---

June 15, 2006

Special Report Roundtable - June 15

FOX News Special Report With Brit Hume

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK: Two days ago President Bush stood with Prime Minister Maliki and today Prime Minister Maliki is saying he will give a get out of jail free card to Iraqis who killed American troops. That is just outrageous.

TONY SNOW, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: Mowaffak Rubaie, the national security advisor for Prime Minister Maliki, has just been on Iraqi TV in the last couple of minutes and he said that there's no amnesty for anybody who kills Iraqis or Americans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: Well, that eventually, I suppose, disposed of that, but it was an awful big dust up on Capitol Hill about that today with democrats denouncing what they thought the Iraqis or what they claimed the Iraqis were about to do and what the "Washington Post" had suggested the Iraqis were about to do.

In the meantime, let's take a look at this Bush poll -- job approval poll. Can you see back in June of last year he was at 48 percent, but he was down to 35 on May 16 and he's now rebounded to 40 percent, although the rest of the poll doesn't really tell you why. If you look at the death of Zarqawi, in this poll, it is said by people to be -- most people think it's a minor victory or not a victory, 66 percent consider it minor or not a victory at all and a third or less than a third think it's a victory. His numbers in Iraq are actually down now.

Analytical observations on all this now from Fred Barnes, executive editor of the "Weekly Standard"; Mort Kondracke, executive editor of "Roll Call"; and Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, FOX News contributors, all.

So why the big fuss over this story on amnesty from democratic senators today -- Mara.

MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: Well, because it sounded like that -- it seems like the democrats thought they had saw an opportunity to maybe look -- make the president look as if he was soft on terrorists if he endorsed a plan where they were giving amnesty to terrorists which it sounds like they're not actually. There's going to be some kind of an effort to get the insurgency co-opted and into the political system. That's been going on for quite some time.

HUME: Yeah, it's called reconciliation.

LIASSON: Yeah. Well yes, and also it's also -- you're trying to take all these militias and get them not just inside the security forces where unfortunately a lot of them already are and are still acting like militias, but actually getting them to be pulling on the same ore, so to speak. And there is this question about amnesty, the president was asked about it at the press conference the other day and he didn't answer it. But, it sounds like it's going to be.

HUME: What he -- what he said was.

LIASSON: Well, he was talking about de-Baathification.

HUME: Well, no, but he also talked about -- he said that the guy had said amnesty and he said well, what I think what he meant was reconciliation.

LIASSON: Right, right, but what, what, what, what the question was that Jake Tapper asked that people who were part of the insurgency and perhaps had actually killed Americans or Iraqis would somehow be pardoned. But it sounds like that's not what's going to happen. They are going to make an attempt somebody who might have run guns or sheltered a terrorist in their home, that they would be forgiven.

MORT KONDRACKE, "ROLL CALL": This looks like, like overplay by the "Washington Post" of information -- of something that Maliki actually said that people who had Iraqi blood on their hands would not be subject to amnesty, and that then this was interpreted by an outgoing aide, somebody who'd already resigned who was an aide in the former government of Jaafari told the "Post," oh, yeah, it might be that the -- that people with blood - - American blood on their hands might be amnestied.

LIASSON: But American blood would be OK.

KONDRACKE: And I guess.

HUME: But, Maliki never said that.

KONDRACKE: But apparently Maliki never said that and now Rubaie, the national security advisor, has absolutely stomped on this. I mean, it would be outrageous if they were releasing people and inviting them in if they'd killed Americans with Americans still fighting there and on the 20 - - the day when 2,500 -- when the 2,500th American had been killed, I mean, that would be a slap on the face. But that's not where -- that's not where the Maliki government is coming from. They want us there.

FRED BARNES, "WEEKLY STANDARD": It would be a non-starter for sure. You know, he just read the story and said this isn't going to happen. Come on, there's not a chance of this. But the aide said, and I don't blame the post for quoting him. He.

HUME: The ex-aide.

BARNES: Yeah -- well, he wasn't an ex-aide when they quoted him. He is an ex-aide now, since they quoted him. No, he was an aide, he was still in the office there.

HUME: He was on his way -- he had already resigned.

HUME: OK, but he hadn't left. He was still there. I don't fault the "Post" on this and he said definitely those who killed Americans could get amnesty. So, I don't find the "Post" at fault, but clearly that wasn't going to happen and they reversed that immediately and...

HUME: What about the position taken by democrats on this. Is everybody consistent on this issue?

BARNES: Well no I think they said the right thing at the time.

LIASSON: Yeah.

BARNES: It's just an issue that evaporated almost immediately. They should have known better that that clearly wasn't going to happen.

HUME: Well, isn't this something a little bit inconsistent about people all of whom who said that the Iraqi army, which, of had course had shot at Americans should not have been disbanded and in fact some of the officers in that army should have been recommissioned.

BARNES: I know.

HUME: The same people that are now.

(CROSSTALK)

BARNES: You know, a lot of people were saying that, particularly democrats.

LIASSON: Well, you know, look.

HUME: Of course they were.

BARNES: And they were wrong about that.

HUME: Well I know that, but I mean.

BARNES: If you kept that army at the time, and -- which was heavily (INAUDIBLE) had something like 7,000 generals, they were mainly Sunnis, it would have set off a civil war with the Shiites and so Ambassador Bremer who was in charge and made that decision was right to do that.

LIASSON: Look, the, the, the, the debate about exactly how they should have been decommissioned and handle will go on for some time.

(CROSSTALK)

HUME: I know but the question is the test, the test for democrats is American blood on your hands or shot at Americans.

LIASSON: No, I don't think it's exactly the same thing. I can.

BARNES: Pretty close.

LIASSON: First of all -- if this had stood -- hold on. If this had stood and not been corrected, you would have seen a stampede of republicans saying the exact same thing. There wouldn't have been any doubt. You both said here, it would have been outrageous if it was true. It's not. I don't think it's exactly the same thing to defend your country against an evasion as to once there is a duly elected government to be an insurgent. It's just not the exact same thing.

KONDRACKE: I think the good news of what happened today, frankly, the biggest -- biggest good news, is that John Kerry's proposal to get all American troops out of Iraq by the end of this year got six votes in the United States Senate. I mean, that ought to send a message to the Iraqis that we ain't leaving. That -- you know, we're not precipitously withdrawing.

BARNES: I think they got a pretty good idea of that when Bush showed up there this week.

KONDRACKE: But, that there's popular support for that position for sticking around for a while.

BARNES: Voted against it for political reasons who are actually for it for substantive reasons.

HUME: And what about the poll? If you look through the poll apart from the president's approval rating being up it's hard to find out why.

BARNES: No, no, it showed -- it shows that whatever gains he has are not because of Iraq and if things do turn favorably in Iraq there's more to be gained in his standing.

(LAUGHTER)

BARNES: Now, I'm not saying they will. Look, that's pretty obvious though even to you, Mort.

HUME: quickly.

KONDRACKE: Well, there was no issue on which Bush was up. So I think there was something in the atmosphere that makes people think better of him and I don't know what it was because the poll doesn't show it.

HUME: When we come back with our panel is Hamas collapsing under Israeli fire and the Western boycott. We'll talk about Palestinian developments and there has been wild stuff over there, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOHAMMED DAHLAN, FATTAH PARLIAMENT MEMBER (through translator): The government and Hamas have to start solving problems of the Palestinian society and not evading that by finding a victim. The government is responsible for all of what happens in the past period, legally, morally and politically.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUME: Well, he's a member of the political opposition, he's a member of Fatah and criticizing Hamas, but Hamas has not had a good week over there in the Palestinian areas. There was a -- the parliament -- first the cabinet building was stormed by angry Fatah members, some government employees who had not been paid, and then there, of course, there was a storming of the parliament itself which led to this scene in the legislature which was not exactly what you'd call a high water mark for the Hamas government in Palestine.

(LAUGHTER)

Now, this of course occurs with the Hamas government unable to pay people for their work because it's starved of funds. So, what about all of this? Is this a sign that this is going to make things worse over there? It this a sign that U.S. policy against Hamas is working? Fred, what?

BARNES: Brit, are you sure that wasn't the House debate on Iraq? Guys climbing on their chairs. I don't know what's going to happen, but in the old Marxist terminology, you know, this has been a heightening of the contradictions and the contradiction is you have this self-proclaimed terrorist government or at least legislature that can't govern. It can't govern it can't raise revenues. You know, they're all -- the old supporters, you know the European Union, the United States all the people who sent money in, there're not sending in now, so they can't pay people. Gaza, is -- has -- which was turned over a little bit ago from the Israelis to the Palestinians, is utter anarchy. The Egyptians don't even want to let people in from Gaza. I mean, it is -- it is -- the Palestinian territories are practically returning to a state of nature.

KONDRACKE: I mean, you wonder whether there's not going to be a civil war in the Palestinian territory between the Fatah faction and Hamas. I mean, there are armed clashes between -- between militias of the two sides. And Hamas has suddenly decided oh well maybe we better reinstitute the cease-fire with Israel. They declared it null and void, but if they -- they're fighting with Fatah and if they're fighting with the Israelis, too, the Israelis will clobber them and so they've suddenly offered a cease-fire again.

Meantime, Mahmoud Abbas is offering -- is proposing this referendum which is ostensibly gives the Palestinian people a choice of saying we recognize Israel and we will make -- we will have -- enter negotiations with the state of Israel. But the document on which he is basing this thing, which was womped (ph) up by a bunch of prisoners -- Palestinian prisoners, basically is a retreat, I mean, from previous policy, I mean, it does not explicitly recognize Israel's right to exist and it does not -- it says that the Palestinians have a right to return and all that -- it's a way back throwback document.

LIASSON: Except, even though it includes the right of return, which everyone will tell you is an absolute non-starter for any kind of a final agreement, there -- I think -- this is a guy who was considered to be very weak, no power, and I think he had one big good political play left which was to say OK, let Palestinian people actually vote on the Hamas platform, which is not to have two states living side by side, and Hamas doesn't want this referendum. And one of the questions that a lot of people had was when people voted for Hamas, were they merely voting against Fatah, the previous corrupt, ineffective government, or were they actually ratifying what Hamas stood for and a referendum would be a way to find out.

BARNES: I already know the answer to that.

LIASSON: Well you might know the answer, but not everybody else does.

BARNES: I do. They clearly Hamas -- it was no secret that Hamas.

LIASSON: No it was not a secret.

BARNES: More than anything else, a terrorist group that wants to drive Israelis into the sea and take over their territory. That's what Hamas is all about. They are not reformers, they aren't guys who can collect the garbage better, they aren't guys who are going to pay the government employees, that's for sure. One thing is clear in this mess in the Palestinian territories there is nobody for the Israelis to negotiate with, and probably won't be for a long time.

HUME: So, what does this mean? This means we're.

BARNES: It means the Israelis will continue to build a fence. I'd make it higher than ever.

HUME: Does it mean that we're inevitably in for another round of violence between the Israelis and Palestinians?

BARNES: I would say so.

HUME: And.

BARNES: Look, you think the Israelis trust the Palestinians -- Hamas when they say, oh, we're going to have a cease-fire now? Usually you can't tell the difference between their non-cease-fires and their cease-fires.

(CROSSTALK)

LIASSON: There has been a period.

BARNES: Yes, you can't.

LIASSON: No, there has been a period of calm.

KONDRACKE: They don't trust them, but they know when there's a rocket attack and when there's not a rocket attack. If there's a rocket attack the Israelis will smack them and they should. If there's not a rocket attack then they let things float and let chaos reign in the Palestinian territory.

LIASSON: And the cease-fire held for about 15 months and, as Mort said, it might be reinstituted again if Hamas doesn't want to fight on two fronts at the same time.

HUME: If Hamas -- if this Hamas government fails that will be.

BARNES: What do you mean if? It's already failed.

HUME: Well, it hasn't collapsed yet.

LIASSON: It hasn't collapsed yet.

BARNES: Yeah, I'd like to drop you into Gaza and say.

HUME: I ain't -- look, I'm not saying I want to move over there. I'm just saying, Fred, that, that, this is what U.S. policy clearly was designed to bring about. So it's working?

LIASSON: It was designed to bring about a free and fair election without laying down any guidelines.

HUME: I'm talking about after the election, Mara.

LIASSON: After -- yes, they would clearly have a different kind of government there.

KONDRACKE: It's designed to force the government to recognize Israel and that has not happened and I don't think it's going to happen.

BARNES: I don't think it is.

KONDRACKE: Chaos may ensue.

---

Sponsored Links

About Us | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy         © RealClearPolitics 2006