Buchanan & Press

MSNBC

SHOW: BUCHANAN & PRESS

BYLINE: Bill Press; Pat Buchanan; Fred Francis; Ron Insana

GUESTS: Richard Durbin; Dan Goure; Jack Spencer; Chuck Pena; Richard Butler; Arianna Huffington

HIGHLIGHT:
Hans Blix announces no weapons of mass destruction have been found so far. Should the United States go to war with Iraq in the absence of U.N. inspectors finding a smoking gun? President Bush re-nominates Judge Charles Pickering. Turkey's position on whether the U.S. can base our troops there as a northern front should we go to war with Iraq still a question.

BODY:
BUCHANAN: OK thanks very much Chris. Folks you heard the news. Hans Blix said there is no smoking gun they've been able to find in Iraq and the violation of the U.N.—the U.N. demand that they turn over their weapons of mass destruction. At the same time, U.S. ambassador Negroponte says Iraq is in non-compliance with the U.N. Security Council resolution.

We're going to ask Senator Richard Durbin. I guess he's the senior Democrat now from the great state of Illinois. Senator Durbin, should the United States go to war with Iraq in the absence of our finding, or the U.N. inspectors finding, a smoking gun? In other words, a smoking gun of Saddam's lying when he said he had no weapon of mass destruction?

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: Well I think we have set the stage here. We have said to the world that if we sent the inspectors in, they would find weapons of mass destruction. To justify the United States' concern about Saddam Hussein. The inspectors have been in now for months. They have made almost 300 inspections and have literally found nothing.

Now we learn that our intelligence community is going to share some information with the inspectors to lead them to what we consider to be the hiding places for these weapons of mass destruction. I think that should have happened a long time ago. But absent clear evidence of the presence of weapons of mass destruction then the whole premise of these inspections and our policy toward Iraq are in question.

BUCHANAN: All right Senator the president has said, and we just heard Mr. Negroponte said in effect that Iraq is in material breach of the U.N. Security Council resolution by virtue of the fact that there are omissions about materials they had, they said they destroyed, they have no evidence of having destroyed this material. All manner of biological and chemical weapons and the president and Mr. Negroponte—the president certainly, mainly—may use this as the reason to go to war. What would you say if the president in effect went to war even by ourselves because of this?

DURBIN: I think it's a very dangerous thing to do. For the United States to unilaterally invade Iraq, a land invasion of this nation, without the support of other nations around the world, is dangerous at least two levels.

First, of course, we are in harms way by ourselves at our own expense and secondly, we stand to infuriate the rest of the world. The rest of the world, which frankly backed us in the United Nations when we asked for a meaningful resolution for inspections. It is time for us to stand by the rule of law, to stand behind the United Nations to make certain that we prove with these inspections that there is cause for concern and alarm. For us to disregard them at this point suggests that the inspections and the U.N. resolution are nothing more than a diplomatic formality—some charade. I hope that's not the case.

PRESS: Senator Durbin I want to shift gears and ask you about the president's economic plan. A couple of years ago he went in front of Congress and he asked for some massive cuts in the income tax which he was able to get for—mostly for—wealthy Americans in this country. He was able to get it with the votes of 12 Democratic senators. Now he's back, he says he wants to make those income tax cuts permanent. Not only that, he wants to get away—do away—with the tax on stock dividends. My question is, are Democrats going to cave in again and give the president whatever he wants?

DURBIN: I hope not. The American people know better now. We tried President Bush's approach a few years ago with his tax cuts and what it did succeed in doing is to drive us deeper into deficit than we have been in many, many years. We've gone beyond surplus into ready and deficits because of those tax cuts, the recession and the cost of our war and defense of our nation and now the president says the best solution is more of the same. $676 billion dollars in money taken out of the Treasury over the next ten years. That's not going to stimulate the economy; what it's going to do, of course, is to stimulate the contributors, those people who are wealthy, who have really been behind both political parties and who will be the ones to benefit from the Bush economic policy.

PRESS: Well as a member of the Judiciary Committee, let me ask you about another issue in which Democrats might cave in and that is Charles Pickering is coming back before the Senate Judiciary Committee. You rejected him last time, looks like the Committee will pass him this time and if he gets to the floor, Charles Pickering will be on the federal appeals court, correct?

DURBIN: Well of course there's a lot of—of policy that has to be considered, a lot of procedure that has to be considered. And there's no guarantee that any nominee is going to the bench. But what is breath taking about the president's re-nomination of Charles Pickering is that we spent the last several weeks in Washington reflecting on the state of race relations in America. Spokesmen from the—for the Republican Party—from the president on down—have said that the party of Abraham Lincoln is truly committed to civil rights.

The president turns around and re-nominates Judge Pickering, a judge who was opposed by 38 black legislators in Mississippi by every branch of the NAACP in that state and by the only African-American congressman from that state. It is really insensitive to the reality that he has in fact become a lightning rod for race relations in Mississippi.

BUCHANAN: Senator Durbin, Judge Pickering was nominated to the federal bench twelve years ago in a Democratic Senate unanimously sent him on to the federal bench. He is endorsed now by the brother of the slain civil rights hero Medgar Evers. The president said in his campaign—his winning campaign—first I'm going to cut—make those tax cuts permanent.

Second I'm going to send Judge Pickering back up. Aren't you being an obstructionist when you say we're going to start again opposing his tax cut program and we're going to oppose Judge Pickering again the way we did before the election?

DURBIN: I think that my re-election in the state of Illinois was a validation of the premise that the American people at least in my state and I think in many others expect some debate in Washington, some balance, they don't want to let any president, any special interest group, run roughshod over congress. Members of Congress have to stand up and speak for their values and their principles...

BUCHANAN: All right do you think...

DURBIN: In this situation I don't believe that digging a deeper deficit hole taking money out of the social security trust fund to give tax breaks to wealthy people is in the best interest of America.

BUCHANAN: All right, Senator Durbin do you believe Mr. Bush has nominated a racist judge from Mississippi to the federal appellate bench?

DURBIN: I can't say that. But I will tell you this. When it comes to issues of consequence in Judge Pickering's background time and again issues related to race and equality surface. That is troublesome. Particularly in light of what we've gone through over the last several weeks. I think the White House should have made it clear that they are going to really take a strong position in favor of good relations between the races. The re-nomination of Charles Pickering does not take that position.

PRESS: Senator Richard Durbin thanks so much for joining us, Senator.

DURBIN: Thank you very much.

PRESS: Good to have you here; we'll have you back again.