Sunday on Reliable Sources, Brian Stelter brought Jay Carney and John King to the program to discuss CBS reporter Major Garrett’s controversial question to President Obama about Iran. Garrett asked the president whether he could be content with the Iran deal knowing that there were four hostages still in Iran.
Carney hit Garrett, calling him “pompous” and deeming his question “offensive.” The long time White House press secretary for the Obama administration said “he understood why the president took offense.” noting it was a “poorly chosen word” on Garrett’s part.
At CNN on Thursday night, Anderson Cooper asked former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who is now a contributor at the network, to square President Barack Obama's Thursday night immigration announcement with past presidential statements that he didn't have the power to do what he had just done.
By now, everyone knows that there’s a revolving door between Democratic politics and the “objective” news media. But does it have to spin so fast? On September 10, CNN announced it hired former White House press secretary Jay Carney as a commentator, citing his “invaluable voice for the network” after his five years inside the Obama administration.
By that afternoon and in heavy rotation in the evening around an Obama speech, Carney was battling for the White House position. Having a direct conflict of interest isn’t disqualifying if you're labeled a “commentator.” The issue: Can Carney truly offer “invaluable” commentary when the media themselves know that he used his White House podium to spout falsehoods to the press?
On Wednesday's The Lead, CNN's Jake Tapper tried to pull former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney out of acting like an apologist for President Obama. Tapper turned to his guest, who had just spent an entire segment defending his former boss's ISIS policy, and asked, "What is the difficulty in getting Arab allies to kick in with military assistance? Jay, you don't work for the White House anymore. You can be frank. What is the problem?"
After President Obama’s speech to the nation on Wednesday night, CNN brought on its newly-minted senior political commenator and former Obama White House press secretary Jay Carney and Republican Senator John McCain (Ariz.) to comment on what the President’s speech regarding U.S policy in dealing withy the Islamic terrorist group ISIS. However, the next eight minutes instantly evolved into a heated debate between the two over the President’s actions of withdrawing troops from Iraq early in his administration and whether that allowed a threat like ISIS to proliferate.
CNN senior vice president Sam Feist announced on Wednesday that former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, who left the Obama administration in June 2014, will be joining the liberal news network as a political commentator. Feist praised Carney's "unique experience as both a journalist and a White House press secretary" which will supposedly "make him an invaluable voice for the network as we cover the final two years of the Obama Administration and look ahead to the coming campaigns." The former Obama flack's "unique experience" is actually all too common in the news media. Prior to serving in the West Wing, Carney had a two-decade record as a liberal journalist for Time magazine.
Now online: the August 4 edition of Notable Quotables, MRC’s bi-weekly compilation of the latest outrageous quotes in the liberal media. This week, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews sleazily blasts GOP voters who reacted with “dread” to Barack Obama — “that name and that face” — and who now would impeach him for no reason: “They never went looking for a reason. They never needed one. It was not what he did. It was, from the outset, who he was.”
Also, Univision’s Jorge Ramos lectures Hillary Clinton that “no government should be in the business of deporting endangered children,” while MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry equates the sending of National Guard troops to the border with 1950s segregation. Highlights are posted after the jump; the entire issue is posted online, with 20 quotes at www.MRC.org.
Appearing on CBS's Late Show with David Letterman on Wednesday, former White House Press Secretary Jay Carney asserted that he had been a completely objective reporter for Time magazine before becoming a spin doctor for the Obama administration: "Right after the election in 2008, I was the Washington bureau chief for Time. And I was an old-fashioned journalist, not an advocate, didn't take sides in my job. But I was extremely excited personally about the Obama-Biden victory." [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
In 1993, the "old-fashioned" Carney described then-First Lady Hillary Clinton as a "polite but passionate American citizen – strangely mesmerizing because of how she matched the poise and politics of her delivery with the power of her position." In contrast, during the 2000 presidential campaign, he slammed George W. Bush as a "pit bull let loose in a slaughterhouse."
Jay Carney is doing a round of interviews fresh out of the White House. In The New York Times Magazine, Jim Rutenberg threw briefing-room softballs like this: “Do people in the first row like to showboat?”
Carney said yes: “If you look at the difference in tenor between the on-camera briefings and the on-the-record-but-off-camera gaggles, it’s night and day.” That’s not just due to the TV audience, it’s due to the idea that gaggles are more designed to set up the briefing and the day’s coverage. In this and other interviews, Carney tries sneakily to dismiss the idea that Obama didn’t live up to hise pledge to be transparent.
Psst: David Gregory! You can stop auditioning to fill Jay Carney's White House spokesman spot. President Obama has already appointed someone else. Given his rotten Meet The Press ratings, it's understandable that Gregory would be prospecting for his next position. Even so, his performance on today's Morning Joe was pitiable.
With even liberals like Mika Brzezinski, Donny Deutsch and John Heilemann dumping on the Bergdahl deal, there was Gregory as President Obama's lone defender. Thus: Dianne Feinstein has criticized the lack of consultation? Meh: she's been critical of the Obama admin on other things. And twice Gregory made the argument that Commanders-in-Chief, whatever the circumstances, just don't leave soldiers on the battlefield. That was too much even for Heilemann, who argued that there are limits to what a C-in-C should do, particularly when the soldier in question might have been a deserter. View the video after the jump.
This afternoon outgoing White House Press Secretary Jay Carney took questions from the press corps in his first daily press briefing since announcing his resignation. The questions dealt primarily with the controversy surrounding the release of five high-level Taliban detainees at Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, the sole American POW from the war in Afghanistan, and one who reportedly was judged by the Pentagon.
ABC’s Jim Avila got into a tense exchange with Jay Carney when he asked about the words Obama national security advisor Susan Rice used to describe Sergeant Bergdal’s service in the military. Avila asked Carney how exactly Bergdahl served, as Rice put it, “with honor and distinction.” He gave Carney the opportunity to say the national security advisor misspoke, but he did not.
On Monday, NBC Today co-host Matt Lauer actually held outgoing White House Press Secretary Jay Carney's feet to the fire over the administration releasing five Taliban terrorists from Guantanamo Bay to secure the release Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl: "These are guys who are considered at very high risk to launch attacks against the U.S. if they were freed. So has the administration now, though, endangered the lives of all Americans for the safety of one American?" [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
Carney argued: "...we believe that this is not a security threat to the United States and that there's sufficient mitigation to be comfortable with the transfer of those detainees to Qatar." Lauer pushed back: "Is this semantics here, Jay? Are we calling it a prisoner swap when, in fact, it is negotiating with terrorists?"