CNN Inside Politics - Transcript

Date: June 28, 2005


CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
Tuesday, June 28, 2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

HENRY: This just into CNN. The Taliban has claimed responsibility for the crash of the U.S. military helicopter in Afghanistan that we have been reporting on throughout the day. The Taliban has claimed that responsibility in a phone call to the Associated Press. As we have been reporting, a U.S. CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter crashed Tuesday while ferrying reinforcements for counter-terrorism operations in eastern Afghanistan. Military officials have told CNN about 16 U.S. troops were aboard. As of now the military is saying that they do not know fate of those U.S. troops.

We will continue to monitor this story and update it throughout the day, but the new information is that the Taliban is now claiming responsibility for that crash of the U.S. military helicopter.

Turning back to Iraq, Nebraska's Ben Nelson is among the more conservative Democrats in the U.S. Senate. A short while ago, I spoke with Senator Nelson about Iraq and other issues, including the fate of any changes in Social Security. I started by asking the senator what he thinks the president needs to say tonight to bridge the gap between those who think the U.S. is winning in Iraq and those who think the U.S. effort is failing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BEN NELSON, (D) NEBRASKA: I think what the president needs to do tonight is make a clear statement as to what the mission is, and how it's important to stand up to the Iraqi military, stand up to special operations forces and stand up a functioning government. These are the criteria that are necessary in order to win the war.

But winning the war is not going to be done by the United States or by the coalition forces. Winning the war is going to be done by the Iraqi government, the Iraqi military, and the Iraqis. The Iraqis have to win it. I think right now progress is being made in certain areas, but it's clear also that with the number of IEDs and the number of attacks, these continue to go up. I don't think we can determine right now that we're winning or losing a war, from my standpoint.

What we have to do is discuss whether or not we're meeting those objectives. Whether we are standing up in the military, whether we are standing up sufficient special forces to overcome and defeat the insurgency, and whether we are, in fact, standing up a functioning government. That's what we have to do.

HENRY: Are you worried, though, that support for the war is slipping in the United States and we could be headed for another Vietnam situation?

NELSON: Well, I don't know about Vietnam, whether all these things are transferable from one event to another that way. What I am concerned about is losing the support of the American people in the middle of achieving those objectives. That's why I think the president needs to be able to make the sale tonight that these are the objectives, this is the mission and here's how we're doing on these objectives. If we do that, I think the talk will change from calendar timetables to whether or not how we're doing on each of those objectives. That's what I think the American people want to know.

HENRY: Let's talk about another contentious issue. That's judicial nominations. You were the leader of the gang of 14 that basically averted this nuclear showdown on filibustering judicial nominees. Do you think that, despite that deal that you've put in place, if there is one or two Supreme Court nominees, the Senate may get bogged down in just a nasty war?

NELSON: I don't think so. I think the gang of 14, as they're referred to, has had enough coordination and communication, to where, if there's a questionable nominee, we'll get together, we'll talk our way through it. I think we can work our way through it. It's one thing to continue to talk about the nuclear option. It's another thing to get enough votes on it. And I think that's what the difference. It may be on the table, but it has not been submitted and if it is, I don't believe there will be enough votes for it.

HENRY: You sound optimistic, but Senator Frist today, as you know, as you referenced, said today that the nuclear option is on the table and he may use it. And a lot of people are interpreting that as he may use it for a Supreme Court nomination. Did the gang of 14 celebrate a little too early the idea that you had basically saved the republic and prevented this big nuclear showdown? We, in fact, may have a nuclear war after all?

NELSON: I don't think so. The reason I don't think so is the gang of 14 have continued to communicate. We met a week ago. We'll continue to meet. And i think there's a common understanding that the last thing you want to do is filibuster any kind of judicial nominee in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. And I think we can work our way through as to what constitutes extraordinary circumstances among the 14. And that's all we have to do. And then the process will be able to continue and will avoid that nuclear option.

HENRY: We've talked about issues the president is having some trouble on now, like Iraq, like Guantanamo, elected judicial nominees. But also he's having difficulty on an issue you've been heavily involved in, Social Security. He's also seen the Bolton nomination stalled in the Senate. Is this an example of second-term blues? Do you think that some of your colleagues, especially on the Republican side, are looking at him now as a lame duck and are starting to push back a lot more than they did in the first term?

NELSON: Well, there's a certain inevitability of lame duck status that others will pick up on. And it's up to the person in office to avoid doing that. I remember my second term, I said, I'm not a lame duck, I'm not a dead duck, I'm not Daffy Duck, I'm not any kind of duck. We're not going to quack in this second term. We're going to get our work done. I think it's up to the person in office to dispel whether or not you're any kind of a duck.

HENRY: Making it clear he's no duck, he's Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0506/28/ip.01.html

arrow_upward