Watch CBS News

Face The Nation Transcripts May 10, 2015: Huckabee, Sanders, Gingrich

The latest on the 2016 presidential campaign, home-grown terrorism, and "Deflate-gate," with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, Republican strategist Newt Gingrich, and others
May 10: Huckabee, Sanders and Gingrich 47:19

(CBS News) -- Below is a transcript from the May 10, 2015, episode of "Face The Nation." Guests included former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Newt Gingrich, Stephanie Cutter, John Heilemann, Mark Leibovich, Susan Page, Ron Fournier and Jarrett Bell.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I'm Bob Schieffer. And today on FACE THE NATION, stormy weather from coast to coast, and tough talk on the campaign trail.

Fifty tornadoes ripped through Texas and across the Southwest. So far only one death reported. A tropical storm hit the East Coast and a winter storm formed in the Rocky Mountains.

In politics, Republicans double down on the terrorist threat.

MIKE HUCKABEE: As president, I promise you that we will no longer merely try to contain jihadism. We will conquer it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: As the list of Republican presidential candidates doubled in a week, we'll hear from the latest entry, Mike Huckabee.

And Hillary Clinton is no longer the only Democratic candidate. Vermont independent Senator Bernie Sanders is in and will be here to talk about his chances.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Democratic strategist Stephanie Cutter will be here to add perspective. All that and deflate-gate, what did Tom Brady know and when did he know it, because this is FACE THE NATION.

And good morning, and Happy Mother's Day. We'll have more on the weird weather if developments warrant. But we begin with the newest entry in the Republican primary field, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. He is in Destin, Florida, this morning. Good morning, Governor. The FBI director warned every one of the increasing danger of homegrown terrorists this week. You had some very tough words on terrorism. You said, you know, that we will no longer merely try to contain jihadism. We will conquer it. But you didn't say how. What-- what do we need to do that we're not doing here?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE (R-Arkansas/Republican Presidential Candidate): Well, locally, and here in our own country, we need to have some control of our borders. And instead of spending a gazillion dollars looking at everybody's metadata of phone records and e-mail, we really need to be concentrating on those people who have been tweeting out threatening comments, people who ought to give us some real concern. The attack in Garland, Texas, this week, there were all kinds of indications that these two young men were-- were being radicalized and had some pretty nefarious thoughts going on. Why didn't we see that coming? Internationally, Bob, I think one of the challenges we face is you can't beat an enemy if you don't define him. And this administration has done something I never thought would happen. It's actually brought Israel into a closer alliance with Egypt, Jordan, the Saudis, the Emirates, and Kuwait than, perhaps, those nations are with the United States anymore.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Governor, yes, I take your point on all of that. But, apparently, we did know about these two men and warnings went out, the ones who attack that-- were bent on attacking that convention in Dallas. I don't hear the details, the specifics on how you go after them. I mean are we basically at war with Islam now?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: We're not at war with Islam. We are at war with radical Islam. We are at war with jihadism, the people who believe that their purpose on earth is to kill everybody who doesn't-- who don't agree with them religiously. Yes, we are at war with that. And I think the sooner we come to grips with it and the sooner we realize that that level of religious fanaticism that is all about killing everybody, even other Muslims, the sooner we are going to be able to identify it, surround it, and, ultimately, defeat it.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Governor, when I listened to your announcement speech the other day from Hope, Arkansas, when you got to that part about saving Social Security, you sounded more like a Democrat than a Republican to me. How is that going to go over in these Republican primary states?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: Well, I think I sounded more like an American. I sound like an American who understands that people have been paying in, in my case, since I was fourteen years old, when I got my first job, people pay into a system for fifty years. The IRA people act like that they are on welfare when they get a Social Security check or a Medicare benefit. I'm thinking, wait a minute, didn't the government take that out of my check for all of these years involuntarily? And I understand the program has some real fiscal problems, but why would you punish the recipients who played by the rules that they were forced to play by? Social Security and Medicare aren't voluntary programs. And so my point is that you don't go out there and tell people, now you have paid all these years, we are going to change the rules, because we screwed up the system and we didn't act as good stewards of your money like we said we were going to do.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, even some Democrats say there has to be reforms enacted if Social Security is going to survive. Would you favor some kind of reforms?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: Well, reforms don't mean you are going to start cutting peoples' benefits or changing the rules and say instead of sixty-five it's going to be seventy-five. If you want to go back and say, look, for those of you who are fourteen years old and you are just starting the workforce, you're getting ready to go into your first job, look, we're going to make some changes because the actuarial schedules upon which Social Security and Medicare were based have drastically changed. But about the only way we can really make these reforms is to hurt somebody. I don't think Americans believe that after having paid in all these years, again, not a choice, it wasn't voluntary, it was forced out of their checks, that somehow the government who didn't take good care of business can come in and say, yep, we are going you make you end up paying for our sins. I just don't think that that's something most Americans are willing anymore than I do that Americans are willing to let veterans sit and rot in a waiting room because we didn't take good care of the VA and keep our promises to the veterans, even though, they kept their promises to us when we sent them to wars, that we chose for them to go to.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Governor, let me ask you, Ron Fournier of National Journal, who will be on this broadcast later today, writes that while you are talking as a populist, a blue-collar populist, you have lent your name for money to questionable products. And he points out that an infomercial you made for a diabetes cure is simply not supported by the medical community. How about-- what about that?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: Well, there's going to be a lot of criticism thrown my way. One of the things that I have said is that the particular plan you are talking about is about the healthy eating, watching the kind of foods one takes in. And, you know, I don't have to defend everything that I have ever done. I am not doing those infomercials, obviously, now as a candidate for President. But if that's the worst thing somebody can say to me is I advocated for people who have diabetes to do something to reverse it and stop the incredible pain of that, then I am going to be a heck of a good President.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, Governor, I have diabetes, and I agree with you, and most doctors will tell you, you have to lose weight. You have to have a nutritious diet. But you were also selling pills of some sort, were you not?

FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: No. No. There was not-- that's a misnomer. One of the elements of the plan was dietary supplements but it is not the fundamental thing. The fundamental thing is always as you and I both know, it's exercise it's good eating habits, it's maintaining sugar levels, it's not eating a bunch of junk food, processed food, lots of carbs, sugar those type of things. It-- it's-- as somebody might say it's not rocket science or, as some might say, it ain't rocket surgery. It's really pretty simple, but it does require some discipline. And it's-- it's one of the four big things that are--


FORMER GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: --costing Americans and the health care system along with cancer, Alzheimer's, and heart disease. If we approach this, as I have suggested, which is looking for cures rather than just treatment, we then not only save lives, we start saving serious money, and that's one of the reforms we need to be talking about nationally.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. All right. Well, Governor, we will be talking to you again down the line. And now you are out on the campaign trail officially. Thanks to you for joining us.

We turn now to the Democratic side, and Hillary Clinton finally got a declared challenger. He is not a Democrat, Vermont-- Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. He's called himself an independent socialist. Senator, welcome. Let me just start out by asking you, what is a socialist these days? I mean, I remember when a socialist was somebody who wanted to nationalize the railroads and things like that.

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS (I-Vermont/Democratic Presidential Candidate): That's not the case.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Is that what you have in mind?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: I am proud of being the longest serving independent in the history of the United States Congress. I'm proud that my state of Vermont allowed me to do that. When we talk about Democratic socialism, I think it's important to realize that there are countries around the world like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, who've had social democratic governments on and off for many, many years. And we can learn a whole lot from some of those countries. For example, the United States is the only major country on earth that doesn't guarantee health care to all people as a right. And if you look at the health care systems in those countries, you know what? Not only do they cover all their people, much more cost effective than we are. We end up spending almost twice as much as they do, in terms of education, Bob, all of those countries; in Germany, Austria, many other countries. You know what they say? They're in a highly competitive global economy. All people, regardless of their income, should be able to get a college education. College education is free in those countries. That makes a lot of sense to me. In terms of childcare, our childcare system today, talking about Mother's Day, is a total disaster. Those systems are much better by and large. What they do is many of these countries have higher voter turnouts than we do. They have governments which do a lot better job representing their middle class, rather than a billionaire class, which have so much power today in our economic and political system.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, would you do consider yourself more liberal than the most liberal Democrat?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: I think it's fair to say that I am perhaps the most progressive member of the United States Senate. And by the way, Bob, I have made a decision to run within the Democratic primary process and I will abide by all of the regulations that come down in each of the states. I made that decision. That's what we're going to do.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So in states where you have to be a Democrat to run in (INDISTINCT) you will be--

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: I am going to run-- I am running as a Democrat in the Democratic primary process.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Let me just ask you right now, do you really think you could beat Hillary Clinton? And, if so, how and where is she vulnerable?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: Okay. Great question. The answer is, yes. And the answer is, because there is, in my view, massive dissatisfaction in this country today with corporate establishment and the greed of corporate America and an incredibly unequal distribution of wealth and income which currently exists. Bob, when you have ninety-nine percent of all new income generated today going to the top one percent, when you have the top-- you have the top one-tenth of one percent, only-- almost as much income as the bottom ninety percent, people working longer hours for low wages and all of the money was going to the people on top. You know what people don't think that's a good idea. In terms of the politics of America, as a result of this disastrous Citizens United, Supreme Court decision, clearly, the billionaires, Koch Brothers and others, are owning the political process. They will determine who the candidates are. Let me say this thing. If elected president, I will have a litmus test in terms of my nominee to be a Supreme Court justice. And that nominee will say that we are all going to overturn this disastrous Supreme Court decision on Citizens United because that decision is undermining American democracy. I do not believe that billionaires should be able to buy politicians.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Hillary Clinton says she is going to have a super PAC, says she has to do it, she didn't like it but she has to do it to compete. What about that?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: I understand where she is coming from. I will not have a super PAC. Look, we announced a week and a half ago, Bob, and since that time, we have had two hundred thousand people go to to sign up for the campaign. We've had close to ninety thousand contributions. Do you know what the average contribution was? It's about forty-three dollars, forty-three bucks, for middle-class working families, so I don't think we are going to outstand Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush or anybody else but I think we are going to raise the kinds of money that we need to run a strong and winning campaign.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, threshold question, why-- why would you be better in all of that than Hillary Clinton?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: Well, first of all, let me say that I-- I have known Hillary Clinton for twenty-five years. I respect her and I admire her. But I think we are living in a very strange moment in American history. And that is the problems facing us, in terms of income and wealth inequality and the fact that real employment is eleven percent; youth unemployment, seventeen percent. In terms of the fact that climate change is threatening the very foundations of our planet, that we need strong and bold leadership, I would ask people to take a look at the roles that I've been playing for the last twenty-five years standing up for working families and I have had a record which is taking on the billionaire class, taken on Wall Street, taken on the private insurance companies, and the drug companies.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But why are-- the question was why are you better at it, what-- what's wrong with Hillary Clinton? Is she-- where is she vulnerable?

SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I'll give you an example. Right now, as you know, Congress is in the midst of a debate on-- on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I am strongly opposed to that trade agreement because I think it follows in the footsteps of other disastrous trade agreements which have cost us millions of jobs. In terms of foreign policy, Hillary Clinton voted for the war in Iraq. I voted-- not only did I vote against it, I help lead the effort against what I knew would be a disaster. In terms of climate change, I have helped lead the effort against the Keystone Pipeline. I'm not quite sure that Hillary Clinton has come out with a position on that. So those are just some of the areas where we differ.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Bernie Sanders, we thank you for being here. Hope to talk to you again as we get down the trail. And we'll be back in one minute with more on the campaign.


BOB SCHIEFFER: And to help us sort all of this out a little perspective from former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who ran for the Republican nomination in 2012 and Stephanie Cutter, who was a top aide with President Obama's 2012 reelection campaign. Mister Speaker, how does it look different this year than when you ran in 2012?

NEWT GINGRICH (Republican Strategist): I think it's totally different. First-- first of all, in the top four candidates on Republican side are basically bunched at twelve or eleven or ten percent in New Hampshire, there are no frontrunners. In fact, you might even say they are just walkers. I mean there is-- there is nobody out there right now who's got anything like a strong lead, Bush-- Jeb Bush will raise a lot more money than anybody else but there is no evidence that that's automatic. In '08 John McCain was broke and got the nomination. In '12, Mitt Romney had huge amount of money and got the nomination. We have no idea which year it is and we have no idea what's going to happen.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So, Stephanie, on the-- on the Democratic side, is Hillary Clinton going to face any real challenge? You heard Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders makes a good case for his cause.

STEPHANIE CUTTER (Democratic Strategist): Yeah.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Whether the country is ready for that, I think is another question.


BOB SCHIEFFER: What's-- what's your take?

STEPHANIE CUTTER: I think that it's-- it's pretty likely that Hillary Clinton is going to be our nominee. You know do I think that Senator Sanders has a role to play? Absolutely. And I think that Hillary-- Hillary Clinton believes that also. He made a very strong case and he will influence the debate but, in all likelihood, you know, he has not made a viable case for his candidacy. And I think that matters.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, here's the thing. Can a person who is the overwhelming frontrunner at this part of the campaign, I mean, my God, we're a year and a half from-- from the election.


BOB SCHIEFFER: Mister Speaker, can that sustain?

NEWT GINGRICH: Well, if you ask me do I think Senator, Secretary Clinton can be nominated, yes, there's no guarantee it will be sustained, because there are things that happen, and there are patterns it build. But it won't be because she doesn't-- if she doesn't get the nomination, it will be because not Hillary beats Hillary, it won't be because some candidate beats Hillary, and we don't know how all these different fights are going to work out, but if you were betting today you would say she is the overwhelming favorite to be the nominee.

STEPHANIE CUTTER: Yeah. I absolutely agree. I think that there's nobody in the race right now who presents a real challenge to her in terms of taking the nomination away. But we are-- it's important to remember and we've been through this process many times, that we are many, many months away from the nomination, never mind the election, and there's going to be lots in twists and turns. On the Republican side, certainly, there is no frontrunner. We saw in 2012 that there were-- there were something like five or six frontrunners by the end of that nomination process, so anything can happen, and we're at the very beginning stage of this. And I think it's going to be interesting to watch, particularly, on the Republican side.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Sheldon Adelson kept-- kept your campaign alive, at least for a while there, because he poured a lot of money into your campaign. Do you see any kind of, either of you, any kind of a backlash coming? Because it looks like now we're going to have these Super PACs and the system is going to be totally overwhelmed by-- by big contributions.

NEWT GINGRICH: Well, I think, first of all, they tend to be countervailing, that is Senator Clinton-- Secretary Clinton can raise easily enough money to match Jeb Bush. So you-- you're going to see huge volumes on both sides; and I think there is a declining value when you get above a certain number, the-- the key for a candidate, which I failed, was to get above a critical mass, if, you know, Romney could only have outspent me three to one I might have become the nominee; but there's a point and sometime-- somewhere between five and twenty to one where you drown, nobody who is a nominee in the general election is going to get outspent by a-- by a huge number, because the country is too polarized on what kind of future it wants and both sides can generate huge amounts of money.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But why would people not become cynical when they say, well, his million-- billionaires, he's got more billionaires than my candidate, where does all this end?

STEPHANIE CUTTER: Well, I do think they become cynical and I think what Newt is saying is that, in the general both sides are going to be competitive, but, at a certain point, all of this negativity and money thrown into the system begins to cancel each other out and people start tuning it out. And it does promote cynicism. I do, you know, we do need to figure out how we take action to get this money out of the system and I will say that Secretary Clinton did come out for constitutional amendment to take this private special interest secret money out of the system.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And she also announced she was going to form or run a Super PAC.

STEPHANIE CUTTER: Right, which is very similar to what President Obama did in 2012, don't want to fight with one hand behind your back and I think that's fair.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What-- what's this campaign finally going to come down to?

NEWT GINGRICH: Well, I-- I would recommend to everybody in both parties that they read Tony Blair's essay today in the Guardian. Blair, who rebuilt the Labour Party in a five-year project that finally paid off in 1997, and the only major labor victories have been with Blair in the last forty years or thirty years. So I think it is well worth looking at. What he says is pretty straightforward. If you look to the future, you have a huge opportunity. If you emphasize ambition as well as compassion, you have a huge opportunity. If you emphasize new technology, you have a huge opportunity. But if you retreat-- and I say this for both parties. If you retreat to the past and you go to the extreme in either party, you are going to isolate yourself from having a chance to win.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What's your idea of what's-- what this campaign is about?

STEPHANIE CUTTER: Well, I-- I couldn't agree with that more. I think elections are always about the future and I think that candidates who are espousing policies who want to take us back either culturally or in terms of civil rights or economically are going to have a real problem.

NEWT GINGRICH: One of the things about Cameron's victory and it's very interesting because there were columnists writing stories about what Republicans should learn from the conservative defeat, the morning of the vote. And then, of course, the conservatives won which made their column sort of weird. The number one thing that Cameron did was he emphasized working Britons. And I will give you an example that will be probably controversial. A party which goes into places like Ferguson and Baltimore and says, you know, it is the working African-American who was hurt by the riot. It is the working small business African-American and Latino-American and Asian-American who was hurt by the riot, somebody ought to stand up for the people who are trying to create a decent future, that party is going to start a debate that's really important for this country between those who want to work and those who want to disrupt and destroy. And I think that's a very important debate for the next year.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Okay. We have the last word, about thirty seconds. Will foreign policy play a role this time?

STEPHANIE CUTTER: Absolutely. I think that is-- an issue that's bubbling up on this race. We saw a lot of Republicans talk about it yesterday. I think the real issue is whether or not anybody can really distinguish themselves on foreign policy, particularly, if you are running against Secretary Clinton. You know we heard a lot of rhetoric yesterday with Republicans in South Carolina about finding and killing terrorists but no real policies. No real differentiation compared to what Secretary Clinton or President Obama will do. So we will see.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. We have to go. Thank you both. We will be back with some personal thoughts on what could be another big issue, deflate-gate, in a moment.


BOB SCHIEFFER: I know it's news and maybe it's just the baseball fan in me, but this deflate-gate business just does not seem as important as, say, whether to sign a nuclear deal with Iran. I guess it is a big deal if you bet a bundle on the Super Bowl. But here is the thing. One of the charms of baseball is that cheating has always been part of the game, unless you get caught. Since the beginning of the game pitchers have been spitting on the ball, trying to cut it or scuff it or put a little Vaseline on it to make it harder to hit. People just wink and chuckle, but if the pitcher gets caught, the ump says you are out of here and off the pitcher goes to the shower. Baseball polices itself. It's against the rules for a pitcher to hit a batter on purpose. He can be ejected from the game for that, but the real payback comes back when his team comes to bat. The opposing pitcher is sure to hit someone on that team--usually in the ribs. That really smarts.

Now here is the difference in football and baseball. In football, each team brings its own footballs. In baseball the league furnishes the balls and the umpires hand them out. So you don't have to be too smart to figure out how to fix football's problems. Let the league furnish the balls and the referees hand them out. That's as obvious as, well, locking the front door at the White House before you turn the lights out at night.

Back in a moment.


BOB SCHIEFFER: And we'll be right back with a lot more of FACE THE NATION. Stay with us.


BOB SCHIEFFER: And welcome back to FACE THE NATION. We turn now to our panel. Susan Page, the Washington Bureau chief for USA Today; John Heilemann is the managing editor for Bloomberg Politics; Mark Leibovich, the national correspondent for the New York Times Magazine; and Ron Fournier, senior political columnist for National Journal. And, John, I want to start with you. Bloomberg just set a poll out this week on the Republican and the Democratic races in-- in New Hampshire. Among the Republicans, clearly, there is no clear frontrunner. Senator Rand Paul and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker lead the pack, followed closely by Jeb Bush and Senator Marco Rubio. Among the Democrats, of course, Hillary Clinton is no doubt the clear frontrunner, but Bernie Sanders from neighboring Vermont, who was just here, is-- is in second now, followed by Vice President Biden and others. So, John, what's-- what's the news here?

JOHN HEILEMANN (Bloomberg Politics): Well, first of all, this poll is just out this morning, it's piping hot. We served it up just for you, Bob.


JOHN HEILEMANN: The news, I think, on the Republican side, the biggest story is the change, one change that's happened since our last poll in February, which is Jeb Bush losing five points and Marco Rubio gaining six points, doubling his-- his-- his support in New Hampshire. And we're seeing that across the country. Rubio is on the rise. I think that's the biggest story right now in the Republican nomination contest is that he has vaulted himself into the top tier. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton is a strong or stronger than she's been in any of the polling since last fall and all the way up till now. In New Hampshire, obviously, a very good state for her, in general, but this comes-- this poll is interesting because it comes on the heels of all this negative press. And the fact that this sort of also is confirmed by a lot of their poll, including some CBS polling this week, she seems to be weathering that pretty well, at least in terms of her support within the Democratic Party.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So as far as you're concerned, if things hold up, Hillary Clinton is going to be the nominee?

JOHN HEILEMANN: Well, I think she-- as-- as I think Newt Gingrich and Stephanie Cutter just said, I think she's the prohibitive favorite to be the Democratic nominee.


JOHN HEILEMANN: But things will happen as they said. And the other thing is that sixty-two percent is a-- is a very high number in New Hampshire and it's about what the number she has in Iowa in other polling. But I-- I think if you got to the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary and she only won sixty percent against the current range of a field, there would be a lot of negative press coverage that would say four out of ten Democrats have voted for someone else. If that holds up, she would have to deal with that because she is so much the predominant favorite in terms of money, in terms of endorsements, in terms of everything else.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But this-- this Republican race is really wide open. Of course, we also point out, well, we're over a year and a half from the election here, Susan, but they're in the low double digits, even the leaders in New Hampshire.

SUSAN PAGE (USA Today): That's right. I think-- I think it's right that there's no frontrunner. There's a first tier maybe of-- of four candidates. And I think some troubling news for-- for Jeb Bush, you know, we-- he's been focusing on raising money. He'll-- he's going to come out with a huge number for his Super PAC in terms of early fundraising. But when you look at the early state that's not where money is the key. And Iowa and New Hampshire, it's connecting with voters. He's in seventh place in the most recent poll in Iowa. He's basically fallen from being in the kind of a modest first place in New Hampshire. Does money allow you to sustain losses in a string of the first states in-- in Iowa and New Hampshire, and, perhaps, in South Carolina? South Carolina then looms as a very important contest when we look at it next year.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think Mike Huckabee is for real, Ron?

RON FOURNIER (National Journal): Yeah, he's for real. He's someone who was modestly successful in Arkansas, who comes across as very affable, very populist, in a populist setting, but there's another side to him. He's-- he can be very prickly, even mean, he has got severe, severe--you just touched on it in your previous segment--ethical issues, getting back to Arkansas and-- and going to the current time.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, talk a little bit about that because that was your story. You're the one that wrote that story. You said he was, what, downright, well, you didn't call him sleazy but you said he supported some cheesy kind of--

RON FOURNIER: Cheesy is the word I used. Sleazy might be--

BOB SCHIEFFER: No, I don't mean that.

RON FOURNIER: I-- I covered-- I covered-- I have known Mike Huckabee since before he got into politics and I covered Bill Clinton in Arkansas. And I have a healthy respect for both of them but I also know that they have great advantages and great disadvantages. And with Mike Huckabee, if you compare his conduct ethically in Arkansas to Bill Clinton's in Arkansas, what Mike Huckabee did would make the Clintons blush. I mean Bill Clinton for all his faults did register a huge ethical reform initiative in Arkansas that really cleaned up government in Arkansas and Mike Huckabee registered a target. He, literally, asked his donors and his friends to give him gifts while he was governor of the state of Arkansas.

BOB SCHIEFFER: But what about this infomercial about diabetes? He said well I was just advising people to eat healthy, basically.

RON FOURNIER: Well, no, as you know there was more to that and I really like the way you kind of put him on his heels and he had to filibuster you. He-- his endorsing-- the infomercials that are endorsing cures and treatments that no health agency supports. He's linking cancer to cures to the Bible verse. I mean it's just not the kind of thing, it's just not-- as Frank Bruni wrote today in New York Times of all the adjectives you could put behind his activities, presidential is not one of them.


MARK LEIBOVICH (New York Times Magazine): I thought his handling of your question was, frankly, pretty lame. I thought that and I think there's going to be a whole range of questions that he's going to get on his business activities since he left the governor's, you know, mansion of-- of Arkansas. And, look, I think he needs a better answer. I think a part of his appeal in 2008 was populism. I think he sort of lost a lot of that. And he's not in Arkansas anymore. You know, somewhat like the Clintons, he's basically been gathering a lot of money and I think he has no answer for it.

SUSAN PAGE: I actually think Huckabee has a different problem and that is that were-- last time he broke through in Iowa in a big surprising way without much money, without much organization because he had so much appeal with the evangelical voters who are so important in-- in Iowa and in South Carolina. And this time you see the whole field competing for that vote, including Jeb Bush yesterday you don't really think of him as the evangelical candidate, he gave the commencement address at Liberty University talking about his faith and the importance of his faith and the importance of religious people in American politics. So I think that's Huckabee's bigger problem. His base is now splintered among the whole field.

RON FOURNIER: Where he's distinctive, though, is on the populist message.


RON FOURNIER: But the problem is if people don't trust you, they're not going to trust the populist message and that can go really back to-- to your poll. Marco Rubio is-- is obviously news in your poll, but the New York Times had another good story today pointing out this sugar daddy that he had who supported his personal finances, supported his political campaign, and supported his political agenda, all the while he was getting state money that Rubio was helping shepherd his way. And in the article Marco Rubio says where's the conflict. Well, that sounds awfully Clintonian to me. We can't have a set of politic leaders right now who are mingling their personal and political monies and saying things like where's the conflict. Well, the conflict is right there.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Do you think, John, that Iowa is going to matter in this-- in this presidential race, where you had all these candidates. It's going to be out there competing for the conservative Christian vote, as it were, that-- well, that-- that's important in Iowa and important in some of the other early states, like South Carolina, for example, but will that be an issue that will be with us and is that important as the-- as the campaign season unfolds?

JOHN HEILEMANN: Well, it's-- it's not the case. It's easy to pigeonhole Iowa as being only about social conservatism, it's not. It's obviously has other elements to it. And I think at times it depends on who wins out there. Susan's point I think is right. You've got a lot of candidates, including Mike Huckabee who won in 2008, Rick Santorum who won in 2012, Scott Walker, Ben Carson, potentially, Rick Perry, a lot of candidates competing for that far right vote. If that vote splinters in Iowa and you end up with a more establishment candidate, say someone like Jeb Bush who would not-- he's not very strong in Iowa right now, but given a huge field, all competing for social conservatives, a more centrist candidate or more mainstream Republican candidate, a Bush or a Rubio someone like that. If they come up and win in Iowa and that vaults them into-- into a position where they might win New Hampshire or be in a strong position in South Carolina, Iowa could matter a whole lot.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Mark, you were just saying something.

MARK LEIBOVICH: No. I mean I just think that there is no logical firewall for a Jeb Bush. And I think New-- New Hampshire actually will be more interesting. I mean sitting here a year and a half out than-- than Iowa, just because there is much less-- actually, it's not a year and a half, it's-- it's--


MARK LEIBOVICH: --six, seven months. Sorry, I'm getting my calendar messed up. I think, look, it's more of a clean shot. I think that the-- the-- the Jeb Bush campaign there; I mean, I think that would be the logical place for him to win. I don't think South Carolina is safe for him. And then you sort of this see this big cluster of industrial states coming forward. I mean, I don't think-- I mean, that's safe for him either. So he needs an early win. And like I think the question of what all that money is going to mean that-- that you (INDISTINCT) Susan, is-- is sort of central to this conversation.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, isn't-- is New Hampshire a must-win for Jeb Bush?

JOHN HEILEMANN: Well, assuming that Jeb Bush doesn't win Iowa, again a big assumption, it's my-- anything is possible. New Hampshire is a must-win state for a lot of candidates--it seems to me--a lot of candidates again, in the more establishment bracket. If you're Jeb Bush, New Hampshire is the place, I think is Mark's right, that's where you are going to notch your first win if you are going to notch a win, you know, someone like Marco Rubio, someone like Chris Christie, those are candidates. I mean, Chris Christie-- Chris Christie, I'd say if he decides to run, New Hampshire will be even more important to him, which is why he is spending so much time there, because he has virtually no chance of winning in Iowa. So he's going to put a lot of time and effort in New Hampshire.

BOB SCHIEFFER: You know I'm glad you brought up Chris Christie because you-- yeah. Somehow, I don't hear much about him. I know he is out there. I know he's been in New Hampshire, is he still a candidate? Is he still viable?

SUSAN PAGE: This is bad news for Chris Christie that you're not-- you're not hearing much about him. He-- you know, he-- he's-- I think he is clearly focused on New Hampshire. And New Hampshire is the kind of state that might like a Chris Christie because this kind of social issues in which he's not quite as in tune, the Republican Party matter less there. New Hampshire likes a fighter. They also like people who go-- candidates who go out and talk to them, interact with them at town halls, at coffee klatches, and he is great in that format.

MARK LEIBOVICH: He also defended Tom Brady.

SUSAN PAGE: He's got something. He's got something.


MARK LEIBOVICH: Yes, he did.

SUSAN PAGE: He's got some new problems, right?

JOHN HEILEMANN: In New Hampshire.

MARK LEIBOVICH: New Hampshire.

SUSAN PAGE: I mean before the Bridgegate investigation goes, we don't know. But he's also, in some ways, not a good fit with the Republican voters who by and large end up choosing the nominee. It's a tough race for him.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Let's get back and talk a little about Hillary Clinton, and somebody, this is news coming in right now on somebody's phone here.

JOHN HEILEMANN: It's-- it's Hillary Clinton calling right now. Chris Christie on the lot.

BOB SCHIEFFER: It may be. So is all of this-- you say so far, she seems to be weathering this, but, you know, the e-mails, these contributions coming in to the Clinton Foundation. It seems to me this is something, I don't know if it's-- if it's hurt her so far, but I can't see that this helps her as we go down the line. How does this sort itself out?

MARK LEIBOVICH: I think, look, it's weathering. I think, you know, John said, okay, so she gets sixty percent and the story will be that, okay, she didn't win more. I mean, I don't think she cares about that. I think if you were to ask her right now, would you take sixty percent of the vote in every single early primary, she'd say, yeah, I'll take that deal. I mean, I think everyone fairly well agrees, looking probably at the Clinton people that there will be an anti, you know, Clinton vote somewhere in the Democratic primaries. I just don't think it matters.

RON FOURNIER: That's what blows me away. They-- they really don't think this matters. If you ask the Clinton people, as I've had, they will say, it-- now it doesn't-- not matter, but trust doesn't matter. They've convinced themselves, because Bill Clinton did beat Bob Dole and did beat Bush with his trust numbers being worse than theirs. They've learned from that lesson that Hillary Clinton, her trust numbers can go down, as they have in most polls, and it doesn't matter. I think-- I think they're wrong. I think times have changed enough. She's not the kind of candidate he was. And, mainly, the times have changed in a way, their transparency and accountability and integrity are really going to matter in this election. And it's not something she can just gloss over.

BOB SCHIEFFER: I ask this, as a reporter, will she have a news conference any time soon, Susan?

SUSAN PAGE: So here is this great-- I think it was in a McClatchy story. It said, "Bernie Sanders has had thirty-one encounters with reporters since he announced and Hillary Clinton has had zero." And that, I think, is not sustainable for someone who wants to run in Iowa and New Hampshire and be President of the United States. You have to take questions from reporters, whatever you-- whatever you think of them, and here is one number six, that's the number of Democratic debates we're going to see in the primary season. I assume that Hillary Clinton will-- will participate in all of them. And that is an-- that is an opportunity for those who would challenge her to really make their case against her on an equal footing.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, do we know if she is going to participate in those debates?

RON FOURNIER: She says she is going to.

BOB SCHIEFFER: She says she will.

RON FOURNIER: And I would think the question for us isn't just how it's affecting the campaign but what does these two issues say about the kind of President she would be. And we have to be asking those questions. Is she going to be somebody who is going to be transparent? Well, maybe not. She is somebody who is going to be accountable as a leader? Well, maybe not. Is she is going to be someone who follows the rules? Well, she didn't follow the rules on e-mails or on the foundations, so maybe she is not a rule follower. Those are the questions that even if her numbers start going up, the media still got to pay attention to those questions in-- in helping voters--


RON FOURNIER: --understand how to connect that to their vote.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What about Bernie Sanders? Is there any way, any-- any scenario that anyone sees that he would wind up with the nomination?

JOHN HEILEMANN: I think it would be very hard to imagine Senator Sanders but I-- I would beam the Democratic nominee for the reasons we said before, she is-- right now, he is popular. He's got about eighteen percent in New Hampshire on our poll. There is a part of the leftward the farthest left wing of the Democratic Party finds him appealing, at least at this moment. She, however, is extraordinarily popular with women in the party, with Hispanics in the party, with African-Americans in the party, with union households, with LGBT community. She has great strength with every part of the Democratic nominating electorate, none of which has changed over the course of these very I think substantively serious challenges. And I'm not trying to bring it back to politics. I agree with Ron. I've been very critical of her on the question of the e-mails. I'm critical of her on how she's answered the questions around the foundation. Those are real substantive issues. But within the Democratic nominating electorate, she continues to have great broad and deep strength with all parts of the party that matter, and that says nothing bad about Senator Sanders that he's not going to be able to overcome that, I don't think.

SUSAN PAGE: He said to you there is massive dissatisfaction with income disparity in the country. He could not say-- Bernie Sanders could not say in his interview with you that there's massive dissatisfaction with Hillary Clinton. But, you know, things happen, right? Think how wrong we are typically at this point in the contest when we look ahead at who is the nominee or who the next President is going to be, she isn't in the most formidable position of any non-incumbent in the time I've been covering politics but, you know, time will tell.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, we're going to stop it right there. Mark, I'm going to ask you to step-- stick around because we are going to come back and talk about the other big issue, deflate-gate, in a minute.


BOB SCHIEFFER: We turn now to deflate-gate. Did New England Patriot equipment managers violate league rules by intentionally deflating footballs in last year's AFC Championship game against the Indianapolis Colts in order to make them easier to throw? And did their star quarterback Tom Brady know about it? Last week a report prepared at the request of the league found that two Patriot equipment managers had spoken about deflating footballs for Brady in the past.

And to talk about what this means for the league and the Super Bowl Champion Patriots, we are joined now by Jarrett Bell, the NFL columnist for USA Today and again Mark Leibovich. We asked him to hang around, because, Mark, you wrote a profile of Tom Brady earlier this year in The New York Times magazine, and did a lot of reporting on him. Jarrett, let me just talk to you first. Do you think we are going to see some kind of resolution of this? Will there be any penalty handed down any time soon?

JARRETT BELL (USA Today Sports): Oh, I think so. I think probably by the end of this week, this coming week, this coming week, we'll have some sort of resolution. Now this thing has lingered on for quite some time with the Wells Report, the result of over a hundred days, in-- in-- in putting together the investigation. I think we're talking about a potential suspension for Tom Brady, I think we're talking about some type of financial fine on the New England Patriots as an organization. And we may also be talking about some loss of draft pick. I think it's that serious to that level, and just, real quickly, we're talking about an integrity of the game issue, and we're talking about something that occurred in the championship game, and when you look at what the league has done in recent cases for violations of-- on the field situations, which not to be confused with some of the personal conduct things that have happened in recent times that have gone--


JARRETT BELL: --in different-- to different degrees, we're talking about, an on-the-field matter, the league has been pretty consistent in how it's tried to hand out some of those punishments, you look at the Cleveland Browns' general manager who is suspended for four games, the Atlanta Falcons president, Rich McKay, who was booted off the competition committee, lost a draft pick, thing like that-- things like that. So I think when you start considering what's happened we are going to see the-- the Patriots get hammered pretty hard.

BOB SCHIEFFER: How did we get to this? The teams bring their own footballs. I mean I just don't get that. I mean because I grew up in baseball and I know the umpire looks at every single ball. They're there for him and they-- you know they inspect them. They go over it. Why would-- why did we come to this, that the teams in football-- and I know they do it in college, too, they bring their own footballs to play with.

JARRETT BELL: Yeah. And the-- the officials actually inspect the footballs, and they-- and supposedly pass muster and in this particular instance, what happened after the officials inspected the balls until the time they got on the field, something happened, something changed, and that's where we point the finger at the-- at the offi--the equipment managers. But to get to your point, Bob, I think there's an easy fix in this and we saw it in the Super Bowl where the NFL kind of, you know, amended its policy on the spot, let the independent people handle the football.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Yeah. Well, I mean, yeah. Once they get to the game, then the referee should have custody of the footballs it seems to me. And this-- Mark, what about this? So you-- you did a big piece on Tom Brady. Is this about more than just what happened here?

MARK LEIBOVICH: I think, clearly, it has become more than what's happened. I mean, people-- sports fans, in particular, like black-and-white issues. They want winners, they want losers, they want certainty. And, unfortunately or fortunately, I think the reality of football, baseball, all sports is that it is participated in gray areas. You know there are a lot of rules that are bent that are, you know-- perhaps, manipulated between-- before every game. I really do-- look, you mentioned the Cleveland Browns situation, the piped in noise situation in Atlanta. I do put this on the level of maybe a parking ticket. I do think people want to make this about something bigger, you know?

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, is any of it because some fans just don't like Tom Brady? I mean--

MARK LEIBOVICH: Oh, of course.

BOB SCHIEFFER: He makes-- he's a great hero and he's a great villain. He is good looking. He's rich. He is the best quarterback, you know, I think probably, in NFL history. He's got a beautiful wife. I mean, I think there is very-- there's-- there's-- he's a very, very easy and compelling target.

JARRETT BELL: Yeah. But, see, I don't really think that that's the issue here with Tom Brady. I'm a big Tom Brady fan, to tell you the truth. But when you're talking about having rules, having a championship game and crossing the line, you-- if you're the NFL and you don't come down on the Patriots, now how hard they come down with the severity of the penalties, yeah, we can-- we can debate that. But they definitely have to protect their integrity, because if they let this slide then we don't want to hear anything else about having a level playing field, about-- about having the integrity of the game being the important thing because you-- you've got to enforce the rules.

MARK LEIBOVICH: Here is what I think should happen, okay? I just thought of this as we're sitting here. Give him a one-game suspension and make-- okay, switch the opening game, instead, of playing the Steelers they should play the Colts because they're the Colts later in the year anyway, make them, essentially, replay the AFC championship game at Foxboro Stadium, opening night of the year with the Patriots backup quarterback, Jimmy Garoppolo. I mean, first of all, it'd be great for ratings. It might be fair, maybe fine them a little bit that would be my fix.

JARRETT BELL: Creative discipline, I like that.

MARK LEIBOVICH: Don't you like that?

BOB SCHIEFFER: Creative discipline.

MARK LEIBOVICH: It's doable, though, right?

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right. Thank you all both for being here.


BOB SCHIEFFER: It is something that people want to know about and I think the integrity of the game requires that they-- they do something here, like in baseball. You hit the other guy's guy, you're out of the game and you might get suspended for a period of time. So there is an enforcement of the rules. So it's good to have both of you here to talk about that. We'll be back with a look at some history in the sky over Washington.


BOB SCHIEFFER: Finally, something you may have seen earlier on television. But the sight was so arresting, we wanted you to see it again.

Washington all but shut down Friday, as people filled the streets, the National Mall, and the World War II Memorial as a parade of historic aircraft staged a spectacular flyover to mark the seventieth anniversary of victory in Europe and the coming end of World War II. More than fifty of the planes flew in formation to mark the decisive battles of the war, from Pearl Harbor to the Battle of Midway, D-Day, and the Battle of the Bulge.

MAN: Ladies and gentlemen, here comes the B-29.

BOB SCHIEFFER: The highlight of the show was the B-29 Superfortress. Nearly four thousand built for the war effort, the one that made its way down the Potomac River is the only one left in flying condition. It was the B-29, the Enola Gay, that dropped the first atomic bomb on Japan.

Not all of the seventy-year-old planes were able to complete the trip. Curtiss Helldiver had a mechanical problem and had to land at Washington's National Airport. No injuries.

Back in the sky, the aerial parade ended with the missing man formation, one plane broke from formation and headed to the sky to honor the more than four hundred thousand Americans who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country in the war.

Back in a minute.


BOB SCHIEFFER: Bye for now. We will see you next week.

View CBS News In
CBS News App Open
Chrome Safari Continue
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.