impact of trillions. blogger jeff jarvis stirs up a storm by hurling an obscenity. the reporter whose story prompted david wu to resign over a sex scandal. should he have relied on unnamed sources? i'm howard kurtz and this is "reliable sources." it would be comical if it weren't so serious. washingtonality its worst as all of us in the news business trying to keep up with a story that changes by the hour. the senate scheduled to vote today at 1:00 p.m. to avoid a crippling default. look at the rolling news coverage suggests one inescapable conclusion, we often aren't sure what's going on either the countdown continues, american anger and anxiety keep building as the politicians let another day go by without a deal on the flash debt. >> it is one week and counting to august 2nd, the day the president says the government will run out of money and, among other things, will have to stop sending out social security checks. >> we are not yet in the end game. we are still in the bluff stage of the negotiations. >> tonight, do you know who said this? >> get your ass in line. >> maybe a vote in the house of representatives tonight as part of the effort to fix the debt ceiling, but it probably won't fix anything. >> can president obama find a way to bypass congress if america starts running out of money on tuesday? >> house speaker john boehner planned to pass his solution last night, but all his tough talk and back office bullying couldn't get the vote. >> the house just approved john boehner's bill to raise the debt ceiling, it was a narrow party line vote. >> the boehner bill has just gone down. it's just been defeated in the senate. >> yesterday mitch mcconnell said he was optimistic about a deal. harry reid, the democratic leader said mcconnell wasn't negotiating in good faith. now mcconnell is sounding more optimistic this morning, an administration official saying there could be a deal today. joining us to examine the round the clock coverage, jonathan martin from politico, michael shear who coffers the white house for "the new york times" and nancy cordes, congressional correspondent for cbs news. nancy cordes, can you do anymore than play catch up in a story that is so dizzying that it seems like every 15 minutes if you're away from your computer, you miss something. >> it's very challenging because often even the leaders don't know what's going on. they think there have been no discussions only to find out that discussions had been going on, but just without them. as the stakes have gotten higher and higher, not only have aides tried to spin us, they have out and outlined to us from time to time. >> what's an example of that? >> well, you know, a couple days ago when the boehner bill was on the floor in the house and they were really working hard to wrangle these conservative house members, i can't tell you how many aides i had saying right up until the minute the vote was going to take place, we've got the votes, don't worry, this bill is going to pass. they kept saying that until, guess what? they had to pull the bill from the floor because they didn't have anywhere near the votes. >> the check is in the mail. jonathan martin, spinning, lying, something in between. how intensively are you being lobbied and cajoled by both sides? part of this is the blame game, it's the other guys who won't negotiate in good faith. >> that's what frustrates the american people so much. up until now so much of it has been posturing, framing the issue as to who can get a deal and who can't. >> how do you as a reporter cut through the posturing? >> you have to look at what is happening behind the scenes, not what they're saying at press conferences. the press conferences oftentimes are a bit of theater more they are anything actually indicative of what's happening. what's really going on is cut behind the scenes as we found out last night when lo and behold we hear mcconnell is talking about obama and biden. that's where the actual deal is being cut. >> before my question to you, michael shear, what kind of hours have you been working? >> i think it's been crazy for all of us. i mentioned to you before the show, i had my overnight bag packed when i walked into the capitol last night because we thought there was going to be a 1:00 a.m. vote. that turned out not to be the case. >> you went to bed early instead? >> well, not exactly. >> michael and i saw each other as we were leaving the capitol at midnight and both said to each other should we leave or could something else happen? >> exactly. as we all try to piece together what is happening behind closed doors, aren't we having to rely, and this maybe is true in covering the white house as well, on sources who don't want their names attached and, therefore, maybe have a little more leeway to spin? >> absolutely. there's a fine line between when we all use these anonymous sources, we don't want to use them, we want everybody to be as transparent as possible. the real news isn't what's happening out front. there was a moment last night where a leadership aide, a republican leadership aide had come out. we were all trying to figure out was there going to be a vote at 1:00 a.m.? was there not? the aide said, you know, in these kind of things i like to add 12 hours to kind of buffer things. couldn't say who that was. but it gives everybody a sense of what's really happening. >> it's so sensitive that a lot of the conversations that i have, at least, are assumed to be on background. we're at a point now where they don't want their names or even their bosses attached to the information. the bargain is, i will tell you what's happening here behind the scenes, how it looks. but you can't give me up. >> is that a good bargain because you're not able to tell readers, give readers a good idea of where this information or sometimes spin is coming from? >> the only thing we have right now. >> you have no only shun. let me come to something i raised at the top of the program. we toss these numbers around. it's up to $2.8 trillion. those are real cutbacks in programs that affect real americans. i wonder if you think the details are being lost because we don't have time to go into it and we don't know often what is in the bills. >> that's been a very frustrating feature of the whole deb based. we're told the biden group worked out a trillion in cuts. what are the cuts? we can't tell you. that really matters to americans. are these $1 trillion on things that we weren't really interested in purchasing anything, or is this $1 trillion from medicare? where is the money coming from. >> part of the frustration for reporters, the people we go to, they don't necessarily know either because it's really this handful of people who are negotiating. >> one person's $1 trillion is another person's $2.4 trillion. it depends on are you including interest revenue in that equation. >> what's the baseline, savings? >> it's not paper, too. it's all verbal. >> which is like trying to nail some kind of fog to the wall. does this remind you of a campaign where the clock is ticking toward the ultimate day and policy seems to take a back seat to politics? >> yeah. it does. it's more similar to what happened with t.a.r.p. in the fall of 2008, especially in the last few days it's become so similar to that. a lot of folks whispering we're not sure we can get the votes until we have a market reaction, which is a euphemism for a severe plummet in the dow. that's pretty scary stuff. >> front page story in your newspaper, michael shear "rightward tilt leaves obama with party shift." cuts and no tax increases, is the next story that you and everyone else can right going to be that essentially president obama capitulated and republicans got 98% of what they wanted? >> let's wait and see exactly what the details are. i think that's the next story that will be everywhere is how much the democrats have given up. we already know they've given up a lot. the white house is going to i think rely on this idea that this committee, despite the fact that the triggers may not be what they want, but the committee, they're going to argue for next several months that the committee is what should be balanced. that's where they're going to try to -- >> just to clarify this, is this part of the understanding that there will be a special congressional committee appointed to come up with a second round of budget cuts, perhaps less painful than the automatic cuts. all this has yet to be hammered out. "new york times" columnist paul krug again said "republicans have in effect taken america hostage, yet many people in the news media can't bring themselves to acknowledge this. is there a sense that there's a false balance in these reports because we're kind of allergic to saying one side is to blame, one side is not largely to blame. >> i can't speak for all reporters. i know in my own reporting i've tried to avoid this both sides are dug in because i don't think it helps viewers understand what's really going on. it's kind of lazy. i'd rather say republicans have just walked away with the negotiations or the president is now asking for $4 billion more in cuts and republicans say he is moving the goal post. i think that helps people a lot more than just this sort of generic, nobody is willing to move. >> howie, i think in the last few days that rap has become especially unfair given what's happened in the house. reporting reflected the reality that boehner was getting a hard time getting these house conservatives to agree to any deal whatsoever. i think it's been clear that that was, at least, in the last 72 hours, a sticking point. >> i think we sometimes are guilty of a short-term lens which is understandable. here the country is on the bring of default. the only question everybody in the world wants to know is are we going to avert this? it becomes important. if you look at the lens of the last six months, there is no question that president obama has moved much further toward the gop position, given up tax increases, remember the corporate jet owners and the loopholes. i wonder why the journalists are afraid of being branded excessively partisan if they don't spread the blame around. >> i think that's a fair question. i think in the pft few days the coverage has reflected the reality on the ground that it was the house gop that was sort of the last thing standing between a deal. >> let's remember, the assessment stories, the stories, once a deal is finalize, i think there will be a series of stories that will look back and try to figure out that question. i think it's fair to judge the press once some of those are done. >> right. but, of course, this is when the journalism really counts because this is when the deal is getting done. briefly, have reporters given obama and the white house a pass on not writing down whatever they say their proposal is? this has been a big republican complaint. >> i don't think that that -- i think that criticism from the republicans about the white house has been amply duly reported. i think the reporters have been smart and good in pushing back little bit in saying that some of the republican criticism has been sort of hyperbolic in that regard and there actually are plans written down. >> let me get a break. when we come back, the tea party members who keep saying no. are journalists giving them a fair shake? [ jelani ] neither of my parents went to college. something that was drilled in me early on, you know, college is the place for you. it's my number one goal. ♪ students like me, who take these ap math and science classes and have these opportunities, this is where the american dream lies. when i write that book, you know, i plan to dedicate it to my school. ♪ those hopes and dreams that you have, you know, they're within reach. and i'm living proof. [ female announcer ] sweet honey taste. 80 calories per serving. 40% daily value of fiber. i'm here in the downtown area where the crowd is growing. [ female announcer ] watching calories at breakfast never tasted this sweet... i'll go get my bowl. [ female announcer ] ...or this huge. new fiber one 80 calories. yes, you can actually love breakfast. handle more than 165 billion letters and packages a year. that's about 34 million pounds of mail every day. ever wonder what this costs you as a taxpayer? millions? tens of millions? hundreds of millions? not a single cent. the united states postal service doesn't run on your tax dollars. it's funded solely by stamps and postage. brought to you by the men and women of the american postal worker's union. i find investments with e-trade's top 5 lists and use pre-defined screeners to work smarter. not harder. i depend on myself to take charge of my financial future. [ bell dinging ] whose non-stop day starts with back pain... and a choice. take advil now and maybe up to four in a day. or choose aleve and two pills for a day free of pain. way to go, coach. ♪ man on tv: ...rbis and 36 homers. swings at the first pitch and fouls it deep back into the stands. [ding] [fans whirring] announcer: chill raw and prepared foods promptly. one in 6 americans will get sick from food poisoning this year. check your steps at foodsafety.gov. it's the tea party faction of the republican party that is at the heart of this impasse, why john boehner had such difficulty in getting anything through the house. jonathan martin, in all candor, how well do journalists understand these tea party members who keep saying no to everything? >> i think they're getting to know them better. you have a lot of freshmen who were political outsiders, not known at all by the washington press corps. i think it has taken a period of time. i think you've seen great reporting, thinking about the south carolina delegation that all voted against the bill. but it has taken some time. there's no question about it. but i think it's similar to the 94 class. at first there was uncertainty about who these folks are and what are they after. >> i think it's more than unfamiliarity. nancy cordes, they're often portrayed as being blinded by ideology. they don't see it that way. they see it that they were elected to bring in out-of-control spending, crazy government. >> right. they see congress is never going to do anything unless they hold both democrats and republicans' feet to the fire. they say call me whatever you want, call me a radical, an extremist, but i came here to do one thing and one thing only. and so there are no -- there's nothing you can offer me that's going to change my vote. you can't offer me a committee position or help with my campaign because i don't care about any of that stuff. >> i think we're also steeped in the capital tradition of horse trading, we don't fully understand people who want to do horse trading. on the other hand, when some of these tea party members belittle the consequences of a default when even when conservative economists say it will wreck if economy, lau do you portray that as being reality? >> as jonathan said in the last 72 hours, maybe the last week, this incredible split between this faction of the republican party and the mainstream republican party. whether it's other mainstream members or commentators or the like, that's the thing we've all been writing about. i think that's a totally legitimate thing. if you're part of a faction of a party, i think it's legitimate to write about that effort. >> without wanting to insult these people, they were elected by their districts and entitled to do anything they want and they have moved the debate. if they take the position that a default is no big deal, not that the government couldn't get by for a week, but for months, that's a crazy position. >> but it's not for us to declare something crazy, right? >> i shouldn't have said crazy. is it not out of line with what most responsible experts believe? >> our journalism is based on the assumption there's a shared set of facts we agree on. when you have some members of congress who don't believe in those same set of facts, it's a serious challenge for us to cover. >> the interesting thing is it does hurt their credibility when actually they have a very credible case to make, that we do need to cut spending or we will get downgraded. that is a very responsible position. but when you add it to some of these other claims, it kind of dilutes some of their -- >> when the "wall street journal" editorial page is criticizing -- that tells how much the debate has moved. thanks very much for stopping by. coming up in the second part of "reliable sources," chris ye chrystia friel land on whether it's obscured the threat to the economy. jeff jarvis ignited a twitter storm in washington with the use of one dirty word. ♪ you are my sunshine ♪ my only sunshine ♪ you makes me happy ♪ when skies are grey ♪ you'll never know, dear ♪ how much i love you ♪ please don't take my sunshine away ♪ [ male announcer ] as long as there are babies, they'll be chevy's to bring them home. ♪ helps defends against occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas and bloating. with three strains of good bacteria to help balance your colon. you had me at "probiotic." [ female announcer ] phillips' colon health. you had me at "probiotic." agents, what did we learn here today? that lint balls are extremely flammable... ...that's why it's important to regularly clean and inspect your vents. correct. [ male announcer ] we are insurance. ♪ we are farmers ♪ bum, ba-da-bum, bum, bum, bum ♪ if you like politics, the debt crisis has been one heck of a story. boehner versus his own tea party faction. duelling news conferences, default day this tuesday. what about the real world economic impact of this beltway gridlock on business, on wall street, ordinary americans? has that got sten lost or obscured in the cacophony. joining us chrystia freed la la from reuters. >> thanks, howie. >> have washington reporters gotten caught up in the effort to gain the politics here, that the economic impact, even if there's no default, has been kind of lost? >> the short answer is yes. i say that with deep respect for washington reporting. i think the actual ins and outs of these negotiations have been covered extremely well by very, very hard working journalists. i think if you pull back a little bit -- maybe the onus is less on the washington press corps and more on the ed torsz -- the underlying economic reality and not just the impact of these debt ceiling debates on the economy, but more broadly, the fact that unemployment is still above 9%, i don't think we look at that enough. i think that's mostly because the horse race of politics, that's easy journalism. ae were were hearing from your panel before, the aides, they can't wait to talk to you. it's a lot harder to understand what's happening in the economy and make it come alive. >> since you mentioned the jobs question, i was going to come to that in a couple moments, i watched this incredible obsessive focus of all the news because because understandably want to know is there going to be a deal or is the united states government going to default instead? at the same time, 14 million americans are out of work. why has that problem largely, i say largely, slipped off the media radar screen? >> i think mostly because we cover what is right before our eyes. we cover a deadline for a journalist, as you know, is something we love and we're built for. >> adrenaline. >> also, i think part of it is, the debt ceiling debate is something that's being fought by people who journalists talk to all the time. joblessness is happening in this country outside the coasts, outside the places where journalists gather. part of what's happening is there are two americas, journalists belong to elite america, not main street america where i agree with you, joblessness is the number one issue. >> also a slow motion crisis, a