Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Washington Post White House reporter Jim VandeHei was online Friday, May 26, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest in political news.

Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Jim VandeHei: Good morning, folks. Let's chat.

Breaking News: shots were fired at Rayburn House Office Building but we have no other confirmed details.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Jim,

So how do the Senate and House reconcile their schizophrenic immigration bills? The disguised amnesty package in the Senate version would seem to be anathema to the House, whose felony-equals-illegal-workers equation would seen equally unpalatable to the Senators. Any bets on what chips will be on the table and on the final shape of any bill that emerges?

Jim VandeHei: The House and Senate are in different worlds on immigration. The fragile coalition that backed that Senate bill is held together by common support for providing millions of illegals a chance at citizenship without leaving the country. That is a nonstarter for House Republicans and I see absolutely no wiggle room on that issue in the eyes of most of the 231 Republicans. If the citizenship idea is included, House Republicans bolt. If it is not, the Senate coalition crumbles.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Good morning. It seems like there's a widening gulf opening between the House and the White House. For example, would Hastert have made as a big a deal about the FBI search if he weren't still peeved about not being consulted on the Hayden nomination? Or been left by the White House holding the bag for some controversial immigration provisions that Rove now wants taken out? Do you think the gulf will narrow or widen? Has there been any off the record reaction from GOP Sens/Reps about these signing statements? Thanks.

Jim VandeHei: Yes, there is a widening gulf. But I don't think Hastert's objection to the weekend search of Jefferson's office was motivated at all by anti-White House emotions. For Hastert, this is a matter of constitutional principle. He knows the politics are probably bad -- after all he is basically defending a DEMOCRAT who apparently stuffed $90,000 in his freezer. Hastert believes strongly, as do many others, that the contents of Congressional offices are off limits to the executive branch. Bush seemed to succeed to diffusing tension by putting the seized material into a protected area while Justice and Congress work out their differences.

_______________________

Greensboro, N.C.: What government office is in the Rayburn Office?

Jim VandeHei: it is a House office building. about one-third of members have personal offices there. some committee rooms, too.

_______________________

Boca Raton, Fla.: How does the average reader know if a story is true if it is filled with unnamed sources? How do we know the motive behind the leaks? If a story turns out to be untrue, where is the correction placed if it was original story was placed on the front page?

Jim VandeHei: great question. there is no easy answer. Trust is a foundation of the relationship not only between reporters and source but more importantly between us, the reporter, and you, the reader. We try to limit the use of nameless sources but when you cover government and are trying to get to the truth and often report on sensitive, classified or embarrassing material anonymous sources are crucial. If a story turns out to be false, we correct it. If you see an instance when we don't correct such a story, call the editors and call their attention to it.

_______________________

Indianapolis, Ind.: Hastert was very angry that a seemingly corrupt congressman's office was searched. Pelosi urged that he step down from his chairmanship. Political Play of the Week?

Jim VandeHei: This Washington - everything is political. I don't think Pelosi is a big fan of Jefferson and certainly would love to distance the party from him ASAP. He could ruin their campaign to paint Republicans as the party of corruption, according to Dems I talk to. Jefferson's refusal to leave the committee -- and this 45 day cooling off period -- probably means Jefferson will be around a lot longer than Pelosi would like.

_______________________

Centreville, Va.: Hastert needs to understand that the politics on this are not just bad, they're terrible. And the law isn't on his side, either. I'd just gotten through a couple of weeks of justifying warrantless surveillance of American citizens' phone records only to find that the legislative branch feels that it is immune to warranted searches. Separation of powers worked here-one branch went to another to investigate a third. Do our representatives understand anymore that they serve us, not themselves? And that they don't own those offices, their constituents do? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but the whole thing stinks like the two parties got together to figure out the best way to save their own hides and got the President to cover for them.

I haven't felt like Congress was this out of touch since The Post Office and House Bank scandals in the early 90s.

Jim VandeHei: you are not alone. The polls show Congress is loathed. When the public is already suspicious, everything lawmakers do is viewed through a different prism. I will give you the same advice I give everyone: vote.

_______________________

Houston, Tex.: Now that the Enron jury has delivered its decision, are there any likely repercussions politically -- on the Hill, at the White House, or elsewhere?

Jim VandeHei: I don't think so. There are so many other big political issues right now that are shaping debate and views and elections. Enron, in some ways, is old news. Obviously, the company poured money on Bush and Republicans. But the fact that Republicans and bankrolled by corporations is pretty dog bites man to me.

_______________________

Sagamore Beach, Mass.: Any new developments with the Rove case? How does the National Journal story about Rove and Novak possibly coordinating their testimony affect the case, in your mind?

Jim VandeHei: a lot of question on this National Journal Story. If and when we confirm the details we will write about it. Right now our focus is on whether Rove will get indicted and what issues remain open pertaining to that case.

_______________________

Marriage, U.S.: Is the Post working on a story regarding the marital relations of the major Republicans running for President in 2008? I presume it will contain the fact that every one of them is on their SECOND marriage. One is on his THIRD.

Jim VandeHei: I did not know that fast fact on GOP marriages. I don't talk about what precisely we are covering. I assume as the elections approach, we will write about every issue, from every angle.

_______________________

Louisville, Colo.: What is being made of the fact that the Senate Immigration bill did not carry a majority of Senate Republicans?

The White House is now aligned with a primarily Democrat coalition. That cannot be good for the Republican party.

Jim VandeHei: If my math is right: 23 Senate Republicans voted for it, 32 against. In the House, Hastert has a policy that he will not a hold a vote on a bill that can not get a majority of the majority. If, as my colleagues chuck Babington smartly points in today's paper, if that policy were in effect in the Senate, the headlines would not reading "Senate Pass Immigration Bill." The politics are tough for both parties, but GOPers in particular. conservatives are very opposed to citizenship for illegals. It is a deal killer for many of them. It suggests to me that comprehensive reform, as Bush supports, is unlikely this year unless the president can change a heck of a lot of minds

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: Do reporters believe that got their pound of flesh from the President last night in regards to the war in Iraq?

Jim VandeHei: I have no clue. I was not there.

_______________________

Laramie, Wyo.: What are the early odds that Ken Lay gets a pardon? I'm talking after November elections of course.

Jim VandeHei: about as high as Cheney stepping down and Nancy Pelosi being picked as his replacement.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: I'm expecting you to plea "Church and State here, but I was wondering what you thought of David Broder's (Thursday) column on Senator Clinton's energy policy speech. While I was touched that he got around to mentioning some of her proposals in his eighth paragraph, Broder seemed so much more titillated with the tired issue of the former First Marriage than Clinton's "wonkish text" full of dull talk about that -whatever- grownup energy stuff. He could not resist coming back to the "elephant in the room" for yet one final, obsessive mention of their marriage. Pray tell, will his Monday column catch us up on "Guiding Light"? And you guys wonder why America is fed up with our "news" media.

Jim VandeHei: Broder is the best of the best. His columns are fair and illuminating. I don't want to feed your distrust or disgust of the media, but I think the dynamics of the Clinton marriage will get more discussion and coverage if she runs than her new energy plan does. There is an endless fascination in the Clinton and their marriage, based on my unscientific survey of people I chat with.

_______________________

Sewickley, Pa.: Do you get the sense that folks are listening the Mr. Bush on the war in Iraq anymore? Have they tuned him out because of credibility issues/gaps? Can he remain relevant in the current climate?

Jim VandeHei: Bush made clear last night that Iraq is a big problem for him and his credibility and the public's view of his presidency. What is he supposed to do, quit talking? this is the core issue of this presidency and it will dominate the final years of the Bush White House, for better or worse.

_______________________

Ogden, Utah: I'm fascinated at the headline this morning, "Bush, Blair concede missteps" and the story then goes on to list how Bush and Blair, pretty much, admitted that every criticism of the war, from beginning to "bring 'em on" to the insurgency and current situation, was correct.

In short, they admitted, finally, that absolutely nothing went right, nothing at all.

Misstep? Isn't that sort of like saying "oopsie!"

Should not someone -- editor or reporter -- have made that story just a tad bit stronger? As in "Bush and Blair today conceded that nothing at all in the war in Iraq has gone as planned."

Jim VandeHei: I beg to differ. I did not hear either man say everything went wrong. In fact, I though Bush admitting errors like talking too tough allowed him to gloss over bigger problems such as troop levels in the early days and preparations for a robust insurgency. Bush always talks about progress: huge turnout in national elections and the formation of government and the toppling of Hussein. I think the story hit the right balance.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Why would anyone want to be Bush's Treasury Secretary?

Jim VandeHei: nice title. great perks. unfortunately for would-be treasury secretaries, Bush has showed an inclination to centralize economic policy inside the White House and make the Tres Sec a spokesman.

_______________________

Bremo Bluff, Va.: I am curious about the difference in media coverage of two Senators of significant achievement.

Hillary Clinton, Senator and former First Lady, gets a lot of national media attention. It seems as if she blinks and people report it.

Elizabeth Dole, Senator, candidate for President, wife of a Senator, Cabinet Secretary, former head of the Red Cross, is rarely if ever in the national media.

What is your assessment of the difference?

Jim VandeHei: interesting question. Sen. Dole has a lower profile, was not first lady and is not thinking of running for president. She is not as divisive and also not as involved in the big policy fights of the day. She does hold an important position - head of Senate reelection efforts - but the bulk of high profile coverage she gets is for not raising enough money for her colleagues.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: I really hope you don't make most of your journalistic and editorial judgments based on unscientific surveys of people you chat with.

The people inside the Beltway bubble are obsessed with the Clinton's sex lives, but the American public doesn't really care. Remember how high Bill's popularity and job approval ratings were during the Monica frenzy. It's tabloid journalism, nothing more.

Jim VandeHei: I appreciate your comments and will factor them into my unscientific tabulations

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Hi, Jim!

Thanks for your great reporting, and thanks for doing these chats.

What, in your view, are the biggest changes in the White House since Josh Bolton took over for Andy Card as Chief of Staff? Was there really any "shake up" there? If so, what were the results to date?

Jim VandeHei: It was a gentle shakeup but things got stirred. Bolten's biggest challenge is the obvious one: turn this presidency around. They need to get their edge back, which they seem to be doing in some cases. They are quicker to come up with new ideas -- such as the energy plan and the prime time immigration speech - and seem more sensitive to congressional politics. Much of Bush's problems are out of Bolten's control. Unless Bolten can win the war and bring him troops his boss will have the same political problems

_______________________

Not a member of the group: Jim, find some better friends. NOBODY CARES about "the dynamics of the Clinton marriage." We're far more concerned about energy, the environment, getting troops out of Iraq, restoring American prestige around the world, etc., etc., etc.

Jim VandeHei: I care more about the policy, too. But I can tell you from more scientific studies such as reader surveys and Internet traffic that our audience seems to eat up stories about politics and personalities, too.

_______________________

Phoenix, Ariz.: Boston is right. When the media wastes time covering non-issues like the state of the Clinton's marriage rather than the substance of Sen. Clinton's energy proposals, the American public is being poorly served by the institution that is supposed to keep us informed. Maybe the Clinton's marriage is "news" inside the Beltway, but it ain't all that important to the rest of us.

Jim VandeHei: I am glad we have a studious, policy-minded chat crowd. I personally like a heaping helping of both politics and policy.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: I was puzzled by the timing of last night's news conference between Bush and Blair. None of the major networks covered it (that Wheel of Fortune timeslot is sacred). And it was 1:00AM in London, so most everyone was asleep and maybe even too late for the morning papers. Was there a reasoning behind it do you think?

Jim VandeHei: this was about Bush, not Blair. I think the unusual joint press conference in prime time was a clever way to get as much attention to the Bush worldview as possible.

_______________________

Seattle, Wash.: you said Dole compared to Clinton was "not as involved in the big policy fights of the day."

What involvement? Clinton becomes a spokesperson when she's sure it's safe, i.e. Katrina or Dubai Ports, but I can't name many contributions she made in terms of interesting questioning in hearings(Feingold and Bolton on Rwanda; Wyden and Hayden), or something she did on a bill (like Hagel on immigration reform). She's always asked about her opinions, and gives them when convenient. I mean aside from a trip to Iraq, many Senators are much more engaged. (Collins comes to mind)

Jim VandeHei: I should have been more precise. Clinton tends, from vantage point, to give more policy centric speeches in large forums than Dole. I have not seen Dole assert herself forcefully into many of the big debates, but I could be wrong. please email me evidence to the contrary if I am.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: What exactly is "news" about the Clinton marriage? We all know it has survived more than most marriages could have. End of story. Let's move on.

Jim VandeHei: on that note. I will move on. have a great memorial day.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.