Charlie Rangel said the proof that Hillary Clinton can still win the Democratic nomination is that she is still pursuing the Democratic nomination. Either she has a chance, he said, or she’s nuts.

"If mathematically she couldn't get the nomination, it would mean that Obama has won and so she wouldn't be in the race," said Rangel. "And so obviously mathematically she can."

When asked how she could win the nomination, Rangel replied, "I don't know, but if mathematically she cannot win, then why aren't we declaring Obama the winner? I mean, it doesn't make sense. It is not my job to explain how, if she put $6 million of her money, the team is still together, the campaign is still going on, why do I have to explain mathematically why she can't win? If mathematically she can't win, then they are crazy. They ought to go to an insane asylum."

He added, "Anybody who really knows that they can't win and they won't quit, there is really something wrong with them."

Clinton is still in the race. So by that logic she must see some way of winning. What is it?

"I have no clue," said Rangel, explaining it wasn't his job as chairman of the House's Ways and Means Committee to chart or analyze Clinton's path to the nomination.

Then he offered an analogy: "In poker, when you've lost everything, in terms of not having any resources, and it's your hand, and you can't get all of your cards, you say 'all in.' But you don't quit. Because the game is not over."

Rangel said the New York delegation was still fully behind Clinton.

The members have "invested all of our political clout in her support," he said.

I mentioned Obama’s insurmountable delegate lead. "Your job is not to say who the hell won just because the party has some screwed-up rules in the ways we select,” he responded. “You are interpreting what could happen, and I'm telling you it's not over."

Asked whether Clinton stood in a stronger position today than she did before Tuesday and the disappointing finishes in both Indiana and North Carolina, Rangel said, "There was a time where she was the only candidate and nobody knew who the hell Obama was. And then Obama came and swept the imagination of Democrats throughout the United States of America. Now they are just two candidates. There are no strangers here. People have gotten to know Obama and they have gotten to know all sides of her. And you cannot ignore the number of delegates, the number of states, but you know people can go to who they want to listen to, and work this out."

Rangel said he'd be most happy with a shared ticket. "That would be too good to be true, but I really think that at one time or another in the campaign they have really given a lot of thought to ‘what would I do if I lose,’ and I also know that if they talk publicly 'what do I do if I lose,’ that's a losing statement to make with the press. But it's impossible for them not to have thought about it. If that really happens, and they have a pause, they're able to say, 'Well, this would not only ensure victory, but would bring all parts of our party together.'"