and i agree with what paul begala is saying.e should be talking about invoking the 25th amendment. we should be talking about impeachment. if people in congress took their oaths of office seriously, that's what they would be doing. but unfortunately, republicans are putting party loyalty above patriotism. they are acting as protectors for donald trump because he still has the support of their base. and so they are allowing this travesty to continue. >> david axelrod, the idea that this is somebody who is still working in the white house, still in the inner circle, is the president, in your opinion, right to be talking about treason, right to be outraged by this? >> i don't think he's right to be talking about treason. he has a right to be outraged that people aren't showing loyalty to him. but i don't think he understands loyalty to the people around him. and more than that, what was striking about that "new york times" piece was the person who wrote it said that they felt first loyalty to the country. and that's the oath, of co

it's not unheard of:(paul begala/fmr. advisor to bill clinton)i've seen this before too where people would sit in a meeting, listen to someone, write down words he used frequently and leak with those words so that the president thought that person was a leaker. pretty scummy.scummy maybe. but a hint for sure. so, what else can we glean by dissecting the phrasing? experts say its less about the words, but more about how they're arranged. (carole chaski/exec. director, institute for linguistic evidence) when most people try to write like another person they try to words or they try to imitate their punctuation. the best way to do authorship id is to actually analyze the syntax. that's what we cant consciously. (pam) consciously. manipulate consciously. (pam) house minority leader nancy pelosi said today at first, she thought it might be vice president mike pence -- but added.. the identity will come out eventually. (ken) oakland international airport has become a test site for a new 3-d scanner at the security checkpoint. k

excerpts or reviews of bob woodward's book, is that both ari fleisher, who worked for bush, and paul begaladent clinton, immediately came out sand, hand hey, we didn't like the books he wrote about our president but they weren't false. he certainly knows who they are and, you know, has the tapes, one assumes, from the way he works to prove it. >> and let's look at how extraordinary all of this really is. you have what's described as a senior official within the administration talking about undermining the actions of a sitting president deemed to be a moral reckless, you know, just too impulsive. and then you've got that with this theme, recurring theme, from other published books, whether there's anonymity or whether there's really, you know, named sourcing. there's a really -- there's a common thread here. so what's your view on how potentially damaging this is or is it really just adding to the chorus? >> i have a couple of thoughts here. first of all, bob woodward's book and his account, it echoes many of the themes we saw in michael wolf's fire and fury and omarosa manigault's "unhinged

out front, paul begala former white house consultant the to president clinton. people will be testifying and taking questions. how big of a moment is this? >> this nomination, one of the most important nominations to the supreme court in years and years is now on a knife edge. who would have imagined. the truth is that the open hearings. i'm glad the committee decided to make them open. that the american people judge, i'm glad that they are having these hearings. but it's now largely going to be termed in the court of public opinion. people have a chance to tune in and see who they think is more credible. the problem is going to be. what if we come out with in complete testimony. there are a lot of loose ends, we need to know -- the washington post has reported there were two other teenagers at this party. and apparently there are names that the post has. well, shouldn't we know from them what they remember? is that what the fbi -- is the fbi on this or not on this? there are a lot of loose ends that could have a bearing. >> that's something chris coons brought

. >> paul begala says when he was in the clinton white house people would leak using terms and wordst their colleagues used in meetings so that president clinton would think, oh, it was so and so that leaked it. i wonder if this person did that, too. there's an ending with all of this pageantry and tribute to john mccain who obviously president trump hated and continues the hate to this day and maybe that was a distraction. >> maybe it was. i worked on a number of campaigns where people, again, go leak and i'm the press secretary. who the hell is talking to the reporters on background telling this information? they're like maybe it's so and so. maybe it's so and so. this is like a bad version of "game of thrones" and i wonder how it serves the larger agenda. if i'm a republican -- if i'm a republican and we are -- >> you're losing credibility here. keep goingment keep going. >> and we are going into the midterm election, a fight for us to hold on to the house, keep -- get a large majority of people in the senate, these are not the types of things that i want my candidates in the fiel

paul begala, who was one of the president's advisers, went after you, rahm emanuel said thing.ent now, that president trump himself is going after robert mueller and calling it a witch hunt? bill clinton didn't use those words. the president didn't. do you think it's different that the president of the united states is now doing this? >> president clinton had a different style. and there was no twitter. so there was no social media. i wish the president would stop the tweeting. i wish he would stop the attacks. again, it does not, to put it mildly, promote confidence in the administration of justice to do that. but we have who we have. and again, as i recount in the book, president clinton just had a very different style. he was very charming, but i tell you, he also had a very, very aggressive campaign propaganda campaign that howard kurtz rightly called the spin cycle. >> do you think that robert mueller's investigation is a witch hunt? >> no, i don't. i have concerns and express concerns about some of the people around paul, b -- bob, bi have great confidence in bob as a per

on the left, james carville and paul begala. on the right, robert novak and tucker carlson.n jon stewart went on "crossfire." it was 2004. john kerry was the democratic presidential nominee facing george w. bush. and i thought, you know, watching it, i said, this is going to be a funny show. >> can i say something very quickly? why do we have to fight? the two of you, can't we just say something nice about john kerry, right now. >> i like john. i care about john kerry. >> and something about president bush. >> he'll be unemployed soon. >> anyone who enjoyed paying attention to the news and watched "the daily show" will forever remember jon stewart going on "crossfire" and reading those guys the riot act. >> you're doing theater when you should be doing debate. it's not honest. what you do is partisan hackery. and i'll tell you why i know it. >> you had john kerry on your show and you kiss his throne and you accuse us of hackery? >> the show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls. what is wrong you? >> comedians and satire when done right will take on hypocris