Appearing on MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports on Wednesday, Hardball host Chris Matthews sounded the alarm over the left-wing being in disarray: "The Democratic Party is not unified right now. It's coming apart, you can see it, it's devolving. And so everybody – it's every man for himself, every politician for themselves right now."
Andrea Mitchell Reports
By Brent Bozell | and By Tim Graham | April 21, 2015 | 10:17 PM EDT
While Hillary Clinton hates doing Sunday shows – as we remember from the weekend after Benghazi – she did allow her close friend Gov. Terry McAuliffe to appear on Meet the Press on April 19. Jaws dropped when NBC host Chuck Todd threw him a real Russert-like hardball, quoting from his 2007 memoir What A Party!
"This is Hillary Clinton," said Todd. "This is you quoting her in your book. ‘They had bankrupted us totally. We owned nothing. We didn't own a car. We didn't own a house. Here we were, 50 years old and we owned nothing. No-thing! All the money we had, which we had brought into the White House, was gone. I hadn't made any money for eight years, so it was really horrible.'"
By Scott Whitlock | April 15, 2015 | 5:04 PM EDT
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell clearly has the latest Hillary Clinton talking points. On Wednesday, she discussed the New York Times revelation that the former Secretary of State was pressed two years ago on her private e-mail server. That congressional inquiry, headed by Republican Darrell Issa, received no response. On Andrea Mitchell Reports, the journalist regurgitated, "The answer I'm getting from the campaign is that was not directed at her. It was directed at every member of the cabinet."
By Kyle Drennen | April 10, 2015 | 10:37 AM EDT
Throughout her MSNBC show on Thursday from Panama at the Summit of the Americas, host Andrea Mitchell wrung her hands over the Obama administration actually trying to stand up to a Latin American dictator: "...there are other issues here, including recent sanctions by the U.S. against Venezuela, which have really upset the Cubans and a lot of America's close allies here, Costa Rica and Colombia and others, who are not happy about the wording of that sanctioning of Venezuela, Cuba's closest ally."
By Jeffrey Meyer | April 8, 2015 | 3:39 PM EDT
After Senator Rand Paul engaged in a heated interview with NBC’s Savannah Guthrie on Wednesday's Today, Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd repeatedly scolded the Republican presidential candidate over his conduct with their colleague.
By Kyle Drennen | March 27, 2015 | 3:35 PM EDT
Despite having savaged Republicans two weeks earlier for voicing opposition to an Iran nuclear deal in an open letter to the totalitarian regime, on Friday, NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell and Meet the Press moderator Chuck Todd suddenly realized such a deal would be a bad idea.
By Kyle Drennen | March 20, 2015 | 5:09 PM EDT
- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2015/03/20/palestinian-activist-blasts-israel-and-racist-gop-nbc-reporter-asks-if#sthash.usFfBtez.dpuf
- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2015/03/20/palestinian-activist-blasts-israel-and-racist-gop-nbc-reporter-asks-if#sthash.usFfBtez.dpuf
Filling in as host of MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell Reports on Friday, NBC national correspondent Peter Alexander brought on radical Palestinian activist and executive director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation Yousef Munayyer to condemn Israel and the Republican Party. Alexander lobbed this softball: "What is your take on the back and forth right now between the President and Democrats and congressional Republicans vis-a-vis Israel and ultimately the Israeli-Palestinian situation?"
Alexander lobbed this softball: "What is your take on the back and forth right now between the President and Democrats and congressional Republicans vis-a-vis Israel and ultimately the Israeli-Palestinian situation?"
Munayyer seized the opportunity to praise Democrats while denouncing Israel and its Republican allies in the United States:
Well, there's clearly a partisan divide here. And I think it's much deeper than just the people at the top of the U.S.-Israel relationship....What we have today at the base of the Democratic Party are younger demographics and minority demographics, all of which are turning away from the values that Israel is presenting to the world, which is this exclusivist, status-quo, very conservative perspective on their situation and their world view. And this is something that jives very much with the narrative at the base of the Republican Party, which is very much xenophobic and nativist and at many times racist.
Rather than challenge such defamatory accusations, Alexander responded with this question: "Is Hillary Clinton a better answer for you guys going forward?"
Munayyer replied: "Again, I think it's not so much about the politicians at the top, but the movements at the bases which are gonna change the way American public opinion and the people that represent them eventually relate to this issue altogether."
Earlier in the exchange, Alexander helped Munayyer make his anti-Israel case: "Let me put up on the screen right now some of what you wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times this week, where you say, among other things, 'The biggest losers in this election were those who made the argument that change could come from within Israel. It can't and it won't.'"
Munayyer began to respond: "And that's exactly what I believe. It won't come from the inside. And it's precisely because-" Alexander actually interrupted his guest in order to finish the man's sentence: "Because you think there's the need for real pressure from the outside now because Israel clearly isn't going to do it on its own and not with the help of the U.S."
Munayyer proclaimed: "Absolutely. And the help of the U.S. will be needed, but in a way that is to introduce that pressure."
Here is a full transcript of the March 20 interview:
12:29 PM ET
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I don't want a one-state solution, I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution. But for that, circumstances have to change.
ANDREA MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate. Certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution, that is the way the White House is interpreting. They're strongly considering not blocking a vote for statehood for Palestinians.
NETANYAHU: Well, first of all, that state would become a terrorist state. So we need the conditions of recognition of the Jewish state and real security in order to have a realistic two-state solution.
PETER ALEXANDER: Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu there walking back a promise he made to reject the establishment of a Palestinian state, appeasing hardliners just before divisive elections in Israel. But has too much diplomatic and political damage already been done or is there hope for a two-state solution? We're joined by Yousef Munayyer. Is that right – Munayyer?
YOUSEF MUNAYYER: Munayyer.
ALEXANDER: We practiced it and I got it right. I wanted to make sure I got it right when you were sitting here. You're the executive director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Competition – the Israeli Occupation, excuse me. You're a Palestinian-American, you're an activist on behalf of Palestine, and you write that Netanyahu's win is the best thing to happen for your cause. Why's that?
MUNAYYER: Well, let me be clear, I certainly don't support any of Mr. Netanyahu's policies, but of the plausible outcomes of this election, I think his election, his victory, was actually the best plausible outcome, precisely because the mask has fallen very clearly off of the intentions of the Israeli government and the Israeli state, which not really interested in peace. You know, we heard the interview with Andrea yesterday and the comments that Mr. Netanyahu made and it's clear that this is a man who never misses an opportunity to make excuses not to make peace.
ALEXANDER: Let me put up on the screen right now some of what you wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times this week, where you say, among other things, "The biggest losers in this election were those who made the argument that change could come from within Israel. It can't and it won't."
MUNAYYER: And that's exactly what I believe. It won't come from the inside. And it's precisely because-
ALEXANDER: Because you think there's the need for real pressure from the outside now because Israel clearly isn't going to do it on its own and not with the help of the U.S.
MUNAYYER: Absolutely. And the help of the U.S. will be needed, but in a way that is to introduce that pressure. Look, think about it this way, the Israeli state controls territory in where 12.5 million people live. Four and a half million of them have no right to vote within the Israeli system. If you put that in an American context, that's as if you had 120 million Americans in the United States unable to vote because of their, basically because of their ethnic and religious background. That's unconscionable, that does not – you know, that's not what American values are about.
And yet, this is the only answer we get from the Israeli Prime Minister that's supported by an Israeli public. So this is not going to change from within. This is only going to change when the Israeli public is forced to decide between maintaining this occupation forever or ending it and becoming a real member of the international community in the 21st century.
ALEXANDER: I want to ask you about domestic politics, if I can. Speaker John Boehner today saying that he will be heading off to Israel a little bit later this month. What is your take on the back and forth right now between the President and Democrats and congressional Republicans vis-a-vis Israel and ultimately the Israeli-Palestinian situation?
MUNAYYER: Well, there's clearly a partisan divide here. And I think it's much deeper than just the people at the top of the U.S.-Israel relationship. This is not just about Barack Obama and President Netanyahu [sic], this is about a direct clash between the values that Americans hold dear and the values that Benjamin Netanyahu represents.
What we have today at the base of the Democratic Party are younger demographics and minority demographics, all of which are turning away from the values that Israel is presenting to the world, which is this exclusivist, status-quo, very conservative perspective on their situation and their world view. And this is something that jives very much with the narrative at the base of the Republican Party, which is very much xenophobic and nativist and at many times racist.
ALEXANDER: Is Hillary Clinton a better answer for you guys going forward?
MUNAYYER: Again, I think it's not so much about the politicians at the top, but the movements at the bases which are gonna change the way American public opinion and the people that represent them eventually relate to this issue altogether.
ALEXANDER: Yousef Munayyer, nice to see you again. I appreciate your time, thank you.
MUNAYYER: Thanks for having me.
Alexander lobbed this softball: "What is your take on the back and forth right now between the President and Democrats and congressional Republicans vis-a-vis Israel and ultimately the Israeli-Palestinian situation?"
Munayyer seized the opportunity to praise Democrats while denouncing Israel and its Republican allies in the United States:
Well, there's clearly a partisan divide here. And I think it's much deeper than just the people at the top of the U.S.-Israel relationship....What we have today at the base of the Democratic Party are younger demographics and minority demographics, all of which are turning away from the values that Israel is presenting to the world, which is this exclusivist, status-quo, very conservative perspective on their situation and their world view. And this is something that jives very much with the narrative at the base of the Republican Party, which is very much xenophobic and nativist and at many times racist.
Rather than challenge such defamatory accusations, Alexander responded with this question: "Is Hillary Clinton a better answer for you guys going forward?"
Munayyer replied: "Again, I think it's not so much about the politicians at the top, but the movements at the bases which are gonna change the way American public opinion and the people that represent them eventually relate to this issue altogether."
Earlier in the exchange, Alexander helped Munayyer make his anti-Israel case: "Let me put up on the screen right now some of what you wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times this week, where you say, among other things, 'The biggest losers in this election were those who made the argument that change could come from within Israel. It can't and it won't.'"
Munayyer began to respond: "And that's exactly what I believe. It won't come from the inside. And it's precisely because-" Alexander actually interrupted his guest in order to finish the man's sentence: "Because you think there's the need for real pressure from the outside now because Israel clearly isn't going to do it on its own and not with the help of the U.S."
Munayyer proclaimed: "Absolutely. And the help of the U.S. will be needed, but in a way that is to introduce that pressure."
Here is a full transcript of the March 20 interview:
12:29 PM ET
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I don't want a one-state solution, I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution. But for that, circumstances have to change.
ANDREA MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate. Certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution, that is the way the White House is interpreting. They're strongly considering not blocking a vote for statehood for Palestinians.
NETANYAHU: Well, first of all, that state would become a terrorist state. So we need the conditions of recognition of the Jewish state and real security in order to have a realistic two-state solution.
YOUSEF MUNAYYER: Munayyer.
ALEXANDER: We practiced it and I got it right. I wanted to make sure I got it right when you were sitting here. You're the executive director of the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Competition – the Israeli Occupation, excuse me. You're a Palestinian-American, you're an activist on behalf of Palestine, and you write that Netanyahu's win is the best thing to happen for your cause. Why's that?
MUNAYYER: Well, let me be clear, I certainly don't support any of Mr. Netanyahu's policies, but of the plausible outcomes of this election, I think his election, his victory, was actually the best plausible outcome, precisely because the mask has fallen very clearly off of the intentions of the Israeli government and the Israeli state, which not really interested in peace. You know, we heard the interview with Andrea yesterday and the comments that Mr. Netanyahu made and it's clear that this is a man who never misses an opportunity to make excuses not to make peace.
ALEXANDER: Let me put up on the screen right now some of what you wrote in an op-ed for The New York Times this week, where you say, among other things, "The biggest losers in this election were those who made the argument that change could come from within Israel. It can't and it won't."
MUNAYYER: And that's exactly what I believe. It won't come from the inside. And it's precisely because-
ALEXANDER: Because you think there's the need for real pressure from the outside now because Israel clearly isn't going to do it on its own and not with the help of the U.S.
MUNAYYER: Absolutely. And the help of the U.S. will be needed, but in a way that is to introduce that pressure. Look, think about it this way, the Israeli state controls territory in where 12.5 million people live. Four and a half million of them have no right to vote within the Israeli system. If you put that in an American context, that's as if you had 120 million Americans in the United States unable to vote because of their, basically because of their ethnic and religious background. That's unconscionable, that does not – you know, that's not what American values are about.
And yet, this is the only answer we get from the Israeli Prime Minister that's supported by an Israeli public. So this is not going to change from within. This is only going to change when the Israeli public is forced to decide between maintaining this occupation forever or ending it and becoming a real member of the international community in the 21st century.
ALEXANDER: I want to ask you about domestic politics, if I can. Speaker John Boehner today saying that he will be heading off to Israel a little bit later this month. What is your take on the back and forth right now between the President and Democrats and congressional Republicans vis-a-vis Israel and ultimately the Israeli-Palestinian situation?
MUNAYYER: Well, there's clearly a partisan divide here. And I think it's much deeper than just the people at the top of the U.S.-Israel relationship. This is not just about Barack Obama and President Netanyahu [sic], this is about a direct clash between the values that Americans hold dear and the values that Benjamin Netanyahu represents.
What we have today at the base of the Democratic Party are younger demographics and minority demographics, all of which are turning away from the values that Israel is presenting to the world, which is this exclusivist, status-quo, very conservative perspective on their situation and their world view. And this is something that jives very much with the narrative at the base of the Republican Party, which is very much xenophobic and nativist and at many times racist.
ALEXANDER: Is Hillary Clinton a better answer for you guys going forward?
MUNAYYER: Again, I think it's not so much about the politicians at the top, but the movements at the bases which are gonna change the way American public opinion and the people that represent them eventually relate to this issue altogether.
ALEXANDER: Yousef Munayyer, nice to see you again. I appreciate your time, thank you.
MUNAYYER: Thanks for having me.
By Kyle Drennen | March 19, 2015 | 5:02 PM EDT
Starting off her interview with newly reelected Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday, NBC's Andrea Mitchell acknowledged his win – then told him how bad it was: "Prime Minister, congratulations on your victory. But – there's always a but – critics and analysts here and around the world are saying, 'At what cost?' Your hard turn right on the Palestinian issue, what you said about the Arab voters coming out in droves, they say, are costing you, costing you support around the world."
By Kyle Drennen | March 18, 2015 | 5:04 PM EDT
While in mourning over the re-election of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on her Thursday MSNBC show, host Andrea Mitchell avoided talking to any Israeli officials and instead brought on former Palestinian Authority spokesperson Diana Buttu to denounce the victory of the Jewish leader.
By Jeffrey Meyer | March 18, 2015 | 1:55 PM EDT
Appearing on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports on Wednesday, the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg repeatedly criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s electoral strategy which he labeled “the Israeli version of the Southern Strategy.”
By Kyle Drennen | March 17, 2015 | 5:06 PM EDT
Reporting live from Tel Aviv and campaigning hard against the re-election of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on her MSNBC show on Tuesday, host Andrea Mitchell invited on one guest after another to denounce the Likud party leader.
By Matthew Balan | March 13, 2015 | 3:42 PM EDT
MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell deferred to State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki on the Friday edition of her program, and let the Obama administration flack attack the 47 Republican senators who signed an open letter to Iran's leaders. Mitchell led into the segment by playing President Obama's condescending "I'm embarrassed for them" and "it's close to unprecedented" shots at the senators, and gave Psaki a platform to promote the administration's talking points on the issue.