running mate. but was romney forced to say that after being caught flat-footed on the campaign trail? and the jerry sandusky trial. defense rests without calling sandusky himself to the witness stand. finally, mitt romney's dancing horse is the inspiration for some horse play by stephen colbert. ♪ >> more of that in the sideshow. we begin with president obama invoking executive privilege against house republicans. pete williams, of course, is nbc's justice correspondent. executive privilege puts the president squarely in the middle of fast and furious or was he already there? >> no, i don't think he was. there was never any real allegation the president was involved in it. let's go back to what fast and furious was. >> please. >> this was the name of an atf operation intended to track the flow of guns bought illegally in the u.s. and smuggled into

mexico. and agents were instructed to simply watch them. let the guns go in and help find out where they ended up. well over a thousand guns were allowed to walk. never were found. two showed up at the scene where a u.s. border patrol agent named brian terry was killed in a shoot-out with drug dealers. though there has never been a conclusive match between those weapons and the rounds that killed him. nonetheless raised a lot of concern about this operation. now the justice department says when the attorney general found out about it he put a stop to it and taken administration i have measures to punish the people involved and has an investigation going on. the problem here, michael, is that the justice department initially sent a letter to congress when it was first asked about this saying no, no guns were walked. that was obviously wrong and now the congress wants to know how was it that the justice department said that in the first place and how did it -- what did it do when congress started to investigate. that's the documents that this fight is all about. >> it has been catnip for conservatives who already have

had antipathy towards attorney general eric holder. is it now politics or is it substance? >> well, i guess there is a little bit of both here. because the justice department is in a somewhat weakened position because by their own admission, initial letter was wrong. and congress wants to know how it was it was misinformed. on the other hand, undoubtedly there's politics involved here, the attorney general says he thinks this is entirely a political sideshow. i will let others decide what the degree is. now here's where it gets tricky. committee voted today to recommend contempt. that goes to the full house. if the full house votes contempt there is a federal law that says it goes to the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia, worked for the justice department and he under federal law must convene a grand jury to see whether the attorney general should be indicted for a misdemeanor for contempt of congress. there's two tricks here. one is there is a long standing view of the justice department that congress can't tell it what to do. but secondly, and this is what the development today was, why it is important.

it has been the view of both republicans and democrats when they run the justice department, that when a president asserts executive privilege then the u.s. attorney must not proceed that that's the end of the matter. so that's why the decision by the white house to exert executive privilege over some of the documents that are disputed here, that's why it changed what may happen with -- and when this ever gets to court. >> pete, thank you very much for that. >> you bet. >> congressman elijah cummings of maryland. congressman, allow me to share with you what -- how speaker john boehner's office said today they issued a statement about the rising stakes and said that the white house's decision to invoke executive privilege implies white house officials were either involved in fast and furious or the coverup that followed. what is your response? >> i am so saddened that speaker boehner would say that. i wish he would spend time with the committee and realize this was based on politics and not facts.

this is unprecedented. we have never had an attorney general to be found in contempt. we have never had a situation where a president asserted executive privilege and vote went forward. again, i think it is very unfortunate. the attorney general sat down with the chairman issa has made it clear that he wants to cooperate, will cooperate with him and work with him. again, he's -- an attorney general who has produced 7,600 pages of documents, gone through all kinds of -- over 2 million e-mails, has appeared before congress nine times and 16 months. and just spent -- then when fast and furious, when he learned of the tactics, immediately stopped that operation and he ordered his own investigation. this did not have to be. i think basically we had a situation today where chairman issa was saying our way or the

highway. it is so sad that we are in the political situation that we are in with the partisan divide and that we have. as you know, this was a vote, every vote, including amendments, where -- strictly on party lines. you couldn't get one democrat to agree with this because we knew that it was unprecedented and that it was unfair and knew that this attorney general was trying to work with the -- chairman issa. at the same time understand as the attorney general said in various -- meeting that we had the other day, he said look, this is my watch. i am -- i want to cooperate but there are certain things i have to protect as part of my job. and these are things attorney generals all throughout history have protected like certain we for a determination to be made

by some of the committee members as to whether there was a the additional information? do they already have enoh where they can glean the answer to those seemingly legitimate questions? >> we already have information that -- attorney general provided a thousand pages to explain this whole issue of ether there waa coverup. he already did that. even provided them with some documents and they didn't even request. as far as any type of retaliation against witnesses, again, he has made it clear he's willing to prode documents, sit down and explain those documents, and so i think that that -- again, those things are available. let me tell you one other thing. it is interesting the executive privilege, when the president asserted executive privilege, he did not include documents that might be useful in determining whetheor not there was my type

of retaliation with regard to whistle blowers. so -- but -- go ahead. >> i get, sir, you are sing this is driven bay partisanship on the president invoking executive privilege. i think this takes this issue from that which it has been a stalking horse for conservatives thus far to something that will now be an issue front and center in the 2012 presidential race. what is your assessment of the political risk involved by the president invoking executive privilege? >> i think that in the end, i think that when all of the -- dust settles, this battle will be resolved. i don't think it will be that much of a significant issue. i just don't. i think that, again, the attorney general -- when the dust clears, people will see the attorney general has been over backwards trying to work with the chairman and others understood. thank you.

we appreciate it. ranking member of the house oversight and government reform committee. before voting to hold attorney general holdern contempt of congress, passions ran high in the house oversight committee. here is just a sampling. >> the house of representatives has never in o long history held an attorney general in contempt. and i am horrified that you are going forward with this contempt charge. >> the president of the united states has claimed executive privilege. that brings into question whether or not eric holder knew about it and how much did the president know about this? >> this is not about eric holder. it is about the department of justice and justice in the united states of america. have the guts. i hope we have the guts and perseverance to get to the bottom of this. >> in all of my 30 years of being in the united states congress, the way he was treated when he was here testifying

before this committee, i must admit have never seen anybody treated in that fashion. >> congressman patrick meehan. is a pennsylvania republican good to see you. has eric holder be disrespected by your committee previously? >> i don't believe he has been disrespected by the committee. and we can't look at this as something about eric holder. what rereally need to be looking at this is investigation into tactics by the atf which clearly violated the department policy that led to the death of a border agent who was left to bleed out in the desert. we are trying to get to the bottom of a situation that that same attorney general has identified as fatally flawed. >> i guess i asked the question because you heard congressman cummings say he thinks this is partisan-driven and there have been references made as well to him having -- the attorney general of the united states

being referred to as a liar by chairman issa. so it takes on a life of its own that it's antipathy driven. you say no to that. >> i try to separate myself from that and i think in the passion and the news clips that will be generated people will look for those moments in which there are sort of, you know, high tension things that are set. the fact of the matter is a great deal of discussion related to the facts or basically the absence of facts that are relevant to a very, very important issue. it was effectively what did the people in the highest levels of the justice department knowing with respect to this investigation and what kind of active role did they play in the direction of the activities which have violated the department policy. again, led to not just the deaths of bord agent terry but literally hundreds of deaths on the other side of the border. >> in a letter to the president, attorney general eric holder, said complying with congressman issa's subpoena would have a

chilling effect. here's what he wrote. it would inhibit the candor of such executive branch deliberations inhe future an significantly impair the executive branch's ability to respond independently and effectively to congressional oversight. respond to that criticism and concern. >> it is an issue that -- the court has basically -- dealt with rather recently. i happened to be in the justice department or soon had left it when a lot of these same questions were being asked. and the court determed that some of those deliberations were not protected information. from the executive privilege. so it is -- you know, advice to the president himself, there's real questions about the extent to which these wilbe covered by that kind of an invocation. in the end, it is really a shame we have to get here in the first place. the request for simple documentation may help us to understand more about the facts is that what is lacking. >> congressman patrick meehan,

thank you for your time. >> great to be with you. thank you. coming up, are you better off than you were four years ago? that's the big question facing any incumbent president running for re-election. today a new poll showsore and more americans say yes, they are better off. we'll get to how that's playing in the presidential race next. this is "hardball" the place for politics. [ male announcer ] it seems like every company has a facebook page these days. but where's the relationship status? well, esurance is now in a relationship...with allstate. and it looks pretty serious. esurance. click or call.

i'd like to thank eating right, wholain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans? [ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios battle ground states in the presidential race. and for that we check the "hardball" score board. starting in michigan where the third poll in a row shows a very tight race. the new we ask america poll has mitt romney up two 45-43. now to iowa and another close contest. the poll there has obama up one 45-44. next to arizona, a red state democrats hope they can put in play. a new ppp poll shows it's getting close. romney 49, obama 46. and finally to colorado where ppp has obama up seven, 49-42. we'll be right back.

welcome back to "hardball." surprisingly good news from the white house from the latest bloomberg news poll released today. take a look at this. polls shows president obama with a huge lead over mitt romney nationally. the president has a 16-point lead over romney on the question of which candidate has a better economic vision for the future. the poll also shows mitt romney's efforts to paint president obama out of touch haven't worked. voters overwhelmingly say he is out of touch. it is important to note the poll is an outlier compared to other recent national polls which show the race to be very tight. so what should we make of this poll? and with four and a half months to go until the election, where do things stand? eugene robinson is a pulitzer prize winning columnist important "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst. susan page is the washington bureau chief for "usa today." welcome both. he's why i'm skeptical.

perhaps the key question for the election is whether voters will feel better off than they were four years ago. according to the latest bloomberg poll, 45% say they are better off. susan, what i have ringing in my head is the revelation recently by the census bureau that 35% of our net worth has been lost in the last couple of years. that's largely attributable to people seeing the value of their home, principal asset decline. you know if i'm seeing the value of my home decline, how can i now say if i'm one of the 45%, i think i'm better off than i was four years ago. >> you know, it is possible when you look at the head to head number in this poll, it looks like maybe the sample had a democratic tinge. the reason polls have a margin of error is because there's a margin of error when you take a national poll. if that's the case perhaps it is number is lower. i think it is possible that given we have been in a recovery for some time people are

beginning to feel maybe a little more hopeful. although some of the economic numbers, as you say, we have seen, just in the past couple of weeks, have indicated perhaps things are slowing down this spring and as they did the last two springs. and those attitudes could turn around. but -- you know, i think it is possible that there are some people in america who begin to feel like we have come through the worst of it. things are about to get better. >> i don't doubt that. eugene, just to stick with the polling for a moment, could it lie in the fact that this is likely and not registered voters? i'm not sure how we could determine or discern who is a likely voter as we sit here today in mid june. >> pollsters have different screenings they do to use determine who is a likely voter and who is not. those are the kinds of details you have to look at when you evaluate every poll. as you said earlier, this poll is an outlier. certainly the head to head number, the 13-point gap, we're not seeing that in any other poll. but the general sort of sunniness or -- and optimism that comes through in this poll, i do think that is in -- the

same direction that we have seen in some other polling. that people just are feeling better about the economy and about their lives. >> want to get out of the funk i think is how i would describe it. here is another interesting finding from the poll. the question of which candidate is more out of touch. 55% of respondents say romney is more out of touch. 36% say it is the president. could that have to do with aggressive advertising that the president has been using to go after romney's record both at bain and as governor of massachusetts? today the president's campaign is out with two strong new ads hitting romney. the first one accuses romney of raising taxes on everyone but millionaires in massachusetts. take a look at this. >> i'm going to reduce taxes. >> as governor, mitt romney did cut taxes on millionaires like himself. but he raised taxes and fees on everyone else. $1.5 billion. over a thousand fee hikes on health care, school bus rides,

and on milk, driver's licenses, nursing homes, nurses, led poisoning, nurses, electricians, hospitals, health services -- romney economics didn't work then. and won't work now. >> the other ad hits romney for his time as a corporate raider at bain and for outsourcing jobs. looks like this. >> running for governor, mitt romney campaigned as a job creator. >> i know how jobs are created. >> but as a corporate raider, he shipped jobs to china and mexico. as governor, he did the same thing. outsourcing state jobs to india. >> susan, is it possible that the obama campaign was successful in defining governor mitt romney before he was able to define himself for the general election? >> you know, i think that's definitely happened. there's some signs it is happening. i went to watch two focus groups called these walmart moms. which are moms that shop at walmart. one group in richmond, virginia, and the other in las vegas. the only thing they really knew about mitt romney was what they

had learned in these negative ads that run about him and said things like he fired people and shipped jobs overseas. and it is an effort, i think, by the obama campaign to chip away at the credential mitt romney has as someone that knows what to do about the economy and yes, i think that as negative ads often are, think these are being effective in defining him before americans know very much about him. >> it could be a net-net of a long and bloody primary season if it is true. >> yeah. it certainly could be. he took a lot of incoming fire during the primary season from fellow republicans who went after him on the bain capital issue and on the general sort of richie rich about romney and his lifestyle. i think some of that probably stuck. remains in people's memories. >> here is another issue. mitt romney dodged saying whether he agrees or disagrees with the president's new deportation stance.

dealing with latino voters stressed an economic message today to rnc released this ad both in english and in spanish. >> latino unemployment in double digits, rampant foreclosures. >> unemployment rates up. >> for people who can't get work. that's what these numbers represent. >> for hispanics unemployment rose to 11%. >> hispanic voters concerned about the economy. >> unemployment among latinos is still in double digits. could this be seen as a broken promise? >> eugene, big 48 hours coming up. governor romney tomorrow, president on friday and both speaking to a prestigious latino group. to my ear, to my eye, he's yet to really define himself on the president's proposal of last friday and how he would differ from it. >> he hasn't answered the straight question of whether he will rescind it or what he thinks about it. you know, his problem with latino voters now -- you can

come out with this economic message, romney. you've got to convince people to listen to it, to hear what you're trying to say. and i -- i think his position -- where he is right now is that a lot of latino voters aren't willing to listen to him because they think the republican party already made up its mind and isn't interested in them or their votes. and fair or unfair i think that's a -- pretty firmly implanted -- impression now that they are going to have to overcome. >> it will be interesting to see what he says tomorrow and we will have the details on "hardball." thank you eugene robinson and susan page. up next, mitt romney's dancing horse is heading to the olympics. that's got stephen colbert going. this is "hardball" the place for politics.

welcome back to "hardball." time now for the sideshow. you may remember colbert's enthusiastic support last week for ann romney's horse in the olympic dressage trials. the sport also referred to as horse ballet. her mare qualified for london and colbert took credit last night. >> i did it! i horsed it! eat it all you naysayers. jimmy, crank up the jockey jams. ♪ ♪ i want to take you to bermuda ♪ ♪ come on pretty mama ♪ key largo ♪ montego ♪ that's where we want to go ♪

♪ that's where we want to go ♪ way down to kokomo >> we can't decide who has the better moves there. the horse of colbert. bryce harper coined a new phrase last week when a reporter asked if he'd celebrate a three-hit game and win over the toronto blue jays with a beer where the drinking age is lower than the u.s. harper is a mormon who sustains for alcohol and said this. >> that's a clown question, bro. >> that's a clown question, bro. well, that trending phrase made its way to capitol hill in a couple of days. take a look at fellow nevadan and mormon harry reid yesterday. >> i don't want to answer that question. that's a clown question, bro. >> unlike bryce harper senator reid went on to answer the question that he had been asked. up next, the defense in the jerry sandusky trial rests

without calling sandusky to th stand. is their last best hope a mistrial? that's ahead. you are watching "hardball." the place for politics. those surprising little things she does still make you take notice. there are a million reasons why. but your erectile dysfunction that could be a question of blood flow. cialis for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat,

or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial.

the legal team for jerry sandusky rested their case today but they declined to call their own client to the stand. with closing arguments scheduled for tomorrow morning, this case could be in the jury's hands as soon as tomorrow afternoon. sandusky denies all charges the prosecution alleges he committed over a 15-year pan. kathleen cain is a former sex crimes prosecutor. diane dimond is covering this case for the daily beast and news week. i'm curious to take your pulse on something because you have been in that courtroom from you a far it seemed to me that dottie sandusky, wife of, the

big gun for the defense, and yet she appears to have corroborated some of the testimony of certain of the boys. in other words, putting them and putting jerry in the same place at the same time. what did you think of her as a witness? >> well, it is obvious that it was dottie sandusky who was the one speaking for the family here. when we learned today he wasn't going to be testifying. she did corroborate some of what the accusers were saying. she said that they did spend the night. they did sleep in that bedroom we heard so much about down in the basement on the water bed. that her husband did go down to say good night to them. not to tuck them into bed as the prosecution kept saying. but she was also strong on saying that never happened, nothing bad ever happened. i would have heard it in the basement. i have good hearing. you know, some of those boys were clingy and conniving and crafty.

so i'm not sure she did a whole lot of good but i think it was important to have at least one sandusky on the stand here >> kathleen, something else that struck me about dottie sandusky's testimony was and with your information maybe you will enlighten us. there was not so much as testimony about a hug between she and jerry. am i wrong in thinking that the jury would have questions in their minds about what's the sex life like between jerry and dottie sandusky? yet, that subject wasn't broached. >> that's an interesting question. but in all of the cases i have ever prosecuted that's never actually come up. it has never been a question in the mind of the juries because afterwards we ask the jury what did you think? were there questions left unanswered? and that's never been brought up. i think that probably the strength of the prosecution witnesses have already set the stage and as to who this man is and who he has a sexual preference for. >> diane dimond in the closing tomorrow by the prosecutor, do

you think that he makes hay over the fact we never heard from sandusky. by that i mean did amendola make a promise in his opening that he didn't deliver? obviously as an attorney i recognize jerry sandusky has the fifth amendment right never to take the stand. but if there had been a commitment made you would hear from him, it could come back to haunt tomorrow. >> it was a sort of vague reference to -- in the opening statement of amendola that i will tell you about jerry sandusky and you will hear from him that blah blah blah. that could mean you could have heard from him via the bob costas interview. it may have been that he intended to put jerry sandusky on the stand. but i think as time went on and the strength of this prosecution's case -- i mean, we had eight accusers here crying on the stand, raw emotion for days and days on end. i think maybe when the strength of that hit the defense, they thought better of putting jerry sandusky on any kind of record if they ever plan to appeal this. >> kathleen kane, diane makes reference to the bob costas interview. while that which the jury did hear i thought was compelling during the course of the last

few days we find there was a piece of that tape that america never saw and this jury never saw which to my ear was a confession, was an admission of sorts. why do you think that wasn't introduced at this trial? that part of the costas tape. >> i really don't know. maybe they couldn't authenticate it and maybe the prosecution couldn't get the right witnesses up to authenticate the tape. but it was extremely damaging. the part they didn't show was probably more damaging than the part they did show. >> right. >> he virtually came out and said that well, i didn't abuse every child but what he didn't say was i didn't abuse any child and that's an omission, just as much a confession as saying i did it. >> diane, you know i've been a big fan of yours for a long time because of your street smarts in these criminal cases. tell me -- give me the vibe from

those jurors. when you eyeball them, what are you taking away from it? >> i'm taking away that most cases have a jury that after a few days they get to know each other and chitchat when they come in and out and smile, pat each other on the back. not this jury. this jury throughout has been very, very solemn. they have been very attentive. i haven't seen one of them doze off which you know is very rare. i think that -- if i could get back to the nbc tape and why that wasn't played, judge john cleland, you wish every judge in america would take a lesson from him. he has been very forthright and very determined to get this case through. and i think that because there was a big break here today in the middle of the day, he came -- had everybody come back and said to the prosecutor, okay,

what have you got? and that was among that nbc snippet was among some of what i think the prosecution wanted to show. and the judge said to him i will bet you that you have already shown the whole -- almost the whole costas thing. i rule you cannot show that. he wants to get this to the jury. >> he is the antithesis of lance ito. look how quickly this case moved. kathleen kane, you prosecuted sex abuse cases like this. how important are those closing statements tomorrow? do they get conflated in the media or do they have the importance we put on them? >> they have a lot of importance. now, the judge will instruct the jury the statements of the lawyers are not evidence and they must strictly look at the evidence. as you know. but those state closing statements wrap the entire case up into one neat package. it brings in all of the avenues and presents to the jury why they should find this man guilty and consequently, the defense will do the same thing. but they are extremely

important. they are the last pieces of evidence, last statements the jury will hear before they go back to the deliberation room. >> big day. he could be sleeping in his own bed for the final time tonight or tomorrow night. of course he could be exonerated. what do i know. thank you, kathleen kane and diane dimond. up next, mitt romney now says marco rubio is being vetted as a potential vice presidential running mate. was romney forced to say that and does rubio really have a shot? this is "hardball" the place for politics.

we talked a lot on the program about the purge of

voters roles in florida. a new poll finds support for rick scot's effort to remove it from the rolls. this is a poll that finds 60% of floridians support the voter purge even though voting rights groups say that legitimate voters may be barred from voting. we will be right back.

there was a story that originated today apparently at abc based upon reports of

supposedly outside unnamed advisers of mine. the story was entirely false. marco rubio is being thoroughly vetted as part of our process. >> we are back. that was mitt romney last night addressing a story that consumed a day of campaigning. controversy over whether marco rubio didn't make the governor's short list of vice presidential candidates. the news whipped conservatives and supporters a frenzy after his announcement on fox. let's watch. >> how has the day been? >> it has been an interesting day. you know, look, i don't want to talk about the process. it is governor romney's process. i want to be respectful of that. >> have you talked to the governor today? >> i have not. >> manuel is a washington post reporter and author of a new book "the rise of marco rubio." joan walsh is editor at large of salon. read the tea leaves. what just transpired?

>> first of all, mitt romney had to come out and say that marco rubio is being vetted. he had to say that. i have no inside information on whether it was true or not. but it would be devastating to any latino voters who may have some prayer of maybe taking a look at his candidacy. i mean, michael, you know that the president put mitt romney in a box with what he did on immigration last week. romney has not responded, has not said whether he would repeal that decision. it's been a terrible week for mitt romney on immigration. and so to have that come out, to have the reaction we had yesterday and to let it stand, i think would be saying i don't care about the latino, the hispanic vote. we're just going to let this ride. and some conservatives, that's right. >> has thus far not we want back toward the center. manuel, the question for you because you know the subject so well, could marco rubio withstand the vetting that would come?

>> well, you would see a flood of stories immediately. and what the romney camp would have to do is weigh the very large positives, all the energy he would bring, what a great speaker he is, how popular he is in the conservative wing of the republican party against the vetting issues. >> give me an example. what would be at the top of the list that you think could cause a controversy? >> i think you would see a lot of stories about his credit card spending when he was in florida. he got a republican party state credit card and he used it for some personal things that were -- some of them silly like movie tickets and wine at a wine shop and $130 hair cut. some of them larger like an ipad. and, you know, he paid it back after it came out that he was using this for personal use, but that could get dug into in a much, much bigger way. and then there's the story about his family's migration to the

united states. >> and whether they were fleeing castro who had just come to power or whether the two were unrelated. >> yeah. i think that's become a permanent part of his biography now. for those who aren't familiar with it, he -- a very core part of his political identity was his family had been pushed off of the island of cuba by castro. in reality i was able to find out that they came in 1956 before castro invaded. it undercut this notion that they had been pushed away. he says they're still exiles, but it raised questions about whether voters could trust the things that he was telling them. >> manuel, one other aspect i've learned from you because you published in the post five myths about marco rubio. one of them being having him on the ticket would automatically attract latino voters. of maybe taking a look at his candidacy.

you know that the president put mitt romney on the box with what he did on immigration last week. romney has not responded, has not said whether he would repeal that decision. of maybe taking a look at his candidacy. you know that the president put mitt romney on the box with what

>> tim pawlenty is having a boomlet, a wave, he probably does no harm. on the other hand, it looks like george bush picking dan quayle so as hot to be overshadowed by someone more articulate and charismatic than he was. and tim pawlenty has working class roots, but does he set the working class on fire i'm not sure about that. he set nobody on fire in the primaries. he bowed out very early. to the extent the primaries were a referendum at all on his excitement and electability, i don't know what he adds except he's probably been vetted somewhat and he's not dangerous. >> manual, sources close to the campaign said he's leading the pack because he's strong where romney is weak.

as the hockey playing son of a blue collar worker and a longtime champion of sam's club republicans, high would be comfortable among working class voters in a way romney never would be. could you see the star of pawlenty rising given the conversation we're having about rubio? >> i could see it rising, fall, rising again in the same way the portman star rose and fell and the same way that the bobby jindal star rose and fell. the one who seems to have been consistently in the mix has been marco rubio. and you know, we got an affirmation of that yesterday, that he has that special something that "it" quality, that x-factor, whatever you want to call it. the question is how much "it" do they want on their ticket? >> joan walsh, i checked today, portman, pawlenty, rubio, in that order. if i look at joan trade, who is

at the top? not who you think, who you like, but who is most likely to be picked by romney? >> i guess it's pawlenty, but i have no idea. we should also say that his bridge issues, he's not without vetting issues, too, and i think we go back and take a look at his ideas about infrastructure when he was governor of minnesota. there would be questions, he's not quite as bland. he's not as unaccomplished as we're asking like he is. anyone who surfaces or resurfaces comes in for a lot of new vetting and nobody is without questions in their past. >> thank you, good luck with your book. thank you, joan walsh. >> allow me to finish with another acquitalt in a high profile perjury case. you're watching "hardball," the place for politics. whole grain, multigrain cheerios! mom, are those my jeans?

[ female announcer ] people who choose more whole grain tend to weigh less than those who don't. multigrain cheerios

let me finish tonight with some thoughts about the not guilty verdict in the roger clemens trial. in the last 24 hours, i have heard many paired this result with the outcome of the john edwards trial. yes, viewed one way, the feds are 0-2 in recent high profile trials, but i don't see the cases similarly. the edwards outcome made sense to me where the campaign finance laws had never been used for such a prosecution, and the benefits were for the benefit of the campaign or for a private dispute, i viewed the prosecution as excessive. i'm no fan of edwards, but ours is not a system that should try

someone because their bottomed out. the roger clemens issue was different. it was whether he had lied to congress under oath about steroids, and about that, we should be concerned. our society is governed by the rule of law. one rule is that the oaths are administered in legal proceedings. our legal process falled without that. it was important in the clinton impeachment process and it's the reason that george zimmerman's wife since in a jail today in florida. where andy pettitte, clemens' friend, former roommate, said he admitted that he thought clemens used hgh was in 2009. at the recent trial, he seemed to buckle on cross-examination and agreed with the defense

attorney that there was a 50/50 chance he had misheard him. that testimony and the prosecution of brian mcnamee, probably explain the case. but that makes it all the more important to charge in a but that makes it all the more important to charge in a difficult case less those with difficult case less those with thank you for being with us. "the ed show" starts right now. >> good evening, americans. welcome to "the ed show" live from indianapolis. let's get to work.

>> the committee meets today to consider reporting a resolution to the house of representatives. finding the attorney general, eric holder jr., in contempt of congress. >> darryl issa political hit job reaches an unprecedented level. they hold eric holder in contempt of congress. >> some might be forgiven for describing the proceedings today as akin to a kangaroo court. >> i am horrified that you are going forward with this contempt charge. >> tonight, congress woman carolyn maloney on the republican witch hunt and jonathan alter with the latest from the hill. >> republicans are still scrambling after the president's immigration move. >> the biggest problem i have with it is he ignores the constitution of the congress a