• With: Karl Rove

    You remember, it was not too far south of here in the United States Capitol where, during a State of the Union address, with the Supreme Court stuck in front of him, mute, that he attacked them over the Citizens United decision to say things that were patently not true! We'll now have a flood of foreign money.

    Well, the Tillman Act in 1907 prohibits foreign contributions. The Citizens United decision had nothing whatsoever to do with that! And he excoriated the Court sitting right there in front of him in a very undignified and unbecoming way!

    VAN SUSTEREN: So he's -- he...

    ROVE: So there's a hostility on the part of the president -- interesting enough, a constitutional law lecturer at the University of Chicago -- towards the proper role of the federal judiciary!

    VAN SUSTEREN: Well, he was likewise rude to Congressman Paul Ryan a year ago...

    ROVE: Sure.

    VAN SUSTEREN: ... at a budget speech, when he invited him to be in the budget -- then he insulted him when he was in the audience. But...

    ROVE: In the (INAUDIBLE)

    VAN SUSTEREN: But I got that. He's rude. I got that. And he picked this fight. I got that. But the problem is, is that we've got to do something to stop this sort of pettiness, where the court is now reaching beyond -- the appellate court trying to reach beyond to the Justice Department. Someone needs to put an end to this. And...

    ROVE: And the attorney general can, and the attorney general can do so by providing three pages that say, Of course we respect Marbury versus Madison, and the -- we depend upon -- in our free society, we depend upon the courts.

    Go back to -- I think it's number 59 or number 65 -- I may have the number wrong -- Hamilton's piece in The Federalist Paper in which he describes the important role of the judiciary. Now it is the weakest, and yet perhaps the most vital of the three branches of the government. Pay homage to the process and to the -- and to the principle of -- of judicial review and be done with it!

    VAN SUSTEREN: Not to beat a dead horse, though, but you know, the whole idea (INAUDIBLE) the same reason that presidents protect executive privilege, there are certain, you know, areas of power within the three executive branches that need to be protected.

    And the -- and I -- look, the president started it. I am totally behind it. The president was wrong legally. I'm totally -- you know, I'm totally in agreement with that.

    But the problem is that the judiciary is reaching beyond the courtroom, beyond -- when they got the answer from that Justice Department lawyer, in order to get into a little bit of a schoolyard brawl with the Justice Department.

    And frankly, I think that it should be ended here, and I don't think the -- I don't think the attorney general should respond, and I think that should be the end of it.

    ROVE: Well, if he didn't respond, it would simply cause it to go on. I mean, it's one thing to have a low-level lawyer sitting in front of the 5th circuit say that thing. It's another thing to have the attorney general submit it as a document in response to that.

    Let's be done with it, and the best way to be done with it is for him to affirm what she said in court are his thinkings -- his thinking and the Justice Department's thinking, as well.

    VAN SUSTEREN: It's sort of interesting, though, the sort of -- it's a common theme that the president is -- I think a lot of people think he's arrogant or that, I mean, he's sort of rude -- I mean, the whole thing that he did with Paul Ryan a year ago. And I'm sort of curious whether, you know, this is something that's going to -- by the time November rolls around, will this be stale and old or is this something that...

    ROVE: No.

    VAN SUSTEREN: You know...

    ROVE: Because look, this is the way he is. You talk about a year ago? How about attacking Paul Ryan this week by totally distorting the Paul Ryan budget?

    Here's the Paul Ryan budget summary right here. Here's the summary of the president's budget. President Obama says, Well, I want to spend $47 trillion over the next 10 years and Paul Ryan wants to spend $40 trillion, and in his speech declares that he's going to cut programs, program after program after program, when he knows that's not true!

    For example, you know, this -- this budget spends more money than we're spending today! For example, Medicare right this year, we'll spend $478 billion. You know what this budget calls for spending next year? $503 billion!

    Now, what Ryan is attempting to do is to slow the future growth of government spending. Are there going to be cuts in some areas? Yes. But the president made it sound like it was a heartless, cruel experiment that was going to slash money.

    Social Security, $773 billion being spent this year. Next year, $813 billion under the Ryan budget! And yet the president was depicting this as across-the-board cuts, particularly those that would fall on America's seniors!

    VAN SUSTEREN: You know (INAUDIBLE) because I thought when he did that -- I thought that it -- I actually thought that the president looked weak because he's fighting...

    ROVE: He did!

    VAN SUSTEREN: ... he's fighting with Congressman Ryan.

    ROVE: He did!

    VAN SUSTEREN: That's not his -- - that's not his opponent.

    ROVE: He did. Look...

    VAN SUSTEREN: That's not his opponent, yet he's...

    ROVE: You've got -- you put your finger on a very important thing. One of the most important assets a president has is the image of him as a strong leader.

    Think about this. President Obama picks a fight with the chairman of the House Budget Committee not once but twice within a year. He starts his general election campaign. We now have a presumptive Republican nominee, I think, in Mitt Romney. What does the president do? He runs a television ad attacking him over oil -- his ties to oil companies and then launches a speech in which he attacks Mitt Romney!

    I thought Romney hit the right tone today, which is, Isn't it sad that President Obama has nothing in the way of a positive accomplishment or a forward-looking vision that he can run on, and he has to begin his general election campaign by attacking the Republican nominee?

    VAN SUSTEREN: But it goes one step further, though. He's fighting with the House Budget...

    ROVE: Budget Committee chairman!

    VAN SUSTEREN: ... Committee chairman about a budget that's been passed in the House. Meanwhile, his own party, Senator Harry Reid in the United States Senate, doesn't have a budget! And so a leader -- I would -- I would...

    ROVE: And -- and this is...

    VAN SUSTEREN: He should be -- he should be calling Harry Reid...