CNN Late Edition - Transcript
Sunday, October 30, 2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
BLITZER: Confirmation hearings for Harriet Miers were to begin a week from tomorrow, but her withdrawal puts the Senate Judiciary Committee back at square one, waiting for President Bush to send up another Supreme Court nominee.
Joining us now from Philadelphia is the committee's Republican chairman, Arlen Specter.
Senator Specter, thanks very much, good to have you back.
SPECTER: Nice to be with you, Wolf. Thank you. BLITZER: I want to get to all of that in a moment, the Supreme Court. And you're going to be in charge of this confirmation hearing.
But let's talk a little bit about the CIA leak investigation, the indictment this past week of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the vice president's now former chief of staff.
Listen to what the special counsel, the prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, said in announcing the indictment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FITZGERALD: But I'll tell you this, very rarely do you bring a charge in a case that's going to be tried and would you ever end a grand jury investigation. I can tell you the substantial bulk of the work in this investigation is concluded. This grand jury's term has expired by statute. It could not be extended. But it's an ordinary course to keep a grand jury open to consider other matters, and that's what we'll be doing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: It makes it sound like Karl Rove, the deputy chief of staff at the White House, the president's top political adviser, may be free and clear.
SPECTER: Well, certainly Mr. Rove is at this moment, and what we may be losing track of, Wolf, is the presumption of innocence. The media has been filled with reports, anticipation about this matter for a long time, a lot of speculation. But nobody has said anything adverse to Mr. Rove in an official way.
BLITZER: In terms of the legality, but what about politically? We heard Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader of the U.S. Senate, on this program, just one hour ago, say that he wants Karl Rove out for even talking about Valerie Plame Wilson with reporters.
SPECTER: Well, Senator Reid is entitled to his opinion, but he's not the president of the United States, and he doesn't administer justice in this country.
And Mr. Rove, like every other citizen, is entitled to the presumption of innocence, and until somebody says that he's done something wrong, he ought to be permitted to go about his business like anybody else.
When you're indicted, even though that's only a charge, that's sufficient to call for the person to step down. But on this date, to the record, I think talk against Karl Rove is political only.
BLITZER: Scooter Libby is, of course, innocent until proven guilty. He's only been indicted so far, as you correctly point out. But based on what you know, based on what the prosecutor -- the special counsel has said and what he's written in the indictment, how strong of a case does he have? SPECTER: Well, that remains to be seen when the witnesses testify. I've reviewed the 22 pages, and they are charges. They are allegations.
And now we have to see what the evidence will show, how these witnesses will stack up, and what Mr. Libby's defense will be.
And let's give him due process. Let's wait for the hearing.
BLITZER: The allegation, the charges include what the prosecutor says is evidence that Libby had at least seven conversations with government officials at the State Department, CIA and the White House about the identity of Joe Wilson, the former ambassador's wife, before he had any conversations with reporters, and that he lied about that in the course of the grand jury investigation and his comments to the FBI.
The response from his lawyer -- from Libby's lawyer, Joseph Tate of Philadelphia, is, and I'll put it up on the screen, he says, "As lawyers we recognize that a person's recollection of events will not always match those of other people, particularly when they are asked to testify months after the events occurred. This is especially true in the hectic rush of issues and events at a busy time for our government."
Does that defense sound credible?
SPECTER: It depends upon what the witnesses testify to. It is one thing to write an indictment; it is another thing to put on witnesses at trial to make the case.
And one of the great problems we have in our society, Wolf, is that there is so much attention focused on Washington, D.C. and on the White House and high-profile personalities, that we tend to forget that this is only one stage of the process. And there's going to be a trial.
I spent a lot of time as a district attorney of Philadelphia prosecuting cases, and trials are very uncertain.
So let's wait and see what the evidence looks like before we decide what the outcome ought to be.
BLITZER: Listen to what the Democratic party chairman, Howard Dean, said about all of this the day before the indictment was announced.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HOWARD DEAN, DNC CHAIRMAN: This is a much deeper issue than just the indictment of the vice president's chief of staff. This is about what happens when you send people to foreign countries to fight without telling America the truth. This whole thing came about because the president wasn't truthful about why we went to Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: Do you agree with Dean?
SPECTER: Well, you couldn't be more outlandishly political than Governor Dean was there.
And special prosecutor Fitzgerald answered Mr. Dean better than I could. He said that this indictment has nothing to do with the issue of weapons of mass destruction.
Look here, Wolf, the issue of weapons of mass destruction has been pretty well discounted. There weren't any there.
The issue as to whether there was some effort to manufacture the evidence is still a matter which is being looked into by the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Those are important questions. But they have nothing to do with this indictment.
And Mr. Dean, Governor Dean, was doing his best to pump it up in advance, but certainly special prosecutor Fitzgerald let all the air out of Dean's balloon.
BLITZER: Let's talk about the U.S. Supreme Court, a subject close to your heart as chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Why do you think -- why do you believe Harriet Miers' nomination fumbled as it did?
SPECTER: Because there was such an avalanche of adverse comment about her.
Instead of following the constitution, which says the Senate decides the issue, and you have hearings before the Judiciary Committee, Ms. Miers was tried in press conferences, in news releases, on radio and TV talk shows, and she never got a hearing.
I think it was very regrettable that that happened. And I was very disappointed that her name was withdrawn.
I think she should have had a chance to appear. She had a very strong -- has a very strong record as a civil lawyer. I reviewed her cases -- a strong intellect.
It is not easy to transfer that to constitutional law, but she deserved a chance.
BLITZER: So, why do you think the president, as some of the critics are now saying, cut and run -- you know, pull the rug out from under her?
SPECTER: Well, you'd have to ask the president why he did that.
I was not satisfied with the answer that there would have been an intrusion into the executive privilege.
The committee and I made it clear that we would respect executive privilege. But the cards were so heavily stacked against Ms. Miers that the decision was made to have her withdraw.
I think she might well have been confirmed had we gone through with the hearings.
BLITZER: A lot of people are bracing for an announcement, perhaps even as early as tomorrow, for a new nominee. Do you think that's going to happen?
SPECTER: Well, the expectation is that that it is very imminent.
The president apparently has decided not to take my suggestion that we ought to let Justice O'Connor serve out the term. She's willing to do so.
Right now, there's a lot of anxiety, Wolf, when you have Chief Justice Roberts -- we don't know how he's going to vote on critical issues, the second new nominee, the possibility of a third in the near future, perhaps even more, so that the constitution of the court could be changed on very major constitutional doctrines.
But the president seems determined to move ahead, and it's up to him.
BLITZER: Have you been informed yet of a name that he has in mind?
SPECTER: I have not.
BLITZER; Have you weighed in, giving him some suggestions?
SPECTER: I have been consulted. I have gone over a list of prospective nominees. I think the better practice for someone in my position is not to make a suggestion, although the advice function is separate under advice and consent.
I think there is more freedom, as the chairman of the committee, to maintain an independent position by not recommending a name.
BLITZER: How worried are you that if it's someone that a lot of Democrats believe could be an extreme right-wing jurist that they will go ahead and filibuster?
SPECTER: Well, I'm very worried about that. The topic, which dominates the discussion, as we all know, is a woman's right to choose. And you have both sides polls apart, and insistent on finding some answer to that question in advance of the hearing, which no one is entitled to.
The rockbed of judicial independence is that a prospective Supreme Court justice ought not to be called upon to say how he or she will vote in a specific case.
You have one of the active anti-Roe protagonists saying last week that they wanted a guarantee. Guarantees are for used cars and washing machines, not for Supreme Court justices.
And, on the other side, you have people who want assurances that the woman's right to choose will be protected.
So, there could be a real tough battle here and a real tough fight, depending on whom the president puts up.
BLITZER: If it's a federal judge, Samuel Alito, would you expect that real all-out war to develop?
SPECTER: Well, I don't want to be in the position of picking a nominee. It would be the kiss of death. So I'm going to pass on that.
BLITZER: Senator, thanks for joining us. Glad to see you on "LATE EDITION."
How you feeling?
SPECTER: I feel good. I feel good, Wolf. For a long time, I had a case of stolen identity. I looked in the mirror and didn't know who I was. I'm beginning to recognize myself a little more. When I get a little more hair, I'll feel a little better.
BLITZER: You look good, you sound good and we hope you're feeling great. Thank very much for joining us, Senator.
SPECTER: Nice being with you, Wolf. Thank you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/30/le.01.html