about stimulus and other issues that are important to this administration in this country. washington elites versus average americans politico will take us inside polarizing new numbers to see how the two sides split on the country's biggest issues and revealing story next on "morning joe." first, let's go to bill karins! a check on the forecast. bill, good to see you! >> good to see you guys. after a hot weekend, it continues today with a little exception. we're going to add some humidity and some thunderstorms this afternoon. first things first. yesterday, we were in the mid-90s once again from new york city to d.c. and this has been an incredible year for heat. in washington, d.c., we've now had 35 days of 90 plus. all of last year, we only had 22 it. guess what we're going to do the next five days in a row? at least 90 to 95 monday through friday in d.c. look at the end of the week. we get back up there to the mid to upper 90s.

those ridiculous heat will continue. forecast will include thunderstorms today. carry that umbrella from boston down i-95 to d.c. and each a few storms out there this morning in pennsylvania and western new york. rest of the country, the heat wave continues for just about everyone. look at denver today, 99! you're watching "morning joe" on this monday. brewed by starbucks. ♪ could switching to geico really save you

fifteen percent or more on car insurance? can fútbol announcer andrés cantor make any sport exciting? ha sido una partida intensa hoy. jadrovski está pensando. está pensando. veamos que va a hacer. moverá la reina o moverá el caballo? que tensión. viene... viene, viene, viene... gooooooooooooooool! geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

♪ actually, the earthquake was the largest ever recorded in d.c. at this point, i think god is messing with obama. what else could i do? i did the job, the oil thing. oh, this is going to be great.

yeah. >> welcome to "morning joe." time to take a look at the morning papers. we start with the mississippi sun herald. seep detected in well. officials say the cap may have to be reopened to prevent the environmental disaster being harder to fix. >> "wall street journal" gop sees path to retake control of the senate this november if everything falls into place. republicans would have to win virtually every competitive race without losing any seats of their own. >> "usa today" in colorado senate race re-elections have been anxious electorate. the tea party candidate is the front-runner against the republican-backed candidate and on the democratic side, president obama and former president clinton have both endorsed separate candidates. >> charleston daily mail. west virginia state lawmakers hit a major roadblock sunday night unable to agree on a special election bill to fill senator robert byrd's senate seat. >> what is that picture? >> it looks delicious. >> breakfast?

>> keith richards for president. i love that guy! >> america, i'm serious! seriously if you were joining me on my wild twitter feed yesterday, we were hundreds of people were joining in talking about food and obesity. anyone -- well, there were many sending insults my way. just look at that picture. >> we're told that is a three-pound burger. >> that's terrific! good for you! "the new york times." burnout start younger. the article tells how politico reporters start their day at 5:00 a.m. because of three sunrise hours are the best time to reach top officials or their aides. that's weird. >> let's turn to the man running that sweat shop at politico, the executive editor, jim vandehei with a look at the more than plk. the piece in the times today say it was a big april's fool gag you don't have to start before dawn. >> i think they do. look at him. >> how could i possibly serve the "morning joe" audience if we're not up at 4:30 to see what

is going on? >> that's correct. >> does burnout start younger because of people like you? >> i don't think so at all. we're having fun. i appreciate "the new york times" intense interest in politico. >> i think it's the onset of gooberness! >> read it up on politico. you guys are debuting a new poll that shows a huge gap between the average american person and a member of the d.c. elite. >> basically, polled about 1,100 people nationally and compared it to a subset of 250 people who are involved in politics or policy in d.c. to see if there is a big disconnect we think there is. in fact, there is. i thought one of the most interesting findings was if you look at whether elites in washington think the economy and the country are headed in the right direction, almost 50% do. if you look at the numbers nationally, only about 25% do. i think that just speaks to like the stark differences between living in washington right now, and living in the real world. if you will. because if you go around d.c.,

restaurants have been folding even in 2009 when things were real bad, housing market is booming here again. unemployment has been pretty low around 6%, much lower than the national average. and that is the reality that washington policymakers and all of us are exposed to every day which is much different than the reality most people live in and i think that has a real -- i think a real effect on politics and it really amplifies how people perceive washington and amplifies the reality of the environment in which decisions are being made here. >> jim, let me ask you about methodology. how do you isolate a average american and see a d.c. elite when you're doing the poll? >> the general population is a traditional conventional poll. what we did for elites is take people who make more than the average american, much more. are involved in some shape or form policy or politics and live in the d.c. metropolitan area and look at that group against a larger national audience.

you do see pretty big differences only on certain issues, though. the view of the country, the view of the economy and then also the view of sarah palin and the tea party. the views there were very different. people here have a much, much err more unfrvel opinion than sarah palin than people do around the country and also of almost twice as many people in d.c. think that the tea party is a fad that will pass away. whereas, half of that number think that's the case around the country. >> also, you have them speaking about obama. what is the feeling -- split between your quote average americans and d.c. elites on the president? >> in d.c. he has a much higher favorable rating. you take the criteria it will skew slightly democratic because of the demographics of northern virginia and the district. certainly has a much higher percentage of people who think that he is doing a good job. we looked at the national sample of how obama is doing against individual candidates and

hypothetical 2012 matchup and we found what everyone else is finding that romney, palin, huckabee everyone seems to have a chance against obama if the election was held today nationally. >> the palin number, go back to that. what does that tell you? >> it's one of the big untold stories in politics today which is people in washington, republicans and democrats, have a really serious view about sarah palin which most of them don't think she is serious. in the country a lot of people who think she is an inspirational leader who, if not ready to be president today, should be a big part of the national die loll. >> what does that mean for her prospects in a couple of years? >> i think she could be the republican nominee without winning in washington. i think she has enough support and energy out in the country she can do it and it freaks out the washington establishment. again, a lot of republicans think if she is the nominee will lead to a landslide re-election.

>> what is your gut instinct? do you think she wants to run for president and the nominee some. >> yeah. >> mika and i think she probably does. very few people who have the chance to be president walk away from it and i believe she has a very good chance of being the republican nominee. >> in must reads charles blow has a really good piece on this i'm going to read. >> you have made up your mind. >> i think she is going to run, of course. everyone will tell her, you should run, you should run and fill her head up with that thought and she will do it and if she hasn't already decided, she will. i'm tired of this news story. >> how long is jim at work today? 3:00 a.m.? >> he's a goober. up to 2:00 a.m., maybe? >> a goober? what a horrible thing to say. >> well. >> jim, we have to let you oversee your employees as they make handbags. >> i have to watch them sweat. speaking of polls what does americans think of elena kagan? did she get a post-hearing

bounce? this is great. looking back, would michael jordan ever have called up larry bird and magic johnson to play on the same team? you will hear jordan's take on lebron's move to paem miami. very interesting. we'll be right back. ♪ roll with it baby come on ♪ ♪ just roll with it baby you and me roll with it baby ♪ move over, mr. ice cream man. mr. rollback is here. summer ain't summer without popsicle pops. ben & jerry: my two best friends. what would i do for a klondike bar? you don't wanna know. i am so happy right now. ♪ just so happy. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no more $2, $3 fees.

tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no more paying to access your own money. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it'd be like every atm in the world tdd# 1-800-345-2550 was your atm. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 the schwab bank high yield investor checking(tm) account. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 zero atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 a great interest rate. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no minimums. d# 1-800-345-2550 d it's ic-insured. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 e schwab bank high yield vestor checking(tm) account. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 the biggest thing in checking since checks. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 open an account at 1-800-4schwab or schwab.com.

♪ ♪ if you want it here it is come and get it ♪ ♪ >> welcome to "morning joe." 30 past the hour. time for a quick look at our top stories. iraqi security forces are on high alert today reeling from one of the deadliest days in iraq this year. yesterday, at least 48 people died when suicide bombers went after former insurgents who were switch sides to fight alongside american forces. most of the victims were killed by a bomber who struck a line of anti-al qaeda/sunni fighters waiting to collect paychecks and comes at a critical time in iraq with the government stuck in a plol impasse. authorities in india say 61 killed and dozen more injured when a express train crashed into a slower train earlier this morning and not clear what

caused the accident although officials have raised the possibility it could be another cage of sabotage. two months ago, rebels were blamed for a train derailment that killed 145 people in the same state. and a new gallup poll finds more americans want the senate to vote for, rather than against, elena kagan's nomination to the supreme court. 44% to 34%. still the percentages in favor is less than a majority. and the poll shows support for kagan's confirmation remaining essentially the same as it was before her june confirmation hearings. that's a quick look at the news. now to willie geist with sports. >> let's do some sports and we start with the british open wrapping up its final day of play yesterday. get to the winner necked in a second. john daly had a great first round. >> look at his pants! he doesn't do that, does he? you made that up. >> the paisley purple look there. had a good first day and blew up the rest.

he shot a 73 yesterday and tied at 48th place but looked damn good doing it. tiger woods struggling after the car accident on thanksgiving. in the bunker on the 4th hole, chip shot. don't you hate it when that happens? rolls back into the bunker. he bogeyed the hole and finished 3 under tied for 23rd place and still has not won since he came back to golf. the man in the lead louis oosthuizen. 16 under and he ran away from the field in this tournament. a 7 shot victory. the south african winning the british open on nelson maldella's 92nd birthday. no less. congratulations to him. michael jordan was playing golf over the weekend in a celebrity tournament. a lot of people made the case that michael never would have done what lebron did and join two other huge nba stars. he wanted to win it alone. here he is talking about lebron. >> you know, no way that, you

know, just hindsight i would have never called up larry or called up magic saying let's get together and play on one team but things are different. i can't say that's a bad thing. i mean, that's the opportunity the kids have today. in all honestly i was trying to beat those guys. i don't know if they would have been on my team. >> people say lebron lacks the killer michael jordan gene. >> the interview proved that, too the one on espn. >> you didn't like that one? >> hard-hitting journalism. >> i thought it was good. >> going to go to miami. >> take my talents to miami. >> yeah. go back to sleep, everybody. would you say the two best teams in baseball is in the american league east? >> top five. >> you favor the red sox. yankees and rays best two teams in baseball playing over the weekend. yankees took some casualties. here is andy pettitte in the top of the third. he was having a great season. what did he do?

he pulled his groin. >> oh, well! >> i hate it when i pull my groin. yankees expect pettitte to miss four to five weeks. on saturday his teammate a.j. burnett was taken out of the game after three innings. mysterious. nobody knew what happened. he suffered lacerations on his hand after punching a clubhouse door. >> what is wrong with these boys? >> punching a clubhouse door. >> barnicle, put that down. >> burnett will make his next scheduled start. >> a picture of a guy grabbing himself on the front page of "the post." >> mets getting help from the umpires over the weekend. >> phil cuzzi. >> slow ground ball. david wright was so safe! they called him out, though. the umpire calls him out. should have been your ball game but no, sir. it shows ishikawa got under the tag. davis doubles off the wall in the tenth. mets get a gift and win beating the giants 4-3. >> looks like the world cup.

>> it is! flopping and a bad ref. check this wreck out. >> oh, my. i don't know if i want to see this. >> okay. >> does anyone get hurt? >> we won't tell you until after it's done. flips several times and goes up into the crowd. >> good god! that is crazy! >> surely casualties over the fence. get this. no one injured including the driver. >> how is that possible? >> isn't it amazing? the safety they have in these cars is outrageous. >> like me on my way to work in the morning. >> that's why we can show it to you on the loop here. >> i get it. >> if nobody is hurt, why not play the benny hill video. >> that was in england. >> why can't passenger cars be that safe? >> if you want to use a hans device. >> i do every time i drive! >> not just what he drives. it would be bad if -- it would be better if they had the dash cam video and make it more interesting gratuitous dash cam

video. thanks, willie. must read opinion pages are next. richard haass is in those. we will dig deeper into your afghanistan piece. winning in afghanistan. are we doing it? is it worth it? we'll ask those questions. also mark halpern has a piece he wrote as well and we will get there.g joe," brewed by starbucks. ♪ ♪ ♪ a day once dawned ♪ and it was beautiful ♪ ♪ so, look, see the sights ♪ that you learned [ male announcer ] at&t covers 97% of all americans.

♪ this summer, get the exclusive samsung strive for just $19.99. only from at&t.

♪ but there is a reality. in order to get what we got

passed, we had to find republican votes and we found three, three, and we finally got it passed. so there is is the reality of whether or not the republicans are willing to play. >> vice president joe biden, once again, really talking about where we are and the reasons why this administration has done what it's done and what the reality is. it makes sense to me. mark halpern, you write overnight, typically.com democrats start to panic as reality of midterm woes set in. the dems may lose some seats. part of the price the way the white house looks at it? >> he'll say we did a lot and knew there would be a political price to pay and now we have to move forward. that is not the way that i think nancy pelosi and other house democrats and senate democrats will see things. i think that's the division that's really now is unleashed by robert gibbs' comment on

david gregory last week. they want to 5:00 fight to save the majority. not the president doesn't want to keep the mant but that psychological gap between them what is causing the stress now. >> biden saying more spending might help, but the question is where to get the support for that. >> six, seven months ago when they lost that senate seat in massachusetts, they said time is our friend. >> yeah. >> our policies aren't popular now but we have time to sell them. time is the democrats' worst enemy and not enough time to sell health care, stimulus and other things they are so proud of. the president will stay proud of them and he'll keep his job. >> if they lose the house, the house and the senate perhaps, wouldn't it would be easier for the president to play rope a dope against a republican congress a. >> not just that but to get things done. the first two years he has chosen to get things down and he would say out of necessarily working with just democrats.

a lot of things on is his list, education stuff and maybe immigration can only be done with more republicans and trade as well. that is more likely to be done with republicans and the majority. you know, i and others here are sometimes suggested that maybe the president doesn't want to keep the majority. he does for a variety of reons he doesn't want subpoena power to the house republicans. again, he is going to say he is proud of these two years and no mistakes were made that he would -- major mistakes were made. the problem he has is these house republicans, they are going into what congressional people do, they are thinking about how are we going to keep our jobs. nancy pelosi, can you imagine her having to go from speaker back to minority leader? >> no. >> improbable in her mind. again, they now, because relations are so frayed they think about the mistakes they see were made and say we're in a tough position because the white house did things they shouldn't have done. >> let's get to richard haass' "newsweek" article. the cover story. i think it's one of the more important pieces we've seen in a while.

rethinking afghanistan. we're not winning. it's not worth it. i'll read a bit from it, richard. the war in the united states is now fighting in afghanistan is not succeeding and is not worth waging in this way. the time has come to scale back u.s. objectives and sharply reduce u.s. involvement on the ground. afghanistan is claiming too many american lives, requiring too much attention, and absorbing too much resources, the sooner we accept that afghanistan is less a problem to be fixed than a situation to be managed, the better. you start out this piece talking about michael steele's comments and giving some credit to them. but, you know, especially when he talks about this being welcome obama's war. it is obama's war. he has ramped it up in a way has never happened there, but it is because it was manage inside a certain way for nine years and it still exists and he adopted it possibly because it was managed badly. shouldn't this have been

finished a long time ago? >> i'm not sure you can finish things in afghanistan. the previous administration, right or wrong, essentially said we're only going after al qaeda arthur ennot get ambitious in afghanistan. mr. obama chose a different path. he said this is important and essential to the war on terror even though there is hardly any al qaeda left there. he said this is essential to the future of pakistan even though i think what happens in pakistan is far more important to its future than what happens in afghanistan. >> was it wrong to get ambitious in afghanistan? >> i think so. i don't think it's worth the investment. i'm much more concerned about developments in iran and north korea. i think the history of afghanistan should teach outsiders not to get ambitious. the idea we're going to create a strong successful central governing government goes against the grain of the afghan history. all of these problems with hamid karzai are, in many ways, predictable. yeah, i think it is wrong to get ambitious in afghanistan particularly the way we are doing it. >> the objective at the moment

is prevent another attack in the united states by rooting out the al qaeda in afghanistan. does your plan here scaling back compromise that goal? >> no. because what the president is basically said any return of the taliban is the same as a return of al qaeda. i said that's not true. we ought to test that proposition. i think the taliban, to some extent, are coming back. the taliban are pashtuns and half of afghanistan is pashtuns and inevitable the taliban will reestablish some footholds. i don't like that but i don't think it's worth americans lives, so long as the taliban does not bring them back. leon panetta said between 50 and a hundred al qaeda inside afghanistan. that's not worth 100,000 american soldiers. instead we ought to be talking to the taliban to draw some red lines. if you come back, we will attack you if you do certain kinds of things but if you don't do those things we won't attack you and secondly rather than pour this

enormous effort through the central government why not decentralize our policy and work with locals and the people there and essentially go with rather than against the grain of afghanistan. >> i don't disagree with you at all. i wonder, though, back when the president had this choice and made the choice he did, could he have spoken in this way? said it's not worth being ambitious? >> sure. >> it's not worth it. you really think so? >> absolutely. coming back to our first story today about "the washington post" all of those things with the national security establishment. i think what the united states has done is thrown a lot at afghanistan simply because it would be politically and so awful if we were attacked again by terrorists operating out of afghanistan. but we don't need to do this massive investment in afghanistan if our concern is simply to make sure the terrorists again don't use it as a sanctuary. there are at least as many terrorists in somalia and yemen. we don't have a hundred,000 troops in those countries. we go after the guys with using

special forces and we're doing in in those countries but we don't need a large on for example presence to built up a national security state in afghanistan. i don't think it's worth it and i think history suggests it can't and won't succeed. >> part of the weight of afghanistan that we carry in this country, i would submit, is cultural. a week ago yesterday in the sunday "the new york times," you had to go into page eight or nine in the sunday times to find it. eight americans killed in afghanistan. on page eight. in the month of june, there were 517 americans wounded in afghanistan. hopefully, many of them, all of them, are receiving treatment here in the united states now. but we carry that weight. and we carry that weight in a country where people go through days, weeks, months, years without thinking about what we're doing to the american military in terms of deployments and redeployments. >> you're exactly right. and the way you honor sacrifice is not by necessarily having

more sacrifice. the argument that we have to keep doing what we're doing because we've been doing it up to now is exactly wrong. if the president has a chance, he is coming up on his third major policy review of afghanistan. and having david petraeus there as the commanding general i think gives him more flexibility to do less. i hope he does that. >> did you get the sense in reporting this piece there is much more strident division at the top of the administration in afghanistan than we read in the papers? >> absolutely. this administration not unified. the opposite. i think the national security establishment, the pentagon to some extent and state department are in favor of what we're doing but the white house very much is not. i think that is a wide open split. that's probably why it took barack obama so long to decide last time. remember that extended review? ten high level meetings? my hunch is this third review is going to be as divided and just as difficult for this president. >> you've worked at the highest levels of our government in past administrations. what would have to happen inside? what would the spark be to cause

the president to shift fundamentally in your direction some. >> great question. either poor developments on the ground or the public opinion polls or simply that he, himself, comes to this conclusion. this is a very cerebral guy and people are known to change their minds. my hunch he, himself, i would be surprised if he, himself, does not have doubts about hi policy. you have to. >> the suicide bombing in iraq another sign that in some ways these are endless cycles. >> this is the new normal in a place like iraq. the whole idea we were going to create iraq to be this model to transform the region. >> no. >> hopefully, it won't get much worse than it is now but it's never going to be the sort of place people set out to create. >> got to be realistic. all right. richard haass, "newsweek" cover story, "rethinking afghanistan." everybody should read it. thank you very much. willie, i know -- >> what did i do now? what happened? >> they are worried about you.

that's all i'm going to say. we'll get to it later. >> i have a hunch i know. >> willie, what do you have coming up? >> we have news you can't use, including secretary of state hillary clinton being asked by our own andrea mitchell about the upcoming wedding of her daughter, veiled in secrecy is this wedding. >> let her have her wedding! >> talking about the mess that will be bill clinton on his daughter's wedding day. ♪ i will get by i will get by ♪ [ dealer ] during the autobahn for all event,

you can get a great deal on a volkswagen. sounds terrific. cars built for the autobahn. actually, we're both pretty conservative drivers. ooh! shoot the gap. shoot the gap! whoo!

so, they all come with carefree maintenance? yep, scheduled maintenance is included. i like the color. good. [ male announcer ] the autobahn for all event. lease the jetta limited edition for $199 a month or get 0% apr. ♪ ♪ yes! ♪ look, they fit! oh my gosh, are those the jeans from last year? how'd you do it? simple stuff... eating right...whole grain. whole grain? [ female announcer ] people who eat more whole grain tend to have healthier body weights. multigrain cheerios has five whole grains and 110 lightly sweetened calories. more grains. less you! multigrain cheerios.

another heart attack could be lurking, waiting to strike. a heart attack that's caused by a clot, one that could be fatal. but plavix helps save lives. plavix, taken with other heart medicines, . to provide greater protection against heart attack

it's time, right? >> that wasn't very enthusiastic. it's monday. >> i'm not sure what you're doing here. >> time for the news you can't use. before we get to to i understand we have an important e-mail. >> the one about mike? is he okay? >> chris? >> jack in virginia. is there a friction between mika and mike barnicle? mika introduced everyone at the table this morning but did not introduce mike. i could see the hurt in his face and i even replayed it in my dvr. >> jack, you want to talk about the tears on my pillow?

every morning. >> only the big stars get talked about. >> you come to the table completely inappropriate. no pants and comments about women. >> it's hot out! >> did you see the humidity out there? >> what am i supposed to do, seriously? pretend that, you know, certain people at the table are in a certain way? >> the news you can't use, this is hard to compete with. >> yes, it is. how mike beats the heat. >> i'm just transparent about my feelings. >> that's important. go ahead, willie. >> i don't know if this is "news you can't use." the big social event of the year so far is chelsea clinton's wedding coming up in a couple of weeks. this thing is a lock-down secret. >> it should be. >> not even telling the guests where it should be. they say stay near manhattan and we'll let you know where to go. hillary clinton was asked by our own andrea mitchell after a long interview about more important issues. at the end, she asked how the president, mr. clinton, will

hold up coming down the aisle on wedding day. >> you should assume if he makes it down the aisle in one piece, it's -- that's a major accomplishment! he is going to -- you know, he is going to be so emotional, as am i, but we're both looking forward to it and very -- you know, very happy about it. >> aahh! >> president shed a few tears and who wouldn't. >> we will leave them alone. they have done a great job protecting her. >> she has done a great job. >> she has done a great job. you were write. chatty ex-governor to testify. yes, rod blagojevich, at long last, gets to speak for themself as he takes the stand probably tomorrow in his federal corruption trial which is a bunch of hoo-ha if you ask me. a frame-up job. apparently, defense attorneys slightly worried about what he might say. >> as they should be! >> we will be there to cover it

every serked of the way. richard haass, thanks for enduring us. >> aren't you glad i stayed around for that last piece? >> great cover on "newsweek."

when i use expedia, my friends at work think there's more than one "me." ...because on our trips, i always get there faster. see, expedia lets me mix and match airlines. so i can take one airline out... and another home. so with more flight options, i can find the combination that gets me there and back quickest. with a little help from expedia, my friends will think i can be everywhere at once. where you book matters. expedia.

♪ yeah. oh, another hot and steamy day in new york city. it is the top of the hour on these dog days of summer.

i'm mcmika brzezinski. joe is off this morning. mike barnicle is here. everybody slow clap for mike barnicle. yeah, we love him. >> even though i have no pants on. >> well, that. and it's nice when you come to work sober. we don't expect it, though. "time" magazine's mark halpern is with us and the best seller of "game change." >> and another mark. mark mckinnon. a contributor to "the daily beast." and willie is here. you're a given. it's awkward here because either i don't introduce willie and it's like what about willie? if i do, it's like what do you want? a little high maintenance now? on "today" show and now he is high maintenance.

like hello! fine. willie geist joins us. okay. before we go, mark, i'd like to -- willie has smartly pointed out that the day after you were on with us last time, you had a chance of heart in your piece that you wrote about sarah palin. >> yeah. well, i'm a flexible media guy. >> what happened? >> i have -- >> you flip-flopped. >> you know, what i remembered was when i worked for anne richards years ago in texas and she had given her key note speech at the convention. you remember a great deal of attention and rocketed the super stardom. then, suddenly, all of the pundits and special interests around her talked about her running for governor. now, she had never really resolved that process in her own mind but it was clear at a certain point because so many people expected it of her, the women did and immigrants in the valley and that it's difficult at a certain point to say no. >> that's right. she won't. >> you can't say no.

i think the physics have set in for sarah palin. it will be harder to say no than yes. >> i don't want to spend a lot of time on this. the reason it's a will she or won't she is because she spends her day surrounded by throngs of people in stores and supermarkets. >> you got to run, you got to run. >> please take care of our country and please run. come on. you hear that a hundred, 200 times a day and it gets in your head. if you have a certain sense of yourself, it may not be that accurate. >> right now, she gives more voice what republicans want in their nominee to go hard at barack obama and hard at the media than anybody else thinking about running. >> i got to read a piece that charles blow wrote over the weekend to you, mark, coming up. that sort of shows why this poses a problem for the republicans in a big way and would love for you to respond. first, our top story. federal officials are raising concerns this morning about a oil and methane gas leak in the

oil over the weekend. over the weekend, bp had expressed hope that a newly installed lid could stop the flow of crude until a relief well can permanently seal the pipe next month. but, yesterday, coast guard admiral thad allen demanded the oil giant intensely monitor the situation and be prepared to reopen the well if new leaks spring up. although the government is allowing bp to keep the well sealed for now, officials are worried that if engineers confirm a leak it could make the seabed unstable. we will continue to monitor this story. to the front page of "the washington post." this morning, "post "reporting since the 9/11 attacks, u.s. intelligence operations have spiraled out of control and that no one knows how much it costs and how many people it employs or how many programs exist. after a two-year investigation, the post discovering that the system put in place to keep the united states safe is so massive that its effectiveness is impossible to determine. among the findings, over 1,200 government organizations and

nearly 2,000 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the u.s. over 800,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people who live in washington, d.c., hold top secret security clearances. and in washington and surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since september of 2001. together, they occupy the equivalent of almost three pentagons or 22 u.s. capital buildings, about 17 million square feet of space. we're going to talk to dana priest who co-wrote the article coming up later in the show. quick. just whip around on the table here. i'm wondering, mark, does any of this information surprise you? >> no. >> it doesn't to me either. >> not at all. >> honestly. yeah, that's fair enough, right there. one-word answer. what do you think the biggest piece of news in this post is,

mark halpern? >> i think we knew this is a big operation but the scale of it is amazing. the number of people involved and number of facilities. >> it's fascinating. not surprising but unbelievable fascinating. >> i think the federal government ought to overspend. that's it. >> that, you could make that argument as well. this is part one of three parts and we're going to talk to dana coming up, but she talks to -- and the reporter who co-wrote this with her they talk to people who are tasked with how massive the situation and operation has become. and so it appears they are also reporting on an effort to sort of sinnergize the information. >> this is a picture taken of the counterterrorism center in virginia. they are watching cable tv. >> that's a shame. >> this is truly disturbing. >> mark, gis the problem is as

we were discussing last hour, many layers of bureaucracy as you want and build all of these buildings and have all of these agencies but if they are not talking with each other as they weren't with the christmas day bomber and some respects, the times square bomber it doesn't work. >> i think it looks like a great investigative piece that will hopefully give clarification what is going on. again, i'll say i'm glad we're erroring this way and not the other way. that's a lot better than the other way around. >> the political angle of it is over the last nine years or so you're not going to take a vote against national security. >> right. >> that's how this has been allowed to build up. >> it's a long time before we have a president who really cuts in this way because of the political imperative on to keep us safer. i will tell you the administration will read this series and say can we stay as safe without spending as much. >> one thing is almost

impossible to get to in this terrific piece of reporting that will extend the next two days is the degree of danger that's out there each and every day directed at the united states of america. it's almost impossible to get to that. >> well, that's just it and why politically there's so much weight behind funding and putting all of our resources behind us. >> yes. >> we will get to this. dana will be on the show as well and we will talk to her about that, as well as the two other pieces that have yet to come in "the post." moving on now. one week after white house spokesman robert gibbs admitted that democrats could lose the house this november, vice president joe biden is offering a much more optimistic look. speaking on abc, biden said he and president obama are confident about their prospects this fall. >> i think we will shock the heck out of everybody. i have -- i am absolutely confident when people take a look what has happened since

we've taken office in november and comparing it to the alternative we are going to be in great shape. we are going to win the house and we're going to win the senate. we're not going to lose either one of those bodies. >> okay. i love him. what do you say, mark? >> i like him, too. but such political theater and so refreshing to hear gibbs and axelrod come out and say the obvious truth. >> they are going to have a hard time? >> yeah, it's tough to keep the house. that's just all of the data points to that and that is the facts and the reality. now we see the vice president come out and have to spend -- >> i think what i heard there was him saying it's going to be tough but we're going to get through. but there is no question that they are in the middle of a lot of policies that have yet to kick in. >> sure. >> and may take a hit for that. what is wrong with saying that? >> nothing is wrong with saying the reality. but the fact is they are pushing the administration officials out. there was a huge backlash from nancy pelosi and others in the democratic party saying how dare you suggest we could lose the

fact. the fact is they could lose the house and likely to lose the house. vice president biden is right we have pols that haven't kicked in and hope they kick in before november and if they do perhaps that will change the outcome. but probably not. >> the one point that i i think democrats on capitol hill make that runs counter to mark's analysis this gives a permission slip for corporate lobbyists to give money to republicans. they tend to put their money where they think the majority is going to be and if the white house says that, then that allows republicans to go to lobbyists and other corporate interests and say even the white house thinks we may be the mant. >> that is the hit right there. >> you were all good with that. >> aren't lobbyists and everybody else in washington looking at the same realities we are? >> no. >> polls looking at? >> but there is psychologist involved. you go to these meetings and you do these solicitations. >> even the white house says. >> even the white house says a smell of we're going to have a speaker boehner and if you want to be in good with him you need to shift your money over now and what the democrats are capitol

hill are arguing and it goes to this more psychological strain between the white house and the house democrats in particular and some on the senate which this sthey feel the white house does not have as much on the line. they are right. the president will have his job in jan and some house democrats will not. >> people who get out the vote and the fund-raising? >> i think it has a counterbalance effect. saying we are in trouble, let's get going. >> except, i think, a huge percentage of the people who helped elect president obama to the presidency won't show up. >> hope is not on the ballot this fall. >> yeah. >> won't show up. >> we are going to have charles blow on the show coming up. i'm going to read -- i want you to respond, mark. >> sure. >> looking ahead to the next presidential election is what a lot of people are doing now given the fact they may take a hit during the midterm, democrats, or they may not. charles blow says this in his piece entitled "the dog days of

obama." >> well, first of all, i do think that the republicans are a little bit drunk on the mid terms in the sense that 2012 is going to be much tougher. i think a good chance the economy -- >> especially if it's this group. is that true? >> i disagree with that.

i think there will be a vigorous contest and interesting to watch sarah palin go up against mitt romney. that could be good for the republican party. >> really? >> absolutely. sure. >> why? >> because i think that there is going to be a struggle for the heart and soul of the republican party. because of that they have to articulate a division for the republican party and it will be a competing division. >> my god. these people have had a couple of years now to do this. >> it's going to come to shape as it is it on a presidential election and mitt romney has to be good to beat sarah palin. if he does he is going to be good. >> struggle for the soul of the republican party. what is the soul of the republican party? >> they have to articulate a new vision post-reagan and post-bush and talk about what we're for now instead of being just against obama. >> on "meet the press" yesterday, the two guys who had the republican efforts to win back the house and the senate were asked by david gregory several times what is the republican party stand for?

what do what you do different than obama and bush? their answer is i wrote wrote down here, hamada, hamada. they didn't have anything to say and understandably so. they want to go into the midterm elections saying we're not for obama but mark said that won't cut it for a presidential candidate. >> you wouldn't argue this is a time of tremendous opportunity for the republican party right now, this moment in time? yes? >> absolutely. >> so? >> mr. blow criticizes people like bobby jindal who is doing i think a tremendous job and showing the next leadership for the republican party. >> mean his arguments i don't like big government and standing on the shoreline saying where is the government? >> we got some great candidates. >> we'll talk about this more. savannah guthrie has this morning's developing headlines out of the white house. also the tea party versus the naacp. they clashed on the sunday talk shows and now the conservative

group has ousted one of its top members. first bill with forecast. >> heat wave is the big store i didn't out there. the tropics is quiet. not bad weather. one wave north of puerto rico but i don't expect any significant development and no hurricanes possibly this week. we have thunderstorms today. we had the heat in the east and storms we're dealing with. one looking like it was going to make a run through new york city and went through allentown, pennsylvania, and it is just going to miss new york. the morning commute should be doing okay. as far as the other forecast concerned during the day today, mostly afternoon thunderstorms and still hot and 90 to 95. as far as the rest of the country goes, denver to dallas and phoenix, the heat is the story that is dominating our summer weather and could go down as one of the hottest summers ever across the united states. you're watching "morning joe," brewed by starbucks. ♪

over a thousand people a day switch to chevrolet. let's find out why. this malibu is sharp, has great mileage and offers onstar. the hundred thousand mile powertrain warranty caught my attention. it's the chevrolet summer event, which means the only thing left to decide is who drives it home. me! her. me! qualified lessees now get a low mileage lease on this malibu ls, a consumers digest best buy, for around $199 a month. call for details. the switch begins at chevydealer.com.

♪ ♪ live look. the sun is up over the white house in washington, d.c. with us now from the white house, nbc news white house correspondent and co-host of msnbc "the daily rundown" savannah guthrie. >> good morning. >> the president is holding a rose forwarden address today on the economy. they scheduled this late last night. what was the thinking behind it some. >> well, they are really going to try to ratchet up the pressure on republicans over the issue of unemployment insurance. they have not been able to get it extended despite multiple attempts in the senate. the white house, democrats feel like republicans are standing in the way and they want to highlight it, because a lot of people are losing their benefits and even more stand to lose their benefits. they think this is an issue where the public will be on their side.

republicans say it's well and good but you have to pay for it. that has been their objection. on the other hand, democrats say this is emergency spending, this is the way unemployment insurance has always been extended in the past and say republicans are being hypocrites here. they point to the bush tax cuts for the healthiest americans where republicans don't have a way necessarily to pay for it so they say it's interesting that they suddenly have a zeal for balancing the budget when, this in their words it's on the back of the republicans. a fight in a nutshell today. >> it is. selling the concept of spending although i think the vice president is really a good community indicator on communicator on this and a number of issues. it's going to be tough. they have to explain it. the president has to explain it because think people are very -- well, the deficit is really resonating with the american public now. >> there's no question about it. i mean, this is probably -- i mean, economy large but in particular it, you're right.

the deficit and spendizing a real area of vulnerability for the democrats. this is something that americans are hugely focused on. poll after poll show it. i've had republican strategists say to me in the races they are running around the country this resonates more than any other issue. they say forget social issues and it's about deficit and spending. frankly, when you ask, why is the extension of unemployment insurance at this point still considered an emergency when unemployment has been high for going on a year now? this is not something that couldn't be foreseen or planned for. frankly, democrats in the white house don't have a great answer to forthat. >> savannah, we saw vice president joe biden yesterday on the sunday shows make a joe namath forecast. are we making too much of the rift between house democrats and the white house? how upset were house democrats

about that? what is the white house doing to manage that? >> west look. if we're continuing to talk about it, then i think we're missing the boat a little bit. i think house democrats have gone through the stages of grief and are moving on. democrats recognize that doing some kind of circular firing squad or indulging themselves in an intraparty feud won't help matters whatsoever. people were legitimately very angry and it kind of underscored exacerbated tensions that exist frankly between house democrats and the white house and house and the senate. the sense among house democrats that maybe the white house doesn't really care when push comes to shove whether they hold the house, that the senate has gotten more attention. i think that was kind of spilling over last week. they had a meeting here at the white house. pelosi i think said her peace and if you talk to folks on the house side, democrats will say let's move on. this isn't exactly productive.

>> savannah, some people have said nancy pelosi used that opportunity to say, okay, all you care about is keeping the majority and here are the things we want to do. is the president going to have to work harder for individual house candidates to try to keep their majority? >> i think he has to pay as much attention to the house as he does to the senate. a lot of house democrats were grousing how many fund-raisers he has done for harry reid running for senate in nevada. so it may be an opportunity. we know speaker pelosi is quite shrewd to extract some more attention for house democrats running those races. i mean, up to now, the president has certainly done fund-raisers and certainly given money. done all of that but will he be out and campaigning for house democrats as much as he would for some of the senate seats? perhaps we will see more of that because of this issue. >> all right. and i wonder, halpern, as we look at how the republicans are responding to this and on to the rift between the house and the white house, if there was

anything different, that the white house could have done to help democrats and still get everything that they wanted to get done done? they've accomplished a lot. agree with it or not. >> one of the things you hear over and hover is the white house doesn't communicate with them enough. but i think all of these little things add up, but it's because they are feeling like they are going to lose their majority is where all of the tensions and little things they would have otherwise overlooked. >> i think the president wants to retain both the congress and the senate going into 2010, into 2012. politically, it would be better for obama to lose the house and like reagan and like clinton, be able to run against a body that has been stopping the progress they have been making. >> could you explain it? it is counterintuitive. >> it is but when you have responsibility for the federal government you get the blame. if it's the republicans out

there in house that are stopping the progress that you're trying to make you can run against the republicans. >> savannah some. >> i was going to say, mark mckinnon put his finger on the very thing that has so many house democrats anxious. they know on paper, of course, the president wants to hold the house and that is certainly true, but there is this suspicion or perhaps this underlying uneasiness it may be better for his own personal fortunes if the house went republican and then the president had this useful foil. now the flip side of that argument is nobody here at the white house wants to see republican control of the house if, for no other reason, than wauf got chairmanships going to the republicans and oversight committee would probably go to congressman daryl issa and then he would have subpoena power. there are a lot of reasons beyond the obvious ones where the democrats don't -- the white house in particular don't want to see the house go republican

but i think mckinnon puts his finger on a sneaky suspicion. >> the president wants to get things done. he's not thinking about house and senate in terms of his re-election. he is thinking about it in terms of passing things. i agree with you he would be better off with republicans controlling the house probably but not because he could run against them but because he could pass immigration and energy and other things with republican support. >> he is probably unlikely to pass those things any way so better to blame a republican congress. >> one good way in response to your question how could he have helped house democrats more was to stop playing the blame game that they have played the last year blaming every institution in america for the difficulties and concentrate on putting more people back to work in factories rather than listening to faculty members in the west wing of the white house. >> right on, barnicle. >> savannah, thanks. say hi to all of the faculty members there. see you on "the detailry rundown" coming up after "morning joe."

"the washington post" launches what it says is the most comprehensive examination yet of the u.s. intelligence system post-9/11. in the next hour we bring in dana priest, an investigative reporter for "the washington post" who broke the story. we will be right back. ♪ i have wandered through this world as each moment has unfurled i've been waiting to awaken from these dreams ♪ ♪ people go where they will i never noticed them until i got this feeling ♪

we're with you when you're saving for your dreams. [ woman ] when you want a bank that travels with you. with you when you're ready for the next move. [ male announcer ] now that wells fargo and wachovia have come together, what's in it for you? unprecedented strength, the stability of the leading community bank in the nation and with 12,000 atms and thousands of branches, we're with you in more ways and places than ever before. with you when you want the most from your bank. [ male announcer ] wells fargo. together we'll go far.

host: could switching to geico with you when you want the most or more on car insurance?ercent host: was abe lincoln honest? mary todd: does this dress make my backside look big? abe: perhaps a...

vo: geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. ♪ welcome back to "morning joe." sweltering day in new york city. a shot from the top of the rock for you rrg the federal government is allowing bp to keep the cap on the gulf well for the next 24 hours despite methane and gas leak. coast guard admiral thad allen demanded the oil giant intensely monitor the situation and be prepared to reopen the well if new leaks spring up. hillary clinton is in pakistan. shortly after her arrival yesterday in pakistan and afghanistan signed off on a trade deal that had been decades in the making and this morning,

clinton announced more than $500 million in new aid projects for pakistan aimed at reducing anti-american sentiment. in an interview with andrew a mechl she talked about seeking cooperation are the pakistani government. >> our argument is simple. look. you've got to take on every nongovernmental armed force inside your country, because even though you think they won't bother you today, there's no guarantee. it's like keeping a poisonous snake in your backyard. >> inside the black panther controversy is the media and the justice department missing the story? republican congressman frank wolf and "the new york times" charles blow next on "morning joe."

hi, i'm looking to save money on my car insurance. how do i know if i'm getting a good deal? you should talk to the specialist. the specialist? he compares rates side by side. you could save hundreds. it's easy. great. okay, pickles! do your thing. [ bell rings ] that's amazing! i trained him myself. i meant the... okay. same coverage, more savings. now, that's progressive. call or click today. blue shirt: great. well, with every laptop, you get a geek so... take your pick. mom: look at all these fabulous geeks! there are so many! look at this one! it helps you video chat with mom! son: bingo! mom: look at this one. you can video chat with me, honey. son: mom, go get the car. mom: he's in such a hurry to learn. vo: buy any laptop and get geek squad support for six months.

online. on the phone, or in-store.

♪ what i have a serious objection with is selective condemnation of racism when he will not condemn the new black panther party for saying that they want to kill crackers and kill cracker babies, whereas, he would condemn the kkk or any element that shows up and claims that they are a part of the tea party. >> they come in all colors. we absolutely denounce the new black panther party but they aren't in our group. these folks are in your groups. >> okay. that was the president of the naacp ben jealous going at it with david web from the national tea party federation.

an interesting story that evolved in certain news organizations and others it's taken longer. here with us now to give us their take on the new party and newest party members party in a voter case, congressman frank wolf. on the set, "the new york times" columnist charles blow joins us to talk about this. first, mark halpern, set up there story for our virs viewers. >> it started with election incident in 2008 in a polling place in pennsylvania and three levels of controversy here. one is the question of how the justice department handled this case. some people have criticized them for narrowing the case. >> this is the video. >> about these two gentlemen. one you see holding a stick there. a club. the other gentleman. justice department narrowed the case focusing on the gentleman with the stick. the second issue come up is how the justice department in general handles civil rights

cases and -- they did not pursue this aggressively because they were african-americans than necessarily the victims being african-americans. sfinly the media and whether the story has been covered and in the right way particularly for the people on the right and some members of congress like congressman wolf we're about to hear from but also critics of the media. >> they wrote about this sunday's post and says this. if the commission on civil rights investigation is purely partisan that should be revealed. if adams is pursue ago right wring agenda he should be exposed and they said they had perhaps covered it more. congressman, do you think the justice department is ignoring the story? >> i think the justice department has refused to comment on this story over and over. as a background, let me say i'm

the only member of the virginia delegation that voted for the voting rights act when it was first passed and got criticized by the richmond times dispatch and also criticized when i voted for the extension of the voter rights act. but when you look at that, if these were two members of the kkk in philadelphia, mississippi, doing what they have done, they ought to be prosecuted as if you have two new black panthers doing it in the city of philadelphia. i think there has been a failure by the media to take a look at this and i think the justice department, i'm the ranking member on the committee that funds the justice department, and we cannot get any answers out of the justice department and also asked that the inspector general take a look at it when he did there was politicizing of the justice department and the bush administration. he looked at the time a there but refuses to look at it here. >> a failure of the media to look at it. let's start there. charles blow, what do you think

is behind that, if you agree with that? your thoughts? >> i don't agree with it completely. i think that, you know, the justice department has to get more answers. i think that's true. i think that the media, depending on what you call the media, some parts of the media i think have exploited this to a degree that the president of the black panther party is on fox on a regular basis now, it seems. you have a tough case here, because, to my understanding, we still don't have any person who has come forward to make an official complaint that they have been -- they were intimidated. you have a intimidation case with no voters. >> that's tough, congressman, couldn't you think? >> there are people that have come forward. >> official? >> also bartell bull who had been working on civil rights in the mississippi in the '50s through the early '70s was the campaign manager i think for robert f kennedy one of the most

egregious violation of the voting rights act. you've seen the intimidation and for them not to pursue this case is just inappropriate. as a strong supporter of voting rights act, not just by verbiage but by actually voting for it, i think you have to look at this wherever you see it. if it's in philadelphia, mississippi, or philadelphia, pennsylvania, that is intimidating to have people standing in front of polling places doing what they have done. >> yeah, but bull said it was more egregious to what he saw in the '60s which is completely outrageus. in addition to that, though, i mean, first you have to make the point -- >> i think he has a pretty -- >> excuse me. no one should be defending these guys and what they stand for and what they believe. in any civil society. racism against racism, call it what it is. no comma at the end of that and no but. they say discussing things, they are racist sts first degree. they are sexists. they are homophobic.

they are anti-semitic and two lists of hate groups and nobody is defending these guys and what they did. in a civil society you don't want anybody standing in front of a polling place with a billy club and people showing up at rallies with aks strapped to their side. that said, what the justice department has said is that they didn't believe that charges were supported by the evidence. now, we will have to wait to see if the investigation bear that out. if the investigations do bear out the fact that the charges are not supportive by the evidence, then you have to step back and say why are people making such a big fuss about such a tiny group? two people, one of whom -- >> correct. i understand what you're saying. i agree with a large portion of it. we have asked the justice department to investigate. they have refused. they have asked glenn fine, the inspector general, whose job it is to look at this to investigate it and he has

refused. we have come back again and asked him again. career people from the justice department have contacted me. so i agree. i want to see it looked at, but, yet, we have the inspector general, glenn fine, refusing to take a look at it. >> i think that is completely fair. look at it. i think, you know, the charge by the guy adams was, you know, who is a disgruntled employee and has his own set of issues. the charge is that it is a systemic problem that they are systemically not prosecuting cases where blacks are the aggressors, if you want to use that word. if that is the case, if he wants to add evidence to that fact -- >> congress mank, do you believe that's true? >> we're -- well, we don't know, number one. eric holder has refused to comment. i have sent him numerous letters. if you go on my web page you will see all of the letters we sent. they refuse to answer the

letters. secondly, glenn fine looked at similar problems in the bush administration. you recall the u.s. attorney problem, that was appropriate. we are asking that zen fine and they look at this and no one will look at it. it's almost as if they are fearful to look into it. >> that's interesting. >> congressman, what is your suspicion about why they are fearful to look into it? what are you suggesting? >> i don't know that i really ought to comment what it is. i think there is politics involved, but i think until we see, it's really hard -- very difficult to say. that's why they want to see the -- we've also asked that the office of professional responsibility look into it. they have had the case now for over a year. and they refuse to make any comments. >> what would be the politics involved? >> that's what i want to know. >> i want to know. >> i think i want to wait and see. i think it's appropriate. i'm not into condemning and complaining and attacking people. i have supported the voting rights act. i was the only member of the

virginia delegation -- i just want to see it looked at. the american people have every right to know that justice is in the justice department. as of now no one will look at it and i want to find out why. >> congressman and then charles. congressman, have you heard back from any of these letters? you haven't heard back from anybody? >> they have come back and said they are not going to look at it. >> they turned you down? >> correct. >> charles? >> is the most inflammatory part of this -- strange logic. the idea that the obama administration, which is what is happening here which is people are trying to tie the obama administration to black radicalism and it's been happening since the campaign and it continues to happen. not everybody, but that --

electoral goal if you can tie him somehow to black radicalism. strange logic to think that this tiny group, he has somehow benefits politically from protecting them, when nobody -- remember. they have a summit the year before this voter intimidation thing came up. there were a hundred people there. there is nobody there. there is nothing to gain. in fact, everybody to game in prosecuting them. >> the argument, isn't it, correct me if i'm wrong, the guy who is holding the stick is actually being investigated while the other guy is not. that is one of the questions. but he lived there. >> also, he was a registered poll watcher. >> right. >> the police showed up. they took the guy away with the billy club and left the other guy there. i mean, there is a certain point -- you know, that's what the investigation i guess will tell us, but it's a complicated case. but the political part of it -- i mean, if there is -- if it is being poe lit 'ed it is

politicized on the right. you have them saying every republican should make this the black panther case the willie horton of this year. he says that. >> why isn't attorney general holder answering the questions and why won't the ig look at it and. >> good question but i'm not sure deserving of the label. >> and if two members of the kkkk stood outside a polling place in mississippi and did that they would be in violation of law for two new black panther to do this in the city of philadelphia is a violation of law. no one should stand on that side of a polling booth, whether they be in virginia or in pennsylvania and do that. and the ig has an obligation to look at it and eric holder has an obligation to look at it and the office of professional responsibility and all three have sort of just saying we're not dealing with the issue and that is wrong. >> all right. congressman wolf, please let us know if you hear back in any "way. keep us posted. that was a great discussion.

we appreciate it. charles, thanks for helping out. up next a new documentary takes us into a new global race. lawrence bender is next on "morning joe." ♪ tdd# 1-800-345-2550 what if every atm was free? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no more $2, $3 fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no more paying to access your own money. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it'd be like every atm in the world tdd# 1-800-345-2550 was your atm. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 the schwab bank high yield investor checking(tm) account. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 zero atm fees. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 a great interest rate. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no minimums. d# 1-800-345-2550 d it's ic-insured. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 e schwab bank high yield vestor checking(tm) account. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 the biggest thing in checking since checks. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 open an account at 1-800-4schwab or schwab.com. there's oil out there we've got to capture. my job is to hunt it down. i'm fred lemond, and i'm in charge of bp's efforts

to remove oil from these waters. bp has taken full responsibility for the cleanup and that includes keeping you informed. every morning, over 50 spotter planes and helicopters take off and search for the oil. we use satellite images, infrared and thermal photography to map and target the oil. then, the boats go to work. almost 6,000 vessels. these are thousands of local shrimp and fishing boats organized into task forces and strike teams. plus, specialized skimmers from around the world. we've skimmed over 27 million gallons of oil/water mixture and removed millions more with other methods. we've set out more than 8 million feet of boom to protect the shoreline. i grew up on the gulf coast and i love these waters. we can't keep all the oil from coming ashore, . and we'll be here as long as it takes to clean up the gulf.

hi, ellen! hi, ellen! hi, ellen! hi, ellen! we're going on a field trip to china! wow. [ chuckles ] when i was a kid, we -- we would just go to the -- the farm. [ cow moos ] [ laughter ] no, seriously, where are you guys going? ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! ni hao! [ female announcer ] the new classroom. see it. live it. share it. on the human network. cisco. you can get a great deal on a volkswagen. sounds terrific. cars built for the autobahn.

actually, we're both pretty conservative drivers. ooh! shoot the gap. shoot the gap! whoo! so, they all come with carefree maintenance? yep, scheduled maintenance is included. i like the color. good. [ male announcer ] the autobahn for all event. lease the jetta limited edition for $199 a month or get 0% apr. ♪

various groups have been focused on acquiring weapons of mass destruction, in particular nuclear weapons. >> all the black market seizures i'm aware of were caught. >> at a russian naval ways in the early 1990s potatoes were guarded better. >> united states launched a rocket to study the northern lights. somebody forgot to pass word on it. the russians opened up the command and control launch codes, the button, put it on the desk and said, we're under attack. >> that's part of "countdown to zero" which traces the history of the nuclear proliferation and claims we have entered a second nuclear age. we are joined by the movie's producer, lawrence bender.

opens this friday. >> it does. >> my dad's in it. >> he is a movie star. >> i'm gone to tell him this. >> he's great and joined the global zero movement which is fantastic. >> what did you talk to him about, which part of this? >> we interviewed a lot of presidents. tony blair. president of striouth africa. what happens with nuclear strike and he talks to the man and very scary. >> next time we have him on, let's ask him about sort of trick he played on his new staff when he joined -- it is a -- it's a -- only he can tell it. >> little nuclear joke? >> a trick, yeah. uh-huh. got it. anyway, are we in countdown mode? why do this movie now? >> well, a lot of people think that we're in a scarier time now than cold war post 9/11.

the threat is not really a nuclear state. a state attacking another state. the threat is really terrorism, proliferation. here in times square, that car a couple weeks ago, if that was a nuclear bomb instead of a fireworks and propane tank, for instance. we really believe the only way to get rid of the threat is get rid of the nuclear weapons in the world. >> is the united states government agile enough where you don't have another state, say the soviet union, but you have a rogue actor coming across nuclear material sold to him by a former scientist, are we able to deal with that threat? >> that's the very point and the main threat. what's happened is the president's taken great leadership on this. we talk about this the movie but united states and russia have about 95% of the world's weapons right now. a and what needs to happen is they need to take leadership and maybe china bb involved and a

downward pressure on all the nuclear states in the world. and then there will be a way to sort of have more of a pressure on the idea of terrorism and proliferation. >> you know, there's a front page piece in "the washington post" with a three-part series of the growth of the intelligence network here in the united states since 2001. given that and the difficulty of communication between one agency and another, and i don't want to bum people out this morning, but is it almost inevitable given the freelance nature of terrorism, a hand held part will be exploded somewhere in the world? >> well, that's the reason why we made this movie because there are a lot of people believe that's not a matter of if but when. for instance, well, there's a lot of people that talked off the record to us about this. but we believe that there is a way to prevent this. which is to -- and it's what the president did a nuclear summit a

couple of months ago in d.c. which is to first lock up all the nuclear materials around the world. he had 47 heads of state in d.c. that committed to do. once you lock it up in a fort knox-like -- not an ounce of gold stolen as they say in the movie. shouldn't be uranium stolen from a secure place. the second thing to do is get rid of the nuclear weapons. now, this sounds naive but a lot of people have come to change their mind and think of nuclear weapons, including people like -- >> how likely is that? >> we think it's likely. george schultz, henry kissinger, talking about the reduction and ultimate elimination. look at reagan in the 1980s. a dream to get rid of nuclear weapons. >> anything you hope? >> the president gives me hope. >> so the movie ends on somewhat

of a hopeful note? >> it does. it actually ends with president obama and president medvedev signing the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. >> lawrence bender, thank you very much. >> opens friday. >> in a theater near you. we go inside the explosive new report on the u.s. intelligence community. that's next. you want some fiber one honey clusters? yeah. you must really care about him. what? you gave him fiber. this tastes way too good to be fiber. they're delicious crunchy clusters with sweet honey and half a day's worth of fiber. you care about my fiber? not really. [ male announcer ] fiber one.

an accident doesn't have to slow you down. from new car replacement and guaranteed repairs to accident forgiveness, we do all we can to help you move on. liberty mutual auto insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? that makes everything taste better.

maybe it's cooking over an open flame. or the juicy beef franks on a delicious bun fixed up just the way you like them. well, whatever it is, you can enjoy more of it with walmart's guaranteed unbeatable prices on all your cookout favorites. ♪ save money. live better. walmart. ♪

welcome back to "morning joe." it is 8:00 on the east coast. top of the hour. live look at the white house. with us on the set here in new york, mike barnicle. we also have the chairman of deutsche incorporated, donnie deutsche joining the table. in new york, charles blow. in washington, political analyst pat buchanan and investigative reporter dana priest. in a three-part series she writes that it's so large no one knows how effective it is. let's dig into that as the top story, dana. let's put some of the information out here. "the post" reporting through you co-writing the article about the size of secret america. my gosh. if you look at these numbers, they're staggering. we've got 1,200 government, 1,900 private and security

investigations. almost a million people with top-secret security access. 33 buildings built for top secret work. is your thesis that this complex, this agency so massive it is impossible it can be effective? >> well, it's not impossible to be effective, but nobody knows exactly if it is. that it's become so big and so unwieldy and disjointed that people that run it can't know -- don't actually know how many people are inside of it and how much it costs and they don't know whether it is effective in certain areas or not. there's a tremendous amount of wasteful redundancy, of government organizations that are doing the same thing as other government organizations. and not even knowing about it. one of my favorite examples is the area of tracking the flow of money to and from terrorist organizations. and we have about 25 different units and organizations doing

that kind of work. and many of them don't know about each other. so how can it coordinate and learn from one another? >> all right. pat buchanan, jump in. >> sure. but dana, the proof seems to me is in the pudding, is it not? this is a huge increase in the security agencies but in terms of terrorist attacks since 9/11, the record of the united states and of both administrations is pretty good. is it not? >> it is hard to tell whether this large complex actually contributed as much as it could to that or not. we've asked government officials if they could give us any examples that we don't know about of plots that stopped. we tried to do that for the last several months an they couldn't and we know that the last two, ft. hood alleged shooter and christmas day bomber not stopped by this gigantic system. it was stopped by a very

individuvigilant -- >> there are classified documents and some that you can get that show thwarted attacks, as well. and i wonder if because i'm looking at your reporting, you seem to be talking to people who are tasked with looking at how massive this has become. and looking as to how to synchronize information. so, it's not necessarily uncovering a problem. it is bringing to light something that we are grappling with. correct? >> well, i don't know to what extent they have started to grapple with it. actually, i do know and the answer is they haven't. we had on the record interviews with secretary of defense robert gates and cia director leon pi net that and gates said he had trouble getting data on his own and frustrated by that. we found nobody in the government who had the count of how many people were -- do have top-secret clearances. >> right. >> and some people helped us with the methodology to figure

it out but they said they were interested in our numbers and you can see on the website what we found. we try to just describe this gigantic system. and you can look at all of its different characteristics on the website. so it's interactive. >> it's amazing what you found. but i'm looking at you talked to army lieutenant john vines who was asked last year to review the method of tracking the defense department sensitive activities and leon pinetta talking about how this all needs to be looked at more closely. so it's not like they don't know that it's impossible almost to track the growth here, but they need to. yes? >> yes. and secretary gates said that he intended to do that. and leon pinetta says he has a five-year plan that he believes as does secretary gates that for no other reason that the deficit is so large and the economy's

still in a recession that we aren't going to be able to continue to spend this sort of money but the idea is you can't cut intel cently unless you know what's out there. >> dana, as a former ceo and u.s. citizen, sometimes when there's a "v" problem you throw stuff at it and as a u.s. citizen, i'm like, that's okay. overkill is okay here. i'd rather err on the side of too much artillery. am i missing something? >> yeah, i think so. i mean, that's the general response has always been more, more, more. but then you look at the christmas day bomber and see the national counter terrorism center, something created for the sole purpose of running tips to ground, had -- because the system had gotten so big, the lines of responsibility had blurred. and the director of national intelligence said as much to the committee when he was testifying on that. he also said to us, you know, as

americans, if it's worth doing it is probably worth overdoing so, you know, they do realize it's gotten very big. it doesn't mean it's gotten more efficient. and they also worried about having a really intelligent conversation about threats and about terrorism. but it's still very politicized an you can't even question size without being called weak on terrorism and that's something that everybody was concerned about. >> pat buchanan? >> right. dana, but it seems quite natural and logical that after 9/11 let's find out what we didn't know. let's build this agency. >> right. >> fine out this and that and then as it builds itself up, seemed to me the responsibility of oversight to look at this redundancy and the overspending which is, frankly, secondary problem and falls upon the congress of the united states. are you suggesting the oversight committees of the intelligence services have really failed in their duty for the last five years? >> absolutely.

i think that they have few staff that are experienced in different elements of the community, the intelligence world. that they don't dig hard enough. that there's natural resistance on the part of the agencies to be scrutinized to the point that they should. there's heavy classification that sometimes prevents members of congress from looking into this more carefully. so i think oversight by congress is definitely an issue. as it is oversight within the intelligence world itself. the general accounting office which looks at all parts of government except the intelligence world has wanted to get in there and do the sort of oddity and investigations they usually do but this administration has said, no, you can't do that so there's fighting all the time about how much you can actually see within the intelligence world. >> mike barnicle? >> of course, that's a real problem for reporters and anyone outside of this that's why our stories don't talk about the

actual substance of the top-secret work. what we did, because we can't do that, what we tried to do is give you a sense of the size but actually counting and this is the database that you can look at, actually counting the number of organizations and looking at patterns and redundancy and the number of contractors that do the same thing and how much some of them have grown. >> thanks for proving once again why newspapers exist and why they're important. >> yes. >> the first of a three-part series. >> true. >> secondly, reading it today, you know, you spent an inordinate amount of time on it. you talked to gates and pinetta and many, many other people, obviously. would you be surprised after your reporting, should any of us be surprised after reading the pieces there might be out there in this world separate kill teams, united states kill teams, operating without the knowledge of the secretary of defense or the head of the cia? >> you know, never say never but

i would be very surprised. kill teams as you all directed by somebody. and because those are very special elements, they usually in my experience every one of them i have known about and we have documented several, they get the direction from the president of the united states through the defense department and through the cia. so the idea that there are rogue kill teams out there doing their own thing, it would surprise me. >> all right. charles blow? >> dana, you said before that you were talking about effectiveness. is there any suggestion that the growth in size has made the kind of coordination less effective? i mean, is it getting -- is it stumbling over itself as it grows to a gar gant juan size? >> exactly. i think that's the point. it is stumbling over itself. that you don't assign clear responsibility. that was the case in the kris

yas m mass day bombing and happened with the alleged ft. hood shooter. that the army organization responsible for who in the ranks may have had jihadist thoughts and communications was doing something that the other agencies had done which is to look at the affiliations within the united states of various terrorist groups. it wasn't spending all of its time looking inside of its ranks because it's hard to do so people reinvent the wheel, do the easiest thing and don't do the hardest tasks which need to be done. >> dana, good morning. it's willie geist. >> hi. >> from the people you spoke to for this piece, the people critical of this huge apparatus we have, what did they feel we should do differently? in other words, what's the solution to the problem? who politically has the guts to say, you know what we need? less national security. >> not less but more effective. it is a big difference. if it turns out to be less, then it's because you're trying to make it more efficient.

and because there's waste and inefficiencies. >> yeah. >> how you find that out is to go through. each department needs to go through it and then if we continue to have a director of national intelligence and they're about to -- they have nominated someone else for that position, then that person needs to have authority and also relationships that will allow it to be coordinated in a colee jal and appropriate and efficient way. >> yeah. i'm going to throw it to pat buchanan in a second but with this thought, dana. you know, i definitely from the people i have spoken to in the intelligence community, i mean, you have mentioned the christmas day bomber maybe four times in this interview and there are many, many, many cases of thwarted attacks or thwarted efforts that, you know, have been the result of the good work of the people who work in the intelligence community. i'm sure you know that. but i just wonder, pat, is there an argument to be made there's a concern about digging really deep into the intelligence community? of course, we have a right to

know as much as we can know and i look forward to reading these pieces but is there an argument to be made it hurts america to dig deep into the top-secret intelligence efts around the world in this age of terrorism? >> but i think there's clearly a line. now, what da that's pointing out so far and what i read in the piece is, look, this is a huge thing, overgrown, it's redundant. it is excessive. and the fear, i will say this, over the weekend i was hearing will they name names of people whom we know or who are quasi classified secret who are cooperating with the intelligence agency and thereby damaging the national security in some way according to certainly a lot of conservatives? let me ask dana that. i didn't see the names and i read early in the piece not very deeply but will they name names of people who we would be surprised are working in the intelligence community? >> are we naming sources? absolutely not. >> i mean -- right.

people working with, say, subcontractors and people like that whose names would surprise us? >> no. we are not -- we are not naming sources. we are naming the companies that do work here. i mean, the companies -- you go on the website and tell you what they do. we put a list of companies together and we have said what they generally -- what types of organizations they -- no. we generally say what types of work they do. and the point of that is is so that you can look and see how many different companies, for instance, do intelligence analysis for various organizations. we don't tell you which organizations they work for. we just give you a broad surface view of how many do that. you can play around on the website and look at that yourself and come to your own conclusions of whether this amounts to an unhealthy redundancy. it is in the view of many in the government resulted in an unhealthy dependency by the

government of contractors. they have a different motive. even people with the best of motivations for the united states work for companies whose main task is to make a profit. and, you know, that's not wrong but it means that they are not -- >> but aren't they -- >> pulling back programs. they're going to push for more. >> are you talking about contractors right now? >> companies that contract with the government. >> aren't they being used because of limits put forward by congress? aren't they inevitable at some point? >> well, it was -- it was -- that's exactly right. they aren't inevitable but congress and the administration in the beginning said we'll give you extra money but you can't use it to hire more government employees. you have to hire contractors, right. but recently they have lifted some of those caps and this administration believes that it's not less expensive to hire contractors and more of the caps should be lifted to replace

government employees for contractors. >> dana, you have a perspective pretty much nobody has in this country after digging and reporting. the money question. after all that, i'm going to premise there's obviously too much bureaucracy here. do you feel more safe, less safe or as safe as when you started this story? >> i wish i knew. you know, that's the frustrating part is that the people who should know have a feeling that they can't know. so of course, we're safer in a way that we're more aware of the problem. i think after nine years, they have a better sense of where the actual threats are. your guest in the last segment talking about nuclear proliferation and terrorists who can get their hands on that sort of material, that is among a top priority. but running after every potential threat, that happened or every potential worry, that happened right after 9/11 for about two years until the community got a better sense of where the real issues are. >> interesting. >> but the bureaucracy is not

caught up almost to the threat analysis that is much more sophisticated now than it was prior. >> pat buchanan? >> right. you criticize the obama administration which is sort of stone walling the a degree, i guess. the congress of the united states. and you say there's no oversight responsibility. you're making a fairly compelling argument to have an adversary opposition in the congress of the united states that maybe the cozy relationship is a problem. i mean, is that your view that they might be better off with a political opposition going after this redundancy? >> oh, you know, i have never covered politics. that's your bally wick. i don't say no oversight. i say if you lock at the framers of the constitution, they would say probably they would agree it's always bet tore have an opposition government. and that's the checks and balances. and so we -- it's hard to get

into these subjects because there is classification and so we try to really balance that. we tried to not go to places that we would do any damage but at the same time -- >> all right. before you -- move over, mr. ice cream man. mr. rollback is here.

summer ain't summer without popsicle pops. ben & jerry: my two best friends. what would i do for a klondike bar?

you don't wanna know. i am so happy right now. ♪ just so happy.

you know, there is a reality in order to get what we got passed, we had to find republican votes. and we found three, three and we finally got it passed. so, there is the reality of whether or not the republicans are willing to play. >> okay. welcome back to "morning joe." time now to look at the morning papers. "mississippi sun herald." seep detected in well. the cap may have to be reopened.

"wall street journal." gop sees path to retake control of the senate this november. republicans would have to win virtually every competitive race without losing any seats of their own. >> "usa today." right now, the tea party candidate is the front-runner against the republican-backed candidate. on the democratic side, president obama and former president clinton have both endorsed separate candidates. >> "charleston daily mail." filling the vacant senate seat. >> i'm sorry. stuck on the meat challenge. >> happy meal. >> what is that? what is that article? throwdown? i went to read it. when's wrong with him? >> how great is that guy? >> elitist. >> meat. see how they stack up against the three-pound burger. are you gios kidding me? >> this is a great country.

>> seriously. that's just what we don't need. >> memorial day to labor day, it is meat season for men. >> no. listen to me, mr. big man. it's a problem that we have a third of the country that is overweight. another third that is morbidly obese. morb morbidly. okay? a third of the country. it's unbelievable. >> the food and nathan eating hot dog connest. >> you know what? pat buchanan, are you with me on this? what we need -- >> pat's not with you. >> no, no, no. listen. in my campaign, the big argument is whether wendy's is better than mcdonald's or burger. >> where did you come down on that? >> burger king. the big one. >> look at that man. is he going to eat that thing? seriously. >> marry it. >> what do you think he'll do, wear it? >> looks like he has a history of eating those things. >> you know what? here's the deal. he absolutely does. we should talk that way about

obesity. we should not avoid the issue and when someone is obese, they are sick as if they have cancer or heart disease. >> oh no. >> we should discuss this. >> if we solve that -- >> mika is right. if we solve the weight issue in this country, we solve the health care issue. >> almost everything with health care. >> don't pander. >> no, no, no. >> you are better than this. >> you are pathetic. >> i have gotten into shape recently and discovered health abe h and how to affect everything in your loif. >> get out of here. >> who is this? >> talking about babes. come on. >> yes, pat? yes, pat? pat wants the table. >> i like donnie better when he was a fat toad. >> wow. >> a fat toad. >> that is wrong. i don't know. >> not going to listen to you. >> fat toad. >> just go to politico. forget the rest of the news.

>> executive editor of politico with a look at the playbook. hey, jim. >> hey, i'm a meat eater. >> of course you are. you are an american man. >> not a european man. >> no. >> red blooded. >> better ways to prove your manly hood. >> oh. >> hey now. >> what would those be? >> it is not eating a three-pound burger with four pieces of cheese melted with mayonnaise and mustard and gawk mole on it. that's not manly. okay? >> okay. hey, jim. >> enjoy. >> talk about your new polling. fascinating poll. there was question about the table about how you identified average american and d.c. elite. those are the two groups in the polls. tell us how you found those people and then get into the numbers. >> right. one poll, standard poll, a poll of 1,100 people. the other poll tried to sift

through to about 230 sort of washington elites, people who live and work in the d.c. area and politics are policy. and make a lot more than the average american. so we could compare to see if, in fact, what we think is true is true of a disconnect between d.c. and the rest of the country and absolutely is. about 50% of people in the d.c. sample said that the economy is headed in the right direction. only a quarter of people nationally feel that way. >> so jim, i can discount my theory that the 250 d.c. elites that you identified you found them outside vineyard vines in georgetown and wisconsin avenue? >> absolutely. driving the bmws down m street. >> talk about because what you're getting driving out here is the disconnect between sort of washington echo chamber and the rest of the country. how does that manifest itself in your poll regarding the tea party? >> for the tea party, fascinating. about 70% of people in d.c. said the tea party is just a passing fad.

it will wash away whereas a small percentage of the general population feels the same way and saw a similar result with sarah palin and shows there's an elitist view that people think exists in d.c. it does exist and born out in the poll data. >> is this an elitist? same poll on upper east side of new york or downtown san francisco, is this more of a county, higher psyocioeconomic groups versus lower? >> good question. i think definitely true in new york. possibly in san francisco. i don't know if it's true across the country. what makes d.c. unique is that whereas in new york your obsession might be money, the markets. here, it is just policy and politics so people spend waste away too much time of thinking about sarah palin, tea parties. the political topics dujour. they're paid to pay attention to the stuff more closely. >> pat, are you a self-identified washington

elitist or regular american? >> i was born and raised in d.c. before there was a beltway there, willie. when we did the studies on immigration and illegal immigration in the '90s and working on books they said there was no issue of a greater disparity of concern than the issue of illegal immigration with the vast majority of americans supporting arizona and the elites saying that's a ridiculous law. did you do anything on that, joim? are you seeing anything on that? >> we did not do immigration but what you're talking about is spot on. the conventional wisdom is what arizona did was terrible and a big backlash against it and then 20 polling organizations found out that the vast majority of the country support what happened in arizona and a lot even want to go further. i do -- i think the poll shows what those polls show. on certain issues, there's a massive disconnect.

we found different issues, importance of afghanistan or what will happen in iraq but with the economy and the social issues, you often see a big, big gap. >> thanks. before you go, mcdonald's, burger king or wendy's? >> definitely mcdonald's. the little onions on the burgers, sorry, mika, they're tasty. >> right. the fries. >> super sized fries. >> the fries win the day. >> in and out burgers. >> yes. jim, thank you for the insight as always. >> you all are sick and i mean you will be sick. >> mika, as somebody that found the new life, these men seem very obsessed with -- >> oh, get out of here. >> mika, i'm -- >> hmm, interesting. >> erin burnett, she loves a good cheeseburgerer and will have the top three business head loins of the morning next. cars built for the autobahn. people are gonna be driving crazy in the jetta... ...the routan, and the cc.

that cc is gorgeous. that jetta is awesome. my wife loves her new routan. and they all come with that carefree maintenance. scheduled maintenance included. we're not shopping for cars here, people. c'mon! well, i am now. that's kind of exciting. [ male announcer ] right now, get 0% apr on 2010 models, excluding tdi. or get a great price on a certified pre-owned volkswagen. introducing total plus omega-3 honey almond flax cereal. all the nutrition of total, plus 10% daily value omega-3 ala, and a delicious honey almond crunch. new total plus omega-3. and a delicious honey almond crunch. when my doctor told me that my chronic bronchitis was copd... i started managing it every day. i like to volunteer... hit the courts... and explore new places.

i'm breathing better with spiriva. spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled maintenance treatment for both forms of copd... which includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. i take it every day... it keeps my airways open to help me breathe better all day long. spiriva does not replace fast acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. stop taking spiriva and call your doctor right away if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, have vision changes or eye pain... or have problems passing urine. tell your doctor if you have glaucoma, problems passing urine or an enlarged prostate... as these may worsen with spiriva. also discuss the medicines you take... even eye drops. side effects include dry mouth, constipation and trouble passing urine. now, i'm managing my chronic bronchitis every day. ask your doctor if once-daily spiriva is right for you. there's oil out there we've got to capture. my job is to hunt it down. i'm fred lemond, and i'm in charge of bp's efforts to remove oil from these waters. bp has taken full responsibility for the cleanup and that includes

keeping you informed. every morning, over 50 spotter planes and helicopters take off and search for the oil. we use satellite images, infrared and thermal photography to map and target the oil. then, the boats go to work. almost 6,000 vessels. these are thousands of local shrimp and fishing boats organized into task forces and strike teams. plus, specialized skimmers from around the world. we've skimmed over 27 million gallons of oil/water mixture and removed millions more with other methods. we've set out more than 8 million feet of boom to protect the shoreline. i grew up on the gulf coast and i love these waters. we can't keep all the oil from coming ashore, but i'm gonna do everything i can to stop it, and we'll be here as long as it takes to clean up the gulf.

mike barnicle said who is that, robert frost? contemplative moment. let's check the business news we rin burnett down there in the haze. hello, erin. >> hello, good morning. all right. so ready for the top three? >> i'm ready, number three. ♪ >> right order. this one is thank you, dubai.

why thank you? because dubai is buying america. >> oh good. >> they're the biggest exporter is boeing. maker of planes. a huge defense contractors, as well. emirates airline, probably the fastest growing in the world buying 30 boeing 777s and brings the total fleet to 101 planes. which is just a big fleet. let's just put it this way. price is $9 billion and going on this week at the farm bureau air show, the biggest in the world. probably the first of a bunch of orders that boeing will get and expecting a significant number. so that's good news. >> good news. >> give the market, you know, a little bit of a bounce on optimism like that after friday's selloff but boeing is saying there's an uneven recovery worldwide and the u.s. is lagging. okay. that's the negative news which brings me, willie, to number

two. ♪ number two the manifesto. this is interesting. spend, spend, spend. you have 16 economists, most of them to the left here who are coming out and saying that we need urgent action on unemployment and that means more spending. incredibly critical of congress' unwillingness to extend unemployment benefits. they say we need more spending and that while they recognize the necessity of a program to cut the long-term deficit, if we don't spend more near term to solve the problem of unemployed americans we'll have a larger deficit in the long term so the call on spending versus saving, louder and louder, an interesting today. take a look at that on the daily beast. and then -- >> ready? this is huge. ♪ number one >> we all like a good fight on a monday, right? okay. so you all know about this whole

fight going on, right, about the signal on the iphone 4? >> yes. >> yeah. >> right. so we know apple said, hey, we are sorry and here's the special case. well, steve jobs at the same time came out and mentioned, he said it is not just us but all smartphones. they drop calls and mentioned an others. specifically including research in motion's blackberry. >> oh. >> so -- >> oh. >> isn't always happy in corporate america with a response like this but the ceo of research in motion saying apple's attempt to pull people to apple is unacceptable. apple claims about rim products deliberate attempts to distort the public's understanding of an antenna design issue and deflect attention from apple's problem. >> lebron james. >> i like that one, yeah. >> bite me. >> that's right.

>> getting verizon instead of at a andt. everyone loves this. >> top three countdown. update on the capped oil well in the gulf of mexico. we'll bring in louisiana congressman next. son: man, this is perfect. blue shirt: great. well, with every laptop, you get a geek so... take your pick. mom: look at all these fabulous geeks! there are so many! look at this one! it helps you video chat with mom!

son: bingo! mom: look at this one. you can video chat with me, honey. son: mom, go get the car. mom: he's in such a hurry to learn. vo: buy any laptop and get geek squad support for six months. online. on the phone, or in-store.

bp may now face a seven-year offshore drilling ban. yeah. in response bp said, what are we supposed to do there for seven years? sit there like idiots and do nothing all day? we could do that. we could do that. >> welcome back to "morning joe." the u.s. government is allowing bp to keep a cap on the busted well in the gulf for another 24 hours despite concerns of a possible methane oil and gas leak.

admiral allen said they're monitoring in case of new leaks and monitoring the situation. of course, the people of the gulf coast. democratic congressman charlie melancon of louisiana running for senate this november and joining us from capitol hill. congressman, obviously, a tenuous situation in terms of still hoping to cap the leak. but somewhat hopeful. not, though, for the people in your district who have been hurt so terribly by this for quite sometime to come. how are they doing in terms of getting the assistance they need from the government? >> well, it's not the assistance from the government as much as the assistance from bp. >> bp. >> escrow fund put up there. i think that's an august 1 start date. i have heard some complaints about the fact that bp backed off of the commitments they had made and while appearing to wait for feinberg to set up. i don't think that's good but

they're tentative right now. there's cautious optimism three days ago when the cap went on and oil stopped flowing. that was a great feeling but everyone knew it wasn't the end of the whole deal and waiting to see what's developing with the leaks. but even more so, i think admiral allen now needs to start flowing the oil. i'm not a person that says this is what you have to do and i don't want to open it back up but we need to gauge that oil. we need to keep it from blowing that bed rom out which i think is a fear. >> when you look at the difficulty that bp as well as the white house and everybody involved are having trying to cap this leak, trying to perm innocently stop the gushing oil, how do you balance that with the questions it raises about what else could be, you know, lurking below the surface of the gulf with this well and others and your opinion on offshore

drilling? >> we have drilled 40 to 50,000 wells offshore. about 5,000 of them in deep water. this is the first one that's exploded to the extent or have had the problems it's had. doesn't mean there won't be another one won't blow and i think bp proving to be a bad player, cutting corners. doing things that they shouldn't have done. that could have prevented when's happened. so you don't fault an entire industry. it's my mother used to say one bad apple doesn't make the barrel bad. >> maybe in this case it kind of does. look at the entire gulf coast right now. pat buchanan would like to jump in. pat? >> sure. >> how are you? you seem to be weighing the problems down there and you seem to have -- maybe i'm mistaken, come down on the side that maybe they have to open up that cap again to relieve this pressure rather than taking the risk of the pressure cracking the ocean floor. and permanent damage. i guess this is the dispute

between the admiral and bp. where do you come down on that? >> well, i think we have to be cautious but at the same time i think i come down more on the side of the admiral flowing. we do have a problem with leak and it is in the bedrock. that could turn out to be swiss cheese under the pressures pushing through so having multiple bedrock, i think, is worse. >> how do you thread the needle for the public? i'm from louisiana, too. i know everybody has somebody engaged in this. they don't want to stop offshore drilling and a big part of the fabric of that place. at the same time, there's pressure, at least from people looking from a distance, that says how can this be that you want to encourage offshore drilling when it has -- so devastating for you right now. do you help america to come to

the reconcile those two things which a lot of people from louisiana and along the gulf can reconcile but a lot of people at a distance have a hard time with this concept. >> my colleagues here in the congress asked the same question of me and it's difficult to explain when you're up to your ankles on the beach of grand aisle trying to tell them, explain to them the importance of the oil industry to the economy and the people of the state and the district which i represent. it's difficult. but at the same time, the shrimpers, the oyster men, the people that have the business, they have friends, families, relatives, neighbors, you name it intertwined in and out of the oil industry. it is an important driver and we were a bright spot in the economy up until this oil spill. the rest of the country was suffering. you know, people criticized me when i voted for the stimulus but i remember the 1980s and the downturn along the gulf coast, particularly louisiana from the oil and gas industry and

people -- bankruptcies, people unemployed. it was horrible. i didn't want to see that happen again. unfortunately, this oil leak could be the beginning of what could be a long-term economic downturn for the people of my area. >> congressman melancon, we wish you the best of luck. >> thank you. >> thank you for coming on the show this morning. >> thank you for having me this morning. the trial of the century. >> thank you. you borrowed my term. >> innocent, innocent of all charges. he told us as much. >> he's set to take the stand. will it help him or hurt him? will sarah palin run? all next. and when they're laughing... you're laughing. be kind to your eyes... with transitions lenses. transitions adapt to changing light so you see your whole day comfortably... and conveniently while protecting your eyes from the sun.

ask your eyecare professional which transitions lenses are right for you. summer ain't summer without popsicle pops. ben & jerry: my two best friends. what would i do for a klondike bar? you don't wanna know. i am so happy right now. ♪ just so happy.

built with quality and backed with the best coverage in america including a 100,000 mile powertrain warranty. that's 40,000 more miles than ford. chevy silverado half-ton. a consumers digest best buy and the most dependable, longest lasting full-size pickups on the road. now get 0% apr for 72 months on 2010 silverado half-ton models with an average finance savings around $5,800.

old fashioned broker did with my money. so i switched to e-trade. it's high-tech, low cost, easy to use. it's transformed the way i invest. experience high-tech investing at e-trade.

beautiful picture, mika. >> here we are. >> riding the bike there. this is the moment we're waiting for. >> actually, i have it. >> you haven't? it's me. he's waiting a year and a half for this moment. rocket rod blagojevich is set to take the witness stand at the federal corruption trial. will it backfire on blago? >> he'll make money. >> or will taking the stand help ensure he's innocent of all charges as he likes to say? nbc's john yang has the story. >> reporter: the most damning witness against rod blagojevich may have been rod blagojevich

captured by secret government wiretaps. >> i've got this thing and it's [ bleep ] golden and i'm not just gives it up for [ bleep ] nothing. >> reporter: what he had was the power to fill president obama's senate seat. what he wanted in exchange was a cushy new job. >> i'd like to get the q[ bleep] out of here. >> reporter: he wanted valerie jarrett to get the seat. even before polls closed on election day, blagojevich began discussing how to trade the appointment for a job in the obama administration. a cabinet post or an ambassadorship. >> yeah. the objective is to get a good gig over there. >> reporter: but the obama camp wouldn't go along. >> well, okay, so we know he wants her. they're not willing to give me anything. appreciation. [ bleep ] them. >> reporter: defense attorneys say blagojevich, a former prosecutor, never knew what he was doing was a crime. and they say his advisers, many of them lawyers themselves, never told him it might be

illegal. their star witness, blagojevich himself. >> now the process of prove my innocence begins and i will prove my innocence and i will testify. rod blagojevich, how are you? nice to meet you. i didn't do those things by the way. >> reporter: given the past performances, the testimony could be colorful. but will it be effective? >> charismatic as he might be, the government has a lot of damning evidence with respect to the tapes. >> reporter: white house chief of staff rahm emanuel could testify this week. other potential defense witnesses, valerie jarrett and senators dick durbin and harry reid. the judge's already blocked the defense bid to have president obama testify. never shy, blagojevich works the crowds as he leaves court each day. as early as this week, he'll try to work that charm inside the courtroom. >> see you next week. >> yes, sir. next week. >> reporter: john yang, nbc news, chicago. >> so good. hey pat, i'll quote blago

himself. when he was in here, he said did i use salty language on the tape? sure. but last time i checked we had an amendment to protect that. is he right? >> dead right. they'll recall what happened in massachusetts. that's what it looks like. mike? >> what was he indicted for? human nature. he wanted a better job. >> i mean, ain't no lying in him. >> seriously, seriously, seriously, who are these people having their children take their picture with him. seriously, what is wrong with us? >> mika? >> pat? >> we are talking about is, you know, joe biden going to take secretary of state and trade hillary clinton, put her on the ticket. isn't this, i mean, trading offices, isn't that pretty much straight politics? >> hey, well, that's a fascinating conversation. i just don't understand standing outside the courthouse and having my daughter take a picture with rod blagojevich.

>> you don't understand. >> these are my favorite -- >> oh! okay. up next, i think we know what we learned. sir? finding everything okay? i work for a different insurance company. my auto policy's just getting a little too expensive. with progressive, you get the "name your price" option, so we build a policy to fit your budget. wow! the price gun. ♪ ah! wish we had this. we'd just tell people what to pay. yeah, we're the only ones that do. i love your insurance! bill? tom? hey! it's an office party!

the freedom to name your price. only from progressive. call or click today.

time now to talk about what we learned today. pat in washington, pat? >> donnie deutsche is an example to us all about how to stay fit and healthy. >> oh my god, okay. called you a fat toad earlier. mike? >> there's no level to which