SEN. SESSIONS SAYS FIGHT OVER COURT NOMINEE ‘IS IN THE PRESIDENT’S HANDS’
DAVID GREGORY: Republicans have said they are not interested in cooperating with the White House or with this President. Do you think this is gonna be a big fight with Republicans and the White House?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS: You know, the answer to that is in the President's hands. I think Senator Feinstein said it well the other day. She said that-- she believed the President should nominate somebody that would get a very strong vote. Seventy plus votes. Bipartisan. That they were a proven and competent professional. That's the kind of nominee I hope that he nominates and that we can support. I would like to be-- be able to support this nominee.
***
SEN. LEAHY SAYS NOMINEE LIKELY TO BE ON HIGH COURT BY FALL
DAVID GREGORY: When are we going to hear a nomination
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: I think you’re going to hear a nomination very soon because we'd like to get this wrapped up this summer.
DAVID GREGORY: Within weeks?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: I think we're gonna hear it-- soon now, so we can wrap this up this summer.
DAVID GREGORY: And you expect-- the justice to be in place by the start of the term?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: Oh, there's no question. It'd be irresponsible to do otherwise.
SEN. LEAHY SAYS CURRENT HIGH COURT IS ‘THE MOST ACTIVIST COURT IN MY LIFETIME’
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY: Well, I think that there is-- right now-- as Justice Stevens himself has said, because of some of the decisions of the Supreme Court, they're beginning to lose credibility with the American People. Actually-- not for the reasons you may think, I agree with what Jeff Sessions has said. They have rewritten the law. This is a very, very activist court. The most activist court in my lifetime. They rewrote the law to say that-- so they said that women could be paid less than men.
They rewrote the law to say that-- age discrimination laws won't apply if corporate interests don't want them to. They rewrote the law to give Exxon Mobil a $2 billion windfall. And they rewrote the law to say that corporations could come in and meddle in elections in this-- in this country. All of those things went against their precedent and went against the laws of this country.
***
SEN. SESSIONS WILL NOT RULE OUT FILIBUSTER ON COURT NOMINEE
DAVID GREGORY: Okay, you-- you're on record in the past as saying filibusters should not be used against judges. And yet, I want to be clear here. You are not taking a filibuster off the table in this particular case?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS: We had a big fight over that debate. And-- Senator Leahy and his side won. And-- they set a standard that says that if you have-- a nominee that-- under extraordinary circumstances-- a filibuster is appropriate to use against them. I hope we do not do that. I voted against Sotomayor, but that was not a filibuster. And I think-- we'll just see how it plays out. Depends on the quality of the nominee. I think that's the standard the Senate has adopted in recent years.
***
U.S. HOPES NONPROLIFERATION STANCE WILL DETER OTHER COUNTRIES FROM ACQUIRING NUCLEAR WEAPONS
SECRETARY CLINTON: We will always protect the United States, our partners and allies around the world, our nuclear deterrent will remain-- secure, safe, and effective in doing so. But we also think we will ultimately be safer if we can introduce-- the idea that the United States is willing to enter into arms treaties with Russia to reduce our respective nuclear arsenals, and that we're gonna stand against nonproliferation in a way that will-- perhaps deter others from acquiring nuclear weapons.
SEC. GATES SAYS NUCLEAR POSTURE HAS A ‘DETERRENT EFFECT’
DAVID GREGORY: If you're in Iran or North Korea, and you've been proliferating even after disarmament started between the U.S. and Russia, what's to stop them from continuing down that path just because of this posture?
SECRETARY GATES: Well, first of all, I think it puts us in a much stronger position in terms of going to other countries and getting their support-- for putting pressure on the Iranians and the North Koreans. I think it also has, potentially, a deterrent effect on other countries-- who might be potential proliferators as they look at North Korea and-- and Iran.
***
SEC. CLINTON SAYS A LOT OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL IS NOT SECURE
SECRETARY CLINTON: We often say that the-- the threat of nuclear war, as we used to think about it during the cold war, has actually decreased. But, the threat of nuclear terrorism has increased. And by that, we mean that there's a lot of nuclear material that is not as secure. It hasn't been destroyed, it isn't under lock and key in many places in the world, particularly in the former Soviet Union, but not exclusively there. We know that terrorist groups, primarily Al Qaeda, persist in their efforts to obtain enough nuclear material to try to do something that would cause just such mass havoc and terror and damage and destruction-- that it would be devastating. And we know that-- a lot of countries haven't, until relatively recently, seen the threat as we see it.
***
SEC. GATES: ‘WE’RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO TRY AND KEEP IRAN FROM DEVELOPING NUCLEAR WEAPONS’
DAVID GREGORY: Secretary Gates-- is the notion of Iran becoming a nuclear power inevitable at this point? Is the strategy of the U.S. government becoming more and more containment?
SECRETARY GATES: No, we have not. We have not-- made that-- drawn that conclusion at all. And in fact, we're doing-- everything we can-- to try and keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
***
INTELLIGENCE SERVICES STILL DIFFER ON WHETHER IRAN IS NUCLEAR CAPABLE
DAVID GREGORY: Are [Iran] they [nuclear] capable now?
SECRETARY CLINTON: They're-- you know, that-- that's an issue upon which-- intelligence services still-- differ. But our goal is to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.
DAVID GREGORY: Secretary Gates, I wanna ask you--
SECRETARY GATES: I'd just say, and it's our judgment here, they are not nuclear capable.
***
SEC. GATES ON PRESIDENT KARZAI: ‘WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE PRESSURE HE’S UNDER'
SECRETARY GATES: I think we have to understand-- the pressures he's under. But at the same time, understand their sensitivity. This is a country-- that has been at war for almost two generations. They have had armies come in and leave and-- and who paid no attention to Afghan sovereignty. We are working very hard at that. We have to work as hard in our rhetoric as we are in our action.
# # #
WEB LINKS FOR EXCERPTS FROM TODAY"S "MEET THE PRESS"
Sen. Sessions isn’t ruling out court filibuster
Sen. Leahy: Court nominee likely for fall term
Clinton: Arms deal makes world safer
Gates: Iran not yet ‘nuclear capable’
Clinton, Gates have ‘sympathy’ for Karzai
Clinton defends Israel’s nuclear summit role
Clinton ‘thrilled’ by passage of health bill
Where will Obama look for high court pick?
Panel examines Obama’s agenda
# # #
Below is a RUSH transcript of this morning’s broadcast, mandatory attribution to NBC News’ "Meet the Press with David Gregory." A final transcript of the program is available at: .
DAVID GREGORY:
But first, the politics of the Supreme Court. The President has another big decision to make. The second court vacancy in two years. How are the White House and Republicans weighing the confirmation battle ahead? Joining us now to talk about that exclusively, the two members at the heart of the debate. The Senate Judiciary Committee, who will oversee the confirmation hearings. Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Ranking Member Jeff Sessions of Alabama. Welcome both of you back to Meet The Press.
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Thank you, good to be here.
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
Thank you.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Leahy, you've conferred with the President, with the White House. How is he approaching this decision?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
(UNINTEL) he's doing it in a very responsible way. He's doing it very methodically. He wants somebody who is going to-- be a solid member of the court. He has made it very clear he's not looking for somebody who-- be there to represent just Democrats or just Republicans, but to represent Americans. To give a voice to Americans who are affected-- everyday Americans who are affected by court decisions. And in many cases, the court decisions have hurt ordinary Americans. He wants somebody who has a sense of what real life is in America.
DAVID GREGORY:
Has he worked out whether he wants somebody with political experience, as opposed to somebody as you often say who's in that judicial monastery like a judge?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Yeah, my-- I've al-- always said I wish we could have some more people outside the judicial monastery. I think-- Justice Sotomayor came the closest to that having been a prosecutor and in private practice and a trial judge. But-- I let him-- I'll let him speak to that. I know that he has several extraordinarily good names before. Any one of whom would make a good justice of the Supreme Court. Among the names he's considering.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Sessions, when the President spoke about this on Friday, he-- he said replacing Justice Stevens-- would be somebody who in his mind had to have-- an independent mind. Who would have all the qualifications to be a judge. And at the end of his statement, he said this. Let me play it for you.
PRESIDENT OBAMA ON TAPE:
It will also be someone who like Justice Stevens knows that in Democracy, powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.
DAVID GREGORY:
That was described as a fight for the little guy sensibility to the job. How does that sit with you?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
I'm not sure exactly what he meant by that. I would say that any judge that faithfully follows the law. Who respects the Constitution and understands that he or she is subordinate to that document, really serves the average American. It's when an unelected, lifetime appointed judge or five of them-- use their power-- unaccountable power to redefine the meaning of the Constitution to effectuate some policy agenda, some empathy, some ideology that they have. That's what threatens the average American. And-- and I'm hearing a lot about that, frankly, all over-- as I travel my state and in airports, that people believe that we're losing our constitutional respect. That our government is overreaching. And they're concerned about it.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator, as you think about the political climate that this is happening. You've got a bruising health care battle-- that has just been waged. Republicans have said they are not interested in cooperating with the White House or with this President. Do you think this is gonna be a big fight with Republicans and the White House?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
You know, the answer to that is in the President's hands. I think Senator Feinstein said it well the other day. She said that-- she believed the President should nominate somebody that would get a very strong vote. Seventy plus votes. Bipartisan. That they were a proven and competent professional. That's the kind of nominee I hope that he nominates and that we can support. I would like to be-- be able to support this nominee.
But if we have a nominee that-- evidences a philosophy of-- "judges know best." That they can-- amend the Constitution by saying it has evolved (?)-- and effectuate agendas, then we're gonna have a big fight about that, because the American People don't want that.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Leahy, isn't it-- important that the President selects someone who unites the country?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Well, I think that there is-- right now-- as Justice Stevens himself has said, because of some of the decisions of the Supreme Court, they're beginning to lose credibility with the American People. Actually-- not for the reasons you may think, I agree with what Jeff Sessions has said. They have rewritten a law. This is a very, very activist court. The most activist court in my lifetime. They rewrote the law to say that-- so they said that women could be paid less than men.
They rewrote the law to say that-- age discrimination laws won't apply if corporate interests don't want them to. They rewrote the law to give Exxon/Mobil a $2 billion windfall. And they rewrote the law to say that corporations could come in and meddle in elections in this-- in this country. All of those things went against their precedent and went against the laws of this country.
DAVID GREGORY:
Sen-- Senator, the question I asked is whether you think a nominee should unite the country.
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
I think a nominee if-- if Republicans and Democrats want to set aside politics, stop listening to the sin-- single issue groups, either the far right or the far left. They can. Remember John Paul Stevens (PH) was nominated by a Republican President who was facing election. He was a conservative Republican and a Democratic-- controlled Senate confirmed him in two and a half weeks overwhelmingly. What has happened between then and today?
DAVID GREGORY:
But I-- I just want to pin you down on this point. Because back in 2005, on this program, after Sandra Day O'Conner retired, this is what you-- this was your advice to-- to President Bush.
SENATOR LEAHY ON TAPE:
That's why we're gonna meet with the-- with the President in about a week. Gonna urge they put somebody who would unite the country, not divide the country.
DAVID GREGORY:
So, yes or no, does that same standard--
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Yes, of course.
DAVID GREGORY:
--apply to President Obama now?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Of course it does. And-- and-- but it also requires people to not take a kneejerk reaction. One Republican leader's already said, "Well, we may-- we may filibuster." He doesn't even know if-- who is--
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, I'll--
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Who this is gonna be?
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, we'll-- we'll get to that in just a moment. Let's put some of the names who are on that short list. There may be other names that are added. But this is what's thought to be the short list of names so far. You have Judge Diane Wood (PH), she's on the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. Elena Keagan (PH), the Solicitor General-- of the United States. Judge Merrick Garland (PH), who sits-- as a judge on the U.S.-- Court of Appeals in the D.C. Circuit. And Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. Senator Sessions, I want to make a disclosure, my wife Beth worked for Judge Garland at the Justice Department. He also performed our wedding ceremony. That said-- as you look at that list-- is there any nonstarter there for you?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
Well, I think that-- it's premature to say that. We have a big responsibility to examine their background. This is the only time in-- in the entire process that the American People-- through their elected representatives have an-- have the opportunity to confront the nominee. Who could have a lifetime appointment for 30 or 40 or even 50 years (UNINTEL).
DAVID GREGORY:
But Senator, you know these (UNINTEL). You know these figures.
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
I'm not gonna prejudge that.
DAVID GREGORY:
But you know these figures. They came up when-- Judge Sotomayor-- was nominated. You know these figures. Are you prepared to say that they are all well-qualified to be on the Supreme Court?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
I think we've got to look at that. I'm not prepared to make an announcement before we get into the background on it. No, I'm not.
DAVID GREGORY:
The issue--
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
Let me just say I disagree with Pr-- Pat's-- analysis and criticism of the court. I don't think this court is an activist court. I think they've attempted to faithfully follow the law. And just because they reach a decision-- that he may not like, does not mean it's an activist court.
DAVID GREGORY:
Let me ask you about procedures.
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
(UNINTEL) Congress wrote the raw-- law badly.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Sessions, the only--
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
So, Jeff-- if we wrote badly, what you're saying is it's okay that they rewrote the law? That's not what the court's supposed to do. They're supposed to interpret the law, not make law.
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
You're exactly right. The court should interpret the law not make the law. And should interpret it in a way that's faithful to the Constitution.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Sessions, can you promise an up or down vote on the President's nominee? Is a filibuster possible?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
I promise a fair hearing. And I f-- I promise that the nominee will have a chance to explain any criticisms that are raised. But if the nominee is-- is one that is so activist like-- Goodman Lou (PH) that's just been nominated. Who's written that-- that the Constitution-- requires welfare and health care to individuals. If it's somebody like that, clearly outside the mainstream, then I think every-- power should be utilized to protect the Constitution--
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, but Senator Sessions, you're on record--
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
(UNINTEL PHRASE) like that.
DAVID GREGORY:
You're on record in the past--
DAVID GREGORY:
Okay, you-- you're on record in the past as saying filibusters should not be used against judges. And yet, I want to be clear here. You are not taking a filibuster off the table in this particular case?
SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS:
We had a big fight over that debate. And-- Senator Leahy and his side won. And-- they set a standard that says that if you have-- a nominee that-- under extraordinary circumstances-- a filibuster is appropriate to use against them. I hope we do not do that. I voted against Sotomayor, but that was not a filibuster. And I think-- we'll just see how it plays out. Depends on the quality of the nominee. I think that's the standard the Senate has adopted in recent years.
DAVID GREGORY:
Senator Leahy, for all the sound and the fury related to Justice Sotomayor, she was called a racist by some on the right. Conservative commentators. She was still confirmed handily. And yet it is significant-- that your colleague here is not ruling out a filibuster. That's the only area of uncertainty here. Because, as you know, the election of Scott Brown, Democrats don't-- don't have-- a bulletproof majority.
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Look, the Constitution says that 51 Senators can confirm somebody. It doesn't require 60 Senators. I don't think there's going to be any kind of a filibuster. You know, this last year we had about a hundred and some odd filibusters. That's totally unprecedented. Actually, that's the lazy person's way out. The American People pay us and-- and elect us to vote yes or no. Not to vote maybe. Every time you have a filibuster, you're saying, "I'm not gonna vote yes or no. I'm gonna vote maybe." That's irresponsible.
DAVID GREGORY:
All right. Final point Chairman. When? When are we gonna hear a nomination?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
I think you're gonna hear a nomination very soon, because we'd like to get this wrapped up this summer.
DAVID GREGORY:
Within weeks?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
I think we're gonna hear it-- soon now, so we can wrap this up this summer.
DAVID GREGORY:
And you expect-- the justice to be in place by the start of the term?
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Oh, there's no question. It'd be irresponsible to do otherwise.
DAVID GREGORY:
All right. To be continued. Senators, thank you both very much this morning.
SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY:
Thank you.
DAVID GREGORY:
Coming up next. America's role in the world. How will this recent nuclear treaty make the country safer? And why are so many friends and foes alike defying the United States? A conversation with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Plus our round table on all the week's political news. David Brooks, David Senger (PH), Kathleen Parker (PH), and Harold Ford Jr. Only here on Meet The Press.
# # #
DAVID GREGORY:
Secretary Clinton, let's talk about the nuclear issue. So you've got critics on both sides of this decision, those who think that it goes too far, weakens America, those who think it doesn't go far enough. So if this nuclear disarmament decision represents middle ground, is it enough to make the world safer?'
SECRETARY CLINTON:
It's certainly is. And I know that this is a very important issue, that I thank you for discussing with us, because the President's position is very clear. We will always protect the United States, our partners and allies around the world, our nuclear deterrent will remain-- secure, safe, and effective in doing so. But we also think we will ultimately be safer if we can introduce-- the idea that the United States is willing to enter into arms treaties with Russia to reduce our respective nuclear arsenals, and that we're gonna stand against nonproliferation in a way that will-- perhaps deter others from acquiring nuclear weapons. And so you have to look at the entire package, Nuclear Posture Review, the New Start Treaty, and the Nuclear Security Summit.
DAVID GREGORY:
But Secretary Gates, this is not about the U.S. and the USSR anymore. It's not about the U.S. and Russia anymore. And the critics, what they've seized on is this idea that American nuclear power, muscle, is ultimately what has deterred aggressors in the past. So, as you look at this Posture Review-- disarmament decision, how does this deter a country like Iran or North Korea from-- you know-- going away from their nuclear ambitions?
SECRETARY GATES:
Well, first of all, we have still a very powerful nuclear arsenal. The Nuclear Posture Review sets forth a process by which we will be able to modernize-- our nuclear stockpile to make it more reliable-- safer, and more secure and effective. We have in addition to the nuclear deterrent today, a couple of things we didn't have in the Soviet days. We have missile defense now, and that's growing by leaps and bounds every year, significant budget increase for that this year, both regional and the ground based interceptors. And we have prompt global strike-- affording us some conventional alternatives on long range missiles that we didn't have before. So-- believe me, the chiefs and I wouldn't-- the Joint Chiefs of Staff and I would not have wholeheartedly embraced-- not only the Nuclear Posture Review, but also the START Agreement if we didn't think at the end of the day, it made the United States stronger, not weaker.
DAVID GREGORY:
But-- it still doesn't answer the question of if-- if you're in Iran or North Korea, and you've been proliferating even after disarmament started between the U.S. and Russia, what's to stop them from continuing down that path just because of this posture?
SECRETARY GATES:
Well, first of all, I think it puts us in a much stronger position in terms of going to other countries and getting their support-- for putting pressure on the Iranians and the North Koreans. I think it also has, potentially, a deterrent effect on other countries-- who might be potential proliferators as they look at North Korea and-- and Iran.
DAVID GREGORY:
What is, Secretary Clinton, the bottom line threat of all of these missiles around the world getting into the hands of terrorists?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
It's a serious threat, David. And that's why the President has convened this Nuclear Security Summit starting Monday. We often say that the-- the threat of nuclear war, as we used to think about it during the cold war, has actually decreased. But, the threat of nuclear terrorism has increased. And by that, we mean that there's a lot of nuclear material that is not as secure. It hasn't been destroyed, it isn't under lock and key in many places in the world, particularly in the former Soviet Union, but not exclusively there.
We know that terrorist groups, primarily Al Qaeda, persist in their efforts to obtain enough nuclear material to try to do something that would cause just such mass havoc and terror and damage and destruction-- that it would be devastating. And we know that-- a lot of countries haven't, until relatively recently, seen the threat as we see it. You know, remember, we've been working for 18 plus years to diminish the threat-- in a partnership with Russia. And we worked-- when my husband was President, we started working with some of the nations that were part of the Soviet Union to get their nuclear material out. But this hasn't been a high international priority, and that's what we intend to make it, starting this week.
DAVID GREGORY:
Le-- let me talk to a related topic, and that is trying to deter Iran from-- building-- a nuclear weapons program. Secretary Gates-- is the notion of Iran becoming a nuclear power inevitable at this point? Is the strategy of the U.S. government becoming more and more containment?
SECRETARY GATES:
No, we have not. We have not-- made that-- drawn that conclusion at all. And in fact-- we're doing-- everything we can-- to try and-- keep Iran from developing-- nuclear weapons. We have-- we're probably going to get another UN Security Council resolution, and that's really-- I mean, it's important, but it's all-- in its own-- f-- in its own right in terms of isolating Iran. But it's also important in terms of a legal platform for organizations like the EU and individual countries to take even more stringent actions against Iran. At the end of the day-- what-- what has to happen is the Iranian government has to decide that its own security is better served by not having nuclear weapons than by having them. And it's a combination of economic pressures, it's a combination of more missile defense and cooperation in the Gulf-- to show them that any attack would-- we can defend against and-- and react against. So I think it's a combination of-- of-- all of these different options in terms of trying to-- convince the Iranians-- that-- that they're headed down the wrong path.
DAVID GREGORY:
And Secretary Clinton, it raises to me-- a larger question about the U.S. role in the world. This President tried engagements as he came into office. Engagements with the Iranians, engagements with-- with the North Koreans, it hasn't worked. They don't wanna talk, they don't wanna dance with this President. So what is the next phase then? What is America's influence in the world?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well David, I would argue because the President was willing to offer engagement, we actually have more support vis-à-vis North Korea and Iran than was certainly present when he became President. The fact that Iran and North Korea have not responded makes our case, in a way. And if you look at North Korea, for example, we now have a very clear understanding with the other members of the six party talks, led by China, that North Korea-- cannot be permitted to just go on its own course, that-- it has to be pressured to come back into this framework to try to get to the denuclearization of the peninsula.
With Iran, a lot of countries were on the sidelines. Their attitude was, "Well, you know, the United States, you know, they're just hurling insults. They're not really, you know-- willing to have any diplomatic engagement." We said, "Okay, fine, we're willing." We-- we stretched out our hand. The President made extraordinary efforts. It was the Iranians who refused. That has brought more people to the table. We have unity in what's called the P5-plus-1, the permanent members of the UN plus Germany. They are meeting in New York as-- as we speak-- to begin the hard process of coming up with a language of a resolution.
DAVID GREGORY:
So you don't think the U.S. would have to go-- go it alone on sanctions before bringing others--
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, not at all.
DAVID GREGORY:
--before going to the United Nations?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, I think--
DAVID GREGORY:
Because you don't have results yet. You say there's been all this unity, but there's been missed deadlines, and you still don't have results.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, but-- but you know, David-- I have-- I'm a big believer in strategic patience. I mean, you know, if-- if we-- if we could wave the magic wand and get everybody to move-- like we could, but that's never been the case in the world. You-- you work through persuasion. You present evidence. We have been consistently doing so. And as Secretary Gates just said, the Security Council resolution will not in any way for-- stall us or the EU or other concerned countries from taking additional steps. But, it will send a really powerful message. The Iranians have been beating down the doors of every country in the world to try to avoid a Security Council resolution. And what we have found over the last months, because of our strategic patience, and our willingness to keep on this issue, is that countries are finally saying, "You know, I kinda get it. I get that they didn't-- they didn't cooperate, they're the ones who shut the door, and now we have to do something."
DAVID GREGORY:
Is a nuclear capable Iran as dangerous as a nuclear state of Iran?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, clearly weapons are more dangerous than potential, potential is troubling too.
DAVID GREGORY:
Are they capable now?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
They're-- you know, that-- that's an issue upon which-- intelligence services still-- differ. But our goal is to prevent them from having nuclear weapons.
DAVID GREGORY:
Secretary Gates, I wanna ask you--
SECRETARY GATES:
I'd just say, and it's our judgment here, they are not nuclear capable.
DAVID GREGORY:
They are not nuclear capable?
SECRETARY GATES:
Not yet.
DAVID GREGORY:
And is that just as dangerous as being a nuclear state to your mind?
SECRETARY GATES:
Only in this respect-- how you differentiate. How far-- how far have they gone? If they-- if their policy is to go the threshold, but not assemble a nuclear weapon, how do you tell that they have not assembled? So, it becomes a serious verification question. And I-- I don't actually know how you would verify that. So they are continuing to make progress on these programs. It's going slower-- slower than they anticipated. But they are moving in that direction.
DAVID GREGORY:
We've been talking about our foes, I wanna talk about our friend. 'Cause I think a lot of Americans are troubled by some of our relationships with our friends in the world right now. Hamid Karzai, who is the leader of Afghanistan-- has done some things recently. He's tried to establish control over what was supposed to be an independent election commission, he invited the Iranian leader to Afghanistan in a move that seemed to-- try to embarrass the U.S. He talked about the U.S. trying to dominate Afghanistan, and now he made threats apparently to join the Taliban. I think a lotta people are-- are fair in wondering why the American forces should fight and die for a people represented by a guy like this?
SECRETARY GATES:
Well-- oh, go ahead.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, go ahead, Bob.
SECRETARY GATES:
I-- I-- first of all, I think you have to see this guy as-- first of all, the President of Afghanistan and of a sovereign country, and when there are attacks on him, on his family, and what he perceives to be on Afghanistan itself, or insults to the sovereignty of Afghanistan, he's going to react. And he's going to react strongly. The fact is, on a day to day basis-- s-- speaking from our perspective, he has a very effective working relationship with General McChrystal, he has cooperated with General McChrystal in going down to Kandahar to begin to set the stage as the Kandahar campaign gets underway, and talking to the local tribal leaders and-- and so on. So I think-- I think we have to understand-- the pressures he's under. But at the same time, understand their sensitivity. This is a country-- that has been at war for almost two generations. They have had armies come in and leave and-- and who paid no attention to Afghan sovereignty. We are working very hard at that. We have to work as hard in our rhetoric as we are in our action--
DAVID GREGORY:
So do we-- is the message here-- don't overreact to some of this?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Absolutely. You know--
DAVID GREGORY:
Did you not overreact when you spoke to him on the phone?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I certainly didn't overreact. You know-- I think, David, some of what is said is-- is not true. And a lot of others-- who make-- claims-- are, you know, short on evidence, and-- very long on rhetoric. This is-- a very difficult situation. And we are working-- very closely with not only the President, but there's a whole government that is there. I mean, we work well with a lot of the ministers who are, you know, dealing on a day-to-day basis with our civilian and military leadership. We have an international presence that each-- of our allies are working in different parts of Afghanistan. And I personally, you know-- have a lot of sympathy for President Karzai and the extraordinary stress he lives under every single minute of every day. And you know, I-- I have a little experience in what it's like being, you know, in the political arena. And in our country, you kinda know it goes with the territory, you put your toe out there. This is new, this is something that Afghans don't have any experience with, a lotta countries around the world-- he's not alone in wondering that if he's attacked by some newspaper in the United States, is our government behind it? And that's not unusual for us to encounter, I see it all the time in leaders that I deal with.
DAVID GREGORY:
So if there's-- if there's people who get worried about our allies, frankly, not listening to the United States, take Israel for example, was the United States blind sighted by the fact that the Israeli Prime Minister abruptly decided not to come to this nuclear conference?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, I mean, that's-- that's a decision for a head of government, a head of state. Gordon Brown is not coming from Great Britain-- Kevin Rudd is not coming from Australia, King Abdul is not coming from Saudi Arabia. There are many things, it's like when President Obama had to cancel his trip to Indonesia and Australia. There are all kinds of things--
DAVID GREGORY:
It seems-- abrupt though, and-- there was--
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, it's--
DAVID GREGORY:
--a couple of abrupt things--
SECRETARY CLINTON:
--I'm sure that--
DAVID GREGORY:
--that low point in the relationship with Israel--
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, the Indonesians and the Australians thought it was kind of abrupt when (LAUGHTER) the President called up and said, "Oh by the way, I'm not coming on this long, planned trip." But the Israeli government will be represented at a very high level. And you know, they are-- they share our deep concern about nuclear terrorism. And they wanna be at the table as we try to figure out how we're gonna make the world safer.
DAVID GREGORY:
This doesn’t make the relationship even-- even more difficult at a difficult time?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
No, not at all. I mean-- we have a deep and-- and very-- close relationship between the United States and Israel, that goes back many years. That doesn't mean we're gonna agree on everything. We don't agree with any of our-- friends on everything. We have a special relationship with Great Britain, we have close relationships with France, our oldest ally. It doesn't mean we agree on everything. And I-- I think that somehow, since we're living in a 24/7 news cycle-- with, you know, things popping every minute, a lot is made of a little, instead of trying to step back and see the forest instead of the trees. And-- that's what, you know, I try to do every day. What are the long-term consequences of what we're doing. And you know, you just can't react to every little event that some, you know, media outlet wants to blow up. You can't do that.
DAVID GREGORY:
Final point-- a domestic matter. There is this image, which I'm sure you've seen-- of you embracing President Obama when healthcare was accomplished. And-- as you might imagine, people in the media could read in a lot to that, given the history between you and the President and your history with the issue of healthcare. And I just wonder, at the end of that process of healthcare reform being accomplished, whether you viewed that and said, "This is what I-- this is what President Clinton ultimately hoped to accomplish, that healthcare reform in this form." Is that how you feel?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
I was thrilled that we finally got healthcare reform passed. I mean, it's been-- a high priority of mine for many years. I often say I have the scars to show for it. And it was a wonderful historic-- accomplishment for the American people. And I was thrilled that the--
DAVID GREGORY:
It's what you would've wanted back in '93, '94?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, you-- you know, everything that was done up until this time added to it. You know, we-- a lotta people made contributions going back to President Johnson and President Nixon and you know, certainly my husband, and even, you know, the-- President Bush. They-- there were building blocks. But getting it across the finish line with the kind of comprehensive reform that our country deserved to have-- didn't happen until this year. And I'm thrilled by it.
DAVID GREGORY:
We'll leave it there, thank you both.
SECRETARY GATES:
Thank you.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Thank you.
* * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * *