members of congress. tomorrow on "the last word" that's all going it be on "the last word" tomorrow. up next, "hardball" with chris matthews. showdown. let's play "hardball." good evening, i'm chris matthews out in san francisco. leading off tonight, cain denies all. it was one of those moment where is we all had the same picture on, simultaneously. herman cain decided to meet the press. and deny all the allegations of sexual harassment against him in toto. he said he couldn't even remember sharon bialek, the woman who came forward yesterday to say cain had made physical, sexual advances on her. cain said the accusations would not chase him from the presidential race. ain't gonna happen, cain said. and mitt takes a hit. a leading conservative red site, redstate.com says nominating

romney against obama is a death wish for conservatives. among criticisms, mitt romney is going to be the republican nominee, and his general election campaign will be an utter disaster for conservatives as he takes the gop down with him and burns up what it means to be a conservative in the process. he is called utterly unprincipled. if not romney, who? and a story that saddened college football fans everywhere. joe paterno will soon be out at penn state according to "the new york times." perhaps in a matter of days. at issue? his failure to act agress ill upon being told a former football coach allegedly sexually abused a boy in the team's showers. let's start with herman cain defending himself. david gregory, moderator of "meet the press," eugene robinson from "the washington post" and msnbc analyst.

and cynthia tucker, a visiting professor at the university of georgia. david, where does this story go now in terms of getting to the truth? >> two tracks. political, but also the facts of the case. i've talked to some lawyers, since last time we talked, and they said the notion, it's a he said/she said, isn't really accurate. bialek's, one of the things she alleged, is there was a room, a suite that herman cain provided for her on the night they went out, so it's not just a matter what he said and now she's totally denying knowing her. presumably there is a record there to go check. is there a credit card receipt, some sort of record? this is indicative of the political problem. more details. more facts likely to come out. other accuser who's are now

prepared to go public. how much more can herman cain take? he was definitive today, chris. denied everything, said he's never acted inappropriately, so he was certainly declarative. >> in denying everything, he now has to defend everything, including an upgrade in the hotel. he said he never sexually harassed sharon bialek and didn't even know her. >> i never acted inappropriately with anyone. period. i saw ms. allred and her client yesterday that? that news conference for the very first time.

as i sat in my hotel room with a couple of my staff members, as they got to the microphone, my first response in my mind and reaction was, i don't even know who this woman is. >> gene robinson it seems this puts him in a position that's quite fuel factually based. this puts anything that comes along and says he did know her, did have dinner with her, drinks with her, did go for a ride, any evidence along that lines crashes him unless he has one last fallback, i forgot. >> well, i forgot. i don't known that's going to cut it, given the definitive nature of his denial. he doesn't remember her, this never happened, so the records are checkable. also in the -- the other case

that we know a little bit about, the one in which there was one of the two in which there was a settlement with the national restaurant association and the woman who is now coming public, he said that case was resolved with a finding that the -- the allegations were checkable, there are records that the restaurant association has, and we can see now if, indeed, those allegations are found to be baseless or not. >> and once this woman karen kraushaar talks tomorrow to the press, her evidence will be particular and we go down to cynthia tucker, her evidence will be obviously it was a big part of her life if it occurred, and she will say something quite definitive about the series of events and if they match up in terms of the charges made by sharon bialek, the public, including the conservative public, may see a pattern of misbehavior here, perhaps. your thoughts. >> absolutely. i don't think for one moment the

restaurant association paid either a settlement or a monetary agreement because herman cain once said to a woman you come up to here, just like my wife does. i suspect that we will hear accusations where he was clearly inappropriate behavior that clearly crossed the line in a way that led the national restaurant association to pay her money. and let's bear in mind, there were at least two women that the national restaurant association reportedly paid money to. you don't do that just because the chairman or ceo has made some perhaps offensive comments in passing. you do that because there is a pattern of conduct that is clearly questionable, and over the days and weeks to come, herman cain will have to contend

with those charges coming out hour by hour or day by day, because he's done nothing to lay them to rest. >> are we sure there are two cases called settlements or agreements? or there is just one? do you know for sure there was a second one? >> i believe there were two women to woman money was paid. >> the ranks of herman's public accusers grew by one. karen kraushaar, who works as a spokeswoman for the treasury department told "the new york times" that she was coming forward, her name had been leaked to several news organizations. one of the two women who settled sexual harassment allegations against cain with the national restaurant association. politico first reported the accusations but did not name her by name. she told "the new york times," when are you being sexually harassed in the workplace, you are extremely vulnerable. do you whatever you can to quickly get yourself into a job someplace safe, and that's what

i thought i had achieved when i left. and cain was asked about ms. kraushaar in his press conference. let's take a look at this exchange with a reporter. >> this is your press conference where you are going to level us with and tell us what happened. so tell us what she accused you of, and what really happened? this is your chance. thank you. >> well, i can only recall one thing that i was aware of that was called sexual harassment. the one thing that i remember that i remember during the day, when all of this broke loose, is that one day in my office at the national restaurant association, i was standing next to ms. kraushaar, and i gestured, standing near her like this, you are the same height as my wife. because my wife comes up to my chin.

that was the one gesture that i remember. the door was open. my secretary was sitting there. it wasn't anything behind closed doors, i gestured because of her height. comparing it to my wife's height. end of story. >> david gregory, i can only imagine, "meet the press" and other organizations are thinking about -- well, put it this way. imagine a couple of women sitting next to each other, three or four sitting next to each other making similar complaints on very personal memories of horrific experiences. won't that have some firepower? >> kraushaar said she would like to have four women come together to provide, her words, a body of evidence against herman cain, against his recollection, which is thin, against his denial which is absolute. in the case of kraushaar, we know there was a settlement before she left the national

restaurant association. again, it's knowable. to go back, even if you're herman cain. he doesn't want to get into the details. which gets to the political point. one of the things that people around him are saying particularly who are working on the front lines in the early states, look, it was important that he came out, addressed this, he was forthright about it, if that's what he ultimately was, and if everything was true, that will provide some peace of mind to supporters. but i'm also talking to pollsters, doing checking and starting to hear now that his poll numbers are starting to shift. and that, of course, is the crack in the foundation that they will have to be watching very, very carefully as he is a front-runner, but i don't think you can say he's a durable front-runner. >> gene robinson of "the post," another debate coming up on cnbc, our sister channel and it seems if you are at all one of the reporter there, it will have to come up if you're one of the other candidates it's going to

come up. how does he get through tomorrow night? by tomorrow night, he will have two accusers publicly by name with specific instances of what i would consider sexual assault in the one case, he was so physical. what do you make of the situation facing him tomorrow night in the debate? >> well, it's a cnbc debate, focused on economic matters. i think he runs back to 9-9-9, every opportunity. >> that's his 911. >> right. that's his 911. exactly. every question, no matter what the question is. but, political impact of this, it's -- to me, it's uncertain. exactly what will happen. there is an element of cain support that is kind of based on, you know, almost a middle finger to the traditional political process. he's not like the others, he's not the traditional politician. he hasn't ever held elective

office, and i think there is a core that is going to try to stick with him, no matter what. now, all bets are off if he is proven to have flat out lied today. but if it remains ambiguous, i don't see all of his support just evaporating. >> talking to rival campaigns, there is a lot of trepidation to start pushing him around. why is that about? his support is strong. hard-core, anti-establishment supporters out there, including those in the early states. because we have seen the polling. one campaign said, look, we want his supporters to reluctantly come to the conclusion that he can't win and then who inherits that support? >> you are thinking what i'm thinking. newt gingrich has already figured out. this gordian knot, and he is cut

it. he will be the best buddy herman cain ever had on the planet for the next week. >> on the debate tomorrow night, saturday night, they will walk a fine line. in some people's interest, to remind people he was a lobbyist in washington. others trying to burnish their anti establishment credentials and what may come with thais some of the alleged activity why he was a lobbyist. but short of that, i think they actually try to layoff of him. you know, again, this is about what happens in the next few days and how much support begins to crumble beneath him. >> i think he's a genius at what the jesuits might call disassembling. they taught us how to do it. that answer of whether he was going to take a lie detector test is for the records. i still don't know what he's saying. thank you. coming up, the accuser, will we see his candidacy survive?

you're watching "hardball" only on msnbc. ♪ [ male announcer ] you never know when a moment might turn into something more. and when it does men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use. cialis for daily use is a clinically proven low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. ♪ [ man ] tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications than 4 hours. [ man ] tell your doctor about if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer,

go to cialis.com.

welcome back to "hardball." despite having to face reporters and a national television audience to discuss multiple charges of sexual harassment, herman cain remains optimistic about his chances. let's listen. >> it is natural some voters would be turned off by the mere mention of the accusations. that is normal and expected. all you have to do is look at campaigns historically and able to identify those situations where some members of the public, some of the voting electorate, are going to be influenced by the court of public opinion. >> and as we said earlier, cain made it clear, he's not getting out of the race. what toll will this take on him politically? what will happen today and tomorrow probably. howard fineman for the huffington post.

and dana mill banks with the great "washington post." howard this one is so fascinating you and i, if we could get a piece of this self-confidence and get rid of our composite guilt. this guy has no guilt about anything he possibly has done. he is st. francis or whatever. i don't know who he is. he's define almost in his perfection. and no matter what anybody throws at him, he just throws walk a very logical statement, no, you're wrong, i'm right. >> i wish i could get away with saying i've never done anything inappropriate to anyone ever. but this is -- back in the nixon years, they used to talk during watergate about a modified limited hangout. you know, that they would let certain facts out, and they would then go from there. this is herman cain doing the

full monty. i mean, he's saying -- yeah. he's saying no way, no how, i don't remember this woman, i don't know this woman, i never did anything wrong, there was never a settlement, never any real accusations. keep in mind, this is a guy who's somehow or another caused $80,000 worth of payments to be made to two staffers of the national restaurant association back when he was the head of it, and he left the association six months early on his contract. so something, somewhere along the line happened. but, of course, he's denying all and that makes it both perilous in terms of the evidence and politically. because all you need is one chink in that armor and even the people who are staunchly with him right now will begin having second thoughts. >> let's take a look at this matter that fascinates me a moment ago. dana millbank. you could do a whole column on

this one. cain gave an inskrutible answer when asked to take a lie detector. try and figure out what he meant. >> as distasteful as it might be, would you be willing to do a lie detector test to prove your honesty in something like this. >> yes. >> go ahead. >> yes, i absolutely would. but i am not going to do that unless i have a good reason to do that. that's one of the first covenants i made with my staff and attorney. of course i would be willing to do a lie detector test. >> what did he say, dana? >> no way on god's green earth will i take a lie detector test. >> he said i absolutely would. >> and then he said only i think it's appropriate. guess who the arbiter of what is appropriate here? the same thing going on with all of the accusations. it doesn't matter what somebody else says, even if he did it if he doesn't consider it inappropriate.

i think what herman cain's standard of inappropriate is, even if anybody -- >> i think have you been surpassed by this woman's testimony yesterday, graphic, detailed and close to what i would consider assault. her description, bialek's description of what happened, either he did or didn't, it's not open to interpretation of whether it's appropriate or not, is it? >> inside what i believe is the brain of herman cain, he believes is he a perfect man who has beaten cancer and everything else, he can do no wrong. anything conflicting with that is tossed out. that's behind many successful executives and many successful men, and it's behind many successful politicians. what we have here is an extreme and an extraordinary case of somebody who actually is literally gotten to the point where he can't think of anything bad he's ever done.

>> howard and dana, we know one of the other women here is going to come out and make a statement in the next 24 hours. what does that do politically? if you're tony perkins, one of the right wingers. what do they do if they -- what's the right word they use in court? a mostly -- a dominance of proof. not a clear case. >> a preponderance of the evidence. >> thank you. you are a lawyer. i forgot. >> a preponderance of the evidence. >> the preponderance against him. >> i'm trying to view this from places a visit a lot during the campaign year, the pews of mega churches in iowa and south carolina and elsewhere. they want to like herman cain, he seems like a decent guy, like his economic views, his professions of faith, the fact that he'll burst into gospel psalms at any moment. they like all that, know he's a conservative.

want to show he's not prejudice, want to show they have a reason to vote for him. but they also want a reason not to vote for them. and unless his story is straight, there is going to be a hesitation there. they will sit there in that church pew and say do we really want to commit to a guy whose story we don't quite know? the other thing this raises beyond all of the questions of sexual harassment, as serious as they are, is the question of who is herman cain? who is he really? he burst on the scene as far as national politics concerned. what do we really know about him? who is he really? what is his whole life story? what do we know beyond the smile and the aggressive salesmanship he has? it will make this western coming out tomorrow it will make some of the evangelicals in iowa and south carolina hesitate. >> one of the creeds of the far

right and a lot of them are against this. we hate lobbyists. we hate people that are lobbyists, hate washington, corrupt, packed with lobbyists. this is a lobbyist. i'm sorry. did anybody notice? head of the national restaurant association. is he a certified big-league, major-league lobbyist as he pointed out today, 150 employees working on his staff, basically lobbying the united states government for a pressure group purpose, to help his industry. >> exactly. >> how come he walks on that one? >> all along he's played this brilliantly well. he's sort of in on the joke. you get the sense that he knows there is some absurdity to the campaign. the lobbyist running as the ultimate washington outsider. i think you got a real moment -- one moment of honesty tonight when he said, look, i don't really care about the court of public opinion. that's shocking for a politician. what is politics, but the court of public opinion. he was saying i only care about those people that support me and

believe in me. he is dealing with a tiny sliver of the ehe electorate, and that's why they won't necessarily pull away they'll rally to his side when he runs against washington. >> dana, i miss disabue of that. 11%, of the republicans, enthusiastic about mitt romney. i'm sure there is a larger percentage enthusiastic about herman cain. >> what we're talking about, maybe there's a turnout of 150,000, 175,000 in the republican caucuses in iowa on january 3rd. herman cain, playing for 25,000 or 30,000 of those. will those people be shaken what they hear progressively the next few days. will they alternatively circle around and defend him? the chances of their circling around and heartfuly embracing him diminish with each passing day is another actual face comes

out, not just the media conspiracy, but an actual person comes forth. that's what he has to worry about. those are the people. if he ends up finishing in the obscure distance in iowa, he can forget it. >> an interesting story. let's hope we get the truth and get fairness in all of this. thank you, howard fineman, thank you, dana milbank. up next, more social philosophy from michele "it's every man for himself" bachmann, in the side show. you're watching "hardball" on msnbc. progresso. it fits!

fantastic! [ man ] pro-gresso they fit! okay-y... okay??? i've been eating progresso and now my favorite old jeans...fit. okay is there a woman i can talk to? [ male announcer ] progresso. 40 soups 100 calories or less.

back to "hardball." jon huntsman stuck at 1% in the polls, and more than a few people suggested that his real goal isn't to win, but to derail mitt romney. latest evidence from the huntsman camp, a new website,

scared mittless. mitt romney, running from america, and a clock counting up the time from the last sunday appearance. we stand now at day 610. let's check out the site's latest video. >> he has not appeared on this program or any sunday talk show since march of 2010. we invited governor romney again this week, but his campaign says he's still not ready. >> i just don't take questions. what i don't want to do is -- listen to my words. listen to my words. that is -- >> he's still not ready to sit down for an interview. >> i guess last week's ad dubbing romney a perfectly lubricated weather vane is more of a jumping off point. he clearly has it out for mitt.

next up, a daily dose of charles dickens. and it's gop candidate michele bachmann. the candidate spoke yesterday at the family research council and cut for spending cuts to social programs. let's listen. >> our nation needs to stop doing for people what they can and should do for themselves. that revives the principle of a national work ethic, that we have sadly forgotten. that means an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. self-reliance means if anyone will not work, neither should he eat. >> if anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. it's biblical language, but not exactly religious. earlier this year, the white house launched a new website where americans can petition the government for an answer from officials if they have enough signatures. the petition called for the white house to immediately

disclose the knowledge of communications with extraterrestrial beings and an extraterrestrial presence. but this of the statement "the u.s. government has no evidence that any life exists outside our planet or that an extraterrest triial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race. in addition there, is no credible information to suggest that any evidence is being hidden from the public's eye." it would have been very interesting if the government office had said anything else but that. up next, mitt romney takes a big hit from a leading conservative website, calling the possibility of romney winning the nomination an utter disaster. but if not romney who? cain? you're watching "hardball."

now back to "hardball." welcome back to "hardball." is mitt romney a real conservative? a lot of conservatives say no and worry they are missing their true opportunity to take on owe obama when he is vulnerable. redstate.com wrote a state scathing both, mitt romney is not the george w. public of not the george w. public of 2012 he is the harriet meyers of 2012. only conservative because a few conserative grand poobahs tells us he's conservative. he will be the republican nominee and his general election will be an utter disaster as he takes the gop down with him and burns up what it means to be a conservative in the process. can romney withstand these kinds

of attacks and pick up the 3/4 of republican voters not with him yet? with me now, democrat bob schrum, and republican steve schmidt, who worked on the bush/cheney 2004 campaign and the mccain campaign. it looks like cain has problems up the wazoo. he will have to keep battling. romney does look more and more like the nominee. can be a good nominee if so many are contentious of his beliefs? are i do think he is likely to be the nominee, if for no other reason, he's the only plausible republican candidate for presidency at this point in the race. i think the comments are unfair to romney. remembering the mccain campaign. you have all of these quote-unquote conservatives

cheering for romney during the entire duration of the primary. he was the conservative candidate. now some elements have turned against him. if you read what mitt romney says, follow mitt romney's vision, i think he is clearly a conservative candidate in the race, and i -- i don't understand why erick erickson would go out and say romney is not capable of winning a race. no president has gotten re-elected with an unemployment race above 7.4%. >> what is an issue that romney will not bend in order to win? name one, steve. you know he won't change. >> i think -- i think that -- i think that these were issues for mitt romney in the senate race, in the presidential race last time. and at the end of the day, he will have to deal with it. it's a criticism. john kerry had to deal with it. >> you have to deal with it now, you, sir, my colleague, name one issue which mitt romney will not bend on in order to win the presidency? >> i'm not -- i'm not a

spokesperson. i'm not a spokesperson for mitt romney. i believe he is enunciated his plans pretty clearly on fiscal issues. gave a serious talk about entitlement reform. i don't think mitt romney would ever compromise the national security of the country. i think he's prepared to be president, and i think he'll have to deal with issues in the congress text of a race. i think it's important to remember, this was a line of attack we used against john kerry in 2004, but it didn't become a disabling issue to john kerry until he went out and said he voted before it before he voted against it. mitt romney has to be very careful. all campaigns begin with assets and liabilities. this is clearly a liability. the romney people are aware of it. his strategies are smart people. we'll see what happens. >> bob, here is more what he said about the flip-flopping issue. "romney is a man devoid of any principles other than getting himself elected. as much as the american public does not like barack obama they

loathe a man so fueled with ambition he will say or do anything to get himself elected. mitt romney is that man. i've been reading the 200 peaches of single-spaced research on there the john mccain campaign on mitt romney. there is no issue i can find on which mitt romney has not taken both sides. he has no core beliefs, other than himself. is he the silly putty of politicians. press on him real hard, and he'll take on whatever image you press into him, until the next group starts pressing." that is damning description of anybody. bob schrum, you ran a campaign against him. you can think of something that mitt romney would stand on and admit defeat on. >> this guy gives zip flopping a good name. he's a warp speed weather vane. he has changed on issues of policy.

steve is quite right, he was trying hard in that segment. kerry got caught up in this, because he voted for the $87 billion before i voted against it. his record was a lifetime of consistency on all of the big principled issues. romney's record is a lifetime of changing as your candidate, john mccain said in 2008. and when romney said i stand for change, and mccain says you sure do. you change all the time. i don't think you can write romney off, saying he has no chance. and steve is the only plausible nominee. >> why do the other candidates always end up hating romney personally? >> well, you know, look, in the 2008 campaign, mitt romney was the first perch to run a negative ad that rubbed some of them the wrong way. look, he's the front-runner in the race. >> huckabee said he had no soul. and you're guy, mccain, was so mad at him, he ran sarah palin

as his running mate because he couldn't stand the idea of giving mitt romney a break by making his vp running mate. >> i would dispute the sarah palin pick was a revenge -- >> it was an alternative. >> kind of a revenge on mccain. >> you know, look, at the end of the day, the economy is terrible, the republican candidate is somebody who is going to need -- is going to have to be someone who can make an economic argument. and i think you saw with the herman cain news conference if that's the stuff we'll talk about on the republican side in the election, we're doomed. and so -- and so i think that mitt romney right now, like i said, he's the plausible candidate in this race. >> in other words, you can run sam the sham and he will win against obama, is that the basic argument? >> listen, i think he's going to be a very tough opponent. you know, the president is forceful, disciplined, focused,

and republicans shouldn't be dancing in the end zone, despite what the economic indicators are. >> thank you, bob and steve. up next, legendsary head football coach may soon be out for not taking stronger action against an assistant coach that allegedly sexually abused a boy in a shower this is a bad, bad thing. you're watching "hardball." people really love snapshot from progressive, but don't just listen to me. listen to these happy progressive customers. i plugged in snapshot, and 30 days later, i was saving big on car insurance. i was worried it would be hard to install. but it's really easy. the better i drive, the more i save. i wish our company had something this cool. yeah. you're not... filming this, are you?

aw! camera shy. snapshot from progressive. plug into the savings you deserve with snapshot from progressive.

welcome back to "hardball." the penn state community has been rocked by charges against a former coach, jerry sandusky, accused of molesting eight boys over 15 years.

this covered his time working at the university and his retirement it could affect the tenure of the beloved coach, joe paterno, who everybody loves. paterno has done nothing you illegal, but many say he didn't do enough when he was confronted against allegations against sandusky back in 2002. "the new york times" reports, quote, penn state is said to be planning paterno's exit amid scandal. joining me, congressman meehan of delaware county who asked arne duncan for a federal investigation into the sandusky charges and msnbc political analyst michael smerconish. congressman, hold on for one second. michael, give us a narration of the story where it's at. >> as it relates to coach paterno, the worst of it is to so-called victim number 2. it is march of 2002. a graduate assistant working with the penn state football program goes into the locker room 9:30 at night and reportedly sees coach sandusky

engaged in anal intercourse with a boy he estimates to be 10 years old. he doesn't intercede, he doesn't call the police, he calls his father he tells the grand jury. the following day he tells coach paterno. paterno's response, sunday, is to tell the athletic director. he discharged his responsibility which legally speaking he may have done, but from a humanity standpoint there's outrage in happy valley that he didn't do enough. subsequently and frankly something reminiscent of the way the church has handled this, nothing is done other than to ask this man to surrender his keys and access to the locker room. that's why people are so horrified. >> so he basically, this coach, or this person, the graduate student, witnessed basically the intercourse of an adult male with a prepubescent boy.

>> correct. he maintains, i have the grand jury report here, that's the way he explained it to coach paterno. paterno's testimony, he was told, there was, quote, fondling or doing something of a sexual nature. not anal intercourse, but pretty damn bad any way you slice it. >> congressman meehan, you don't expect to face these kinds of situations. what do you think a federal investigation will achieve here? >> there was an obligation under the cleary act all the way back in 2002 to report incidents of crime that take place on campus. according to the university's own guidelines, there would have been an investigation that would have been done by the university police back in 2002. and if you had that, you would have had the opportunity to ask this graduate assistant, who's now been identified as a man

who's an assistant coach at penn state, what he saw. he would have had an opportunity to identify who this 10-year-old boy was and would have been able to resolve this incident almost a decade ago. to think that since that time, you know, the mile foundation has continued -- the second mile has continued to operate and for over nearly a decade sandusky presumably has continued to have access to young boys. >> now, these people in these programs, these programs that teal with young boys, they're basically operating in local apprentice. to abuse a child in this case sexually is just horrible and the idea of how people live with this or know about somebody they know who's been engaged in heinous behavior and says, that's one of the things we deal with here. penn state treats football as a religion. michael, you get this, too. it's a religion up there.

penn state. go up any day, any football game up there, realize the value they place. is this a religious thing almost they covered it up because it might affect the program? is that what happened here? >> i think that's a great analogy. i think in several different moments of truth, again, we're accepting as accurate the grand jury report. but in several different moments of truth, each of these individuals showed an allegiance to the institution. meaning i think the penn state football program as opposed to these eight young boys who were being victimized in the most heinous of fashion. >> and these weren't football recruits. these were boys. not men. congressman, you were u.s. attorney, and by the way, respected one for a long time in philadelphia. what do you think of this case? >> i think there was a duty to inquire. i mean, i clearly think this is the kind of a case that's going to have more significant ramifications for penn state. apart from the legalities, too

many adults turned and looked the other way when there should have been notice there was a reasonable duty of inquiry. there had to be adults that continued to watch sandusky around children. what you may not appreciate, is there was an investigation, some of them, particularly athletic director, were aware of a 1998 investigation into exactly this kind of conduct. the district attorney apparently chose not to prosecute, but when you see subsequent conduct, that in and of itself i think requires adults to take an additional step and to assure that sandusky is fully investigated and that there isn't an ability to be near children. look, this is grooming conduct that i used to see as a prosecutor. >> you know, i just think we always have to remember our first responsibility is to the children, not to the fellow adults. shouldn't look out for the guilty, look out for the innocent. it sounds so much like the church.

my church. thank you, u.s. congressman patrick meehan and michael smerconish. i'm out here in san francisco today. this morning i spoke at the jewish community center a great crowd. tonight i'll be at the common wealth crowd of silicon valley. i'm going to talk about "jack kennedy: elusive hero." jack's first political battle of course was with his father who he challenged. he challenged joseph kennedy's appeasement qualities of world war ii. that's how he started out in life. when we return, how the republican party is paying with the tea party. [ dr whathe st yerew e bl ov 'sthin deprtaof you noticed! these clothes are too big, so i'm donating them. how'd you do it? eating right, whole grain. [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't.

multigrain cheerios... five whole grains, 110 calories.

[ female announcer ] new and improved swiffer dusters with dust lock adhesive can clean virtually every surface in your home. ♪ its thousands of fluffy fibers pick up dust here, there, pretty much everywhere. and swiffer dusters traps 3 times more dust than a feather duster. and locks it away. ♪

swiffer cleans better or your money back. ♪ get around

let me finish tonight with this. the republican party is paying for its deal with the tea party. right now. the tea party helped the republicans win control of the house last year. john boehner holds the speakership because of that deal. but the deal is undermining the chances of the republicans to win in 2012. tea partiers don't like taxes. don't like the government. don't like government, period. and this explains as i've said before why the tea partyers don't believe in leaders. they don't believe in having leaders. why have leaders if you don't want them to govern? they like people who attack government, people like sarah palin. she spent two years discovering it was more to her liking to be outside of government than running alaska as its governor. the same goes for most of the candidates who show up for these republican debates. ron paul is a critic of

government as such. he doesn't want to run the government. he wans it so shrink down to a size where anyone can run it. the republicans face the awful outlook of having two candidates still standing for president. one they don't like, don't trust, really don't want to see in the white house. don't want to have to defend once he gets there, if he gets there. the other really is not likely to get to the white house but embodies and his soul the tea party mentality, which is you don't have to know anything about government to run against it, which is what tea partyers do all you need is an unexplained self-confidence you can do whatever you set out to do, that you need to apologize for nothing, need to demonstrate knowledge about nothing. how does this play out? how does a party go before the american people with a candidate for president it would prefer not to see in the presidency or a candidate whom no one else but the tea party could imagine there? mitt romney, the candidate they don't like. or herman cain, the candidate who nobody but the tea party can imagine in the country's highest office. which will it be? how did it come to this? it came to