from washington, "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over two decades, the sharpest minds, issue one, drums of war? >> they're not commander in chief. and when i see the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war, i'm reminded of the costs involved in war. >> at a press conference this

week, president obama took sharp issue with the three republicans who are blaming him for not doing enough with the u.s. military to stop iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. the president blasted mitt romney and rick santorum and newt gingrich for distorting his strategy and for warmongering. >> one thing we have not done is we haven't launched a war. if some of these folks think that it's time to launch a war, they should say so. and they should explain to the american people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be. >> the president sees a window of opportunity and rejects beating the drums of war. >> what i've said is that we have a window true which we can resolve this issue peacefully. we have put forward an international framework that is applying unprecedented pressure. the iranians just stated

they're willing to return to the negotiating table, and we have the opwe maintain that pressure to see how it plays out. >> question, what is the major issue of the presidential election now? is it war or the economy? james. >> i still think it's the economy. if we should have a war, that will knock the economy off the front page and put us into a recession. but if we have negotiations, and this will become an extend and pretend with iran, it's still going to be the economy. >> what about that, eleanor? >> i think the president did a good job tapping down the war talk. one of things they said is we don't have to make a decision next week or next month or two months. you had prime minister netanyahu within washington, and there seemed to be this urgency to come to a decision about hue to handle iran. so the president made the case that he has put in place tough sanctions, the value of the iranian currency plus half its value. they're really feeling the pain. they've agreed to come into

talks. now is not the time for israel to launch an attack. so the president made his case and netanyahu basically went back to israel, where the majority of public opinion is against preemptive strike, so i think for the moment the war drums have quieted. >> let's put that question to the president. sir, did you tell what she said to the israel prime mininetanya visit this week? >> i'm not going into details of my conversation with prime minister netanyahu. but what i said publicly doesn't differ greatly from what a said privately. israel is a sovereign nation that has to make its own decisions about how best to preserve its security. i'm deeply mindful of the historical precedence that weigh on any prime minister of israel when they think about the potential threats to israel and the jewish homeland. >> question, so are netanyahu

and the israelis sufficiently reassured? rich? >> no. it's a pretty transparently cynical attempt on the part of the administration to say just enough to try to reassure netanyahu without really committing ourselves to anything whatsoever. now, i think president obama bought some time with his tough talk, at least prior to the press conference. and the talks bought some time. but netanyahu will wait a couple months, then have the opening when the talks probably fail to say, looking i gave it a chance. and it's not working. the sanctions are biting iran's currency, but they're not in any way slowing the program. even president obama's director of national intelligence has said as much. so you've got the different viewpoint between us and the israelis, they want to do this much quicker because they have a limited military capability, more limited than us, and it's a much more serious threat to them than it is to us. >> a pac had a meet this is week and mr. romney, governor romney, wants to take obama's

job. he delivered remarks to ç apac this week. >> reporter: i'll make sure iran knows of the very real peril that awaits it if it becomes nuclear. ill will engage iran's neighbors. i will station multiple aircraft carriers and warships at iran's door. i will not delay imposing further crippling sanctions. i will not hesitate to fully implement the ones we already have. >> question, does romney's hard- line deter iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon, more than obama's would? and what do you think of those remarks? >> i think without question if he were the president, it would deter iran. but he is not the president. all he is a political campaigner. having said that, the fact is that neither the israelis nor the americans expect or intend to start a war within the next couple months. the one of the main sanctions we hope to impose is on their central bank, and we haven't put that sanction into being.

so our sanctions -- as the director of military intelligence said are having no effect and have had no effect on speed with which they're introducing. but there's a time line that's critical to the israelis. and that time line is when they get -- when the iranians put their major technology, the centrifuges and ability to -- make the material they need to for nuclear weapons into this very, very deep underground facility that they are building, and at that point they are invulnerable to military attack particularly air attack. so you have a huge problem because once that time line is over with, the israelis are faced with a threat. >> israel has an estimated 100 to 200 nuclear warheads. so that would mean annihilation for iran as many that true or false. >> i don't believe israel intends to use nuclear weapons against iran. they will use conventional weapons against iran to destroy, if they can, their facilities. >> this is built on the

supposition that iran could use a nuclear strike against israel. >> that's right. >> that's the threat that is stated. >> this is not an ex substantial threat for iran, but for steal. now, if the israelis rockets an acknowledges, including the director of military intelligence, that the iranians have the technical capacity to put nuclear warheads on the misses ills, at this point steal would have a warning between 10 and 12 minutes. the country would be -- [everyone talking at once] >> do you realize what bomb has done by going with this press conference in which he gave really a probability the best speech of his career? at that press conference, the way he moved through it. it was simply brilliant. and perhaps -- i think quite truth telling. >> also framed it as a matter of u.s. national security. it's not only about israel's interests, and he pointed out

he has moved himself from thinking about a policy of containment to a policy of prevention. and his message for the last week is we've got israel's back, but please do not ability on your own because you have to think through the consequences [everyone talking at once] >> has to think through the consequences of war, and the republicans are getting away with a lot of loose talk. [everyone talking at once] >> the only difference -- >> that's nonsense the israelis don't think through the consequences of war! >> the only difference mitt romney would do is put more aircraft carriers there. so i think for the president to tell the republicans [everyone talking at once] >> romney said he is open to a preemptive strike against the facilities. and as far as we have your back, that's not a military do. trick. they're just another country

who is think they can be -- >> who is bluffing? is netanyahu bluffing? >> i don't think anybody is bluffing. >> is netanyahu blurring? >> netanyahu is not blurring and he cannot bluff, not when facing a terrible decision for his country. >> that's right. that's why he is not bluffing. >> you said it would take one nuclear bomb. i think it would take more than one bomb. [everyone talking at once] one nuclear bomb landing on tel aviv and it's the end of that country. 92 [everyone talking at once] >> half the population -- >> president obama is plouffeing because he says he has a policy of prevention but eye believe he's quite prepared to see that policy fail and go to containment. and the key tell here is when the joint -- head of joint chiefs of staff said iran is a rational actor, and that is a term every art from the theory which says they will behave -- [everyone talking at once] >> what's this again? >> they're assuming the leaders

of iran are more like precious nevada than bin laden. that's a tremendous gamble to take with world peace and the israeli nation. >> excuse me! this is a war [everyone talking at once] >> more than one pakistani bomb you could kill half the population and exterminate that country. >> you think that obama was ill- advised to give that speech as a press conference? >> no. that was -- [everyone talking at once] >> delighted to see iran test a nuclear weapon so they could be beyond in issue and move to -- >> we also have [everyone talking at once] have the holy imam figuring in this picture. in t you right now. "we don't have any belief in the atomic bomb and don't pursue it. our religious principles and beliefs forbid the acquisition and use of such weapons of mass murder." he was on repeating that

message again -- [everyone talking at once] and i'm sorry we don't have the video because the video is in house here. i don't know where it is. >> i don't know where it is either, but -- [everyone talking at once] looking for a video. he said israel is like a cancer on the body politic of arab world and we're going to cut it out. so there's a slightly different -- giving a different speech at that point. >> well, what is that, metaphor? [everyone talking at once] >> we're going to destroy israel, which they have said over and over again for decades. >> he was flat-out saying this is against the koran for -- atomic bomb! [everyone talking at once] >> why are they sending all this time and money building atomic weapons? >> they say for medical reasons. so they're -- [everyone talking at once] >> let her in! >> they're risking the -- [everyone talking at once] >> because of their -- [everyone talking at once]

>> because of some isolated tributary. is it your tuition that this week's drama over a military strike on iran may be a deliberate white house diversion from economic issues? after all, he wept with this before the economic issues really came to light. >> i think the administration believes the economy is starting to cut their way and probably rather be talking about the economy than war. >> but he also wants to talk about this. >> right. if he can paint the republicans as warmongers. >> he wants to -- [everyone talking at once] >> send a message to israel, and that's cool it for now. [everyone talking at once] >> message was received, netanyahu went back to israel again to a divided public. they don't want to go ahead without american support. and you cannot -- you can make the case -- excuse me -- it's my turn now. and rational people can make the case that there's nothing about the iranian regime that

suggests they are totally irrational players. they care about their own power and control, and you can't just assume that the minute they get a bomb they're going to attack. [everyone talking at once] excuse me! >> what do you do with sanctions? answer! i'm letting you talk. what to do you? >> i'm answering. you are operating on the one percent cheney doctrine. >> so you're okay with them getting nuclear weapon? >> i didn't say that! >> yes, did you! [everyone talking at once] >> on this one percent doctrine? one percent of what? >> of possibility that saddam ad has a nuclear weapon, you go in. look how well that turned out for us. we are now going back into negotiations. there's time to be bought, and -- [everyone talking at once] >> that is your bottom line. you're okay with them getting a nuclear bomb. >> stop putting words in my

mouth! [everyone talking at once] >> the macho man here. >> right! [everyone talking at once] >>

issue two, primary math. >> we've seen enough of this president over the last three years to know we don't know near five of this president. [cheering] that's for sure. i'm not going to let has not qu the deal. that's because rick santorum, newt gingrich and ron paul are still in the race, and still get a slice of the pie. but none of the three romney challengers gives any indication of dropping out. that leaves the primary ladder

with 31 wrongs left, kansas, virgin island, alabama, hawaii, mississippi, missouri, puerto rico, illinois, louisiana, d.c., maryland, wisconsin, texas, connecticut, delaware, new york, pennsylvania, rhode island, indiana, north carolina, west virginia, nebraska, oregon, arkansas, kentucky, california, montana, new jersey, new mexico, south dakota, and utah. question, why are the republican primaries this year so protracted? >> because they changed the rules from four years ago and have more proportional primaries where delegates are awarded to all the candidates depending on the percentage of the vote. four years ago, they were mostly winner take all and john mccain was able to wrap it up. if they had the same rule told they had four years ago, romney -- it would be over. we would be writing it's over. this campaign season has been like a long psycho analysis of mitt romney. why doesn't he relate to voters? why can't he close the sale with the republicans? but in the end it's with are

agent tick and there's a chance he may not have the 1144 delegates he needs by june. but he will probably wrap it up june 5, when california votes and new jersey, new jersey is winner take all. california by congressional district. nobody else has the resources to compete in a the congressional districts. he may fall a little short than the republicans have super delegates, it's unlikely that it would go to tampa unresolved. >> you think journalists are manufacturing or at least exaggerating the inability of the romney's to connect with voters on some kind of a transformative ways, by the way he looks, lacks any real full identity? do you get that from the press? the press is about 85% they voted for george mcgovern for president of the united states?

[everyone talking at once] >> is that true now? >> oh, yes. it is. >> against obama? >> they're not voting sandusky [everyone talking at once] >> is the press in love with obama? >> yes. >> they are? >> no, they aren't. [everyone talking at once] >> actually, obama and romney are very similar personalities. they're both kind of buttoned up, what is it, side a or side b, right brain, left brain. they're left brain people. they like to analyze things. but obama can do -- >> i think obama's -- [everyone talking at once] >> turn it on. >> that's the irony, is romney is really duplicating the obama side of the obama-hillary race, picking up the upper scale voters, better educated voters, more urbanized voters, and this is a -- >> i want to interrupt you and give this back to you. at this point is there any possible white knight scenario in the republican who

sarah palin, jeb bush former governor of florida, w's brother. chris christie, governor of new jersey. mitch daniels, gover of indiana. could one of these republicans darlings swoop in and take the republican nomination away from romney? has romney done anything to warm up the hard-core g.o.p. conservative base? or are they too purist? let's get the exit question. any possibility of a white knight? yes or no? >> i do not believe so. >> no. >> no. >> i'm going to give it a no too. >> no no. >> even if he falls short of the magic number he still has the authority of having one more delegates than anyone else. >> that's a metaphysical what? >> i don't want to -- [everyone talking at once] >> the answer is, no! no way

prediction, james? take your time for. >> the current unemployment rate is 8.3%. that will be the low for unemployment for the year. it's only going to drift higher from here. >> goes you know what gallop gives the point? over 9%. why is that? they measure it differently. they don't take. >> account seasonal adjustments and 8.3% is a very rosie way of looking at it if you -- >> you think -- you agree with mort that the bureau of labor statistics gives us that information is slanted and this seasonal adjustment has a lot of cushy stuff inside there we don't want to talk about? >> look, let me say one thing here. the 8.3% measures people who have actively applied for a job

in the last four weeks. when you've had the average period of unemployment which is over six months, over sever months, that's a ridiculous standard on the base at which you look at unemployment. if you look in terms of number of people who have applied for job in the last six months, it's 15.1%. these are government numbers. and to that you have to add the people who have left the labor force which if that was adjustment, it would be 18%. so the numbers are much worse than they look. >> you want to give prediction? is that buried in there? >> no. i'm saving the rest of my prediction. my prediction is -- [everyone talking at once] >> however underflight the 8.3% is, people will really be watching that number and the media will be watching that number come summer, and i think it's going to be down by 8, which will be very good for the president. >> 15 seconds. >> in the massachusetts senate race, elizabeth warren will go from being the darling of liberals to the candidate for liberals want to forget.

she's already done by a significant amount in the latest polls, and scott brown against expectations is doing quite well, opposing the hhs contraception mandate. >> that's an elizabeth won't makes it, right? what becomes senator from massachusetts. >> the economy will be affected in addition by the weakening of the chinese economy, which it's really on the verge of a serious downturn. which will affect the entire global economy, including the united states. >> interesting. i predict president obama will do an about-face and help arm the syrian rebels who are confronting the assad regime forces. bye-bye!