Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), the supposed author of the now-infamous Iran Letter signed by the #47Traitors in the #GOP led Senate, went on a Sunday talk show and displayed an utter lack of knowledge about the history of Iran and the Persian Empire. Did you know that Iran already controls Tehran, their own capitol? OMG - how did this happen? And Iran is also in control of everything from Beirut to Baghdad - everything! Well, not really . . .
But when asked by Face the Nation’s Bob Schieffer what better outcome Cotton expects if a White House-led deal falls through, Cotton seemed to make a key geographic mistake . . .
Bob Schieffer (Face the Nation): What do you want to happen here? What is your alternative here? Let’s say that the deal falls through, then what?
Sen. Tom Cotton: Well as Prime Minister Netanyahu said, the alternative to a bad deal is a better deal. The Iranians frequently bluff to walk away from the table. if they bluff this week, call their bluff. The Congress stands ready to impose much more severe sanctions. Moreover we have to stand up to Iran’s attempts to drive for regional dominance. They already control Tehran increasingly they control Damascus and Beirut and Baghdad and now Sana’a as well. They do all that without a nuclear weapon. imagine what they would do with a nuclear weapon.
Schieffer went on to ask Cotton whether he had any regrets at all about the letter. So he didn’t clarify with Cotton what he meant by his comment that Iran has “control” of its own capital.
Tom Cotton: Iran must be stopped because 'they already control Tehran' http://t.co/hEbR33iUKk
O’Reilly spoke of how the Founders believed in a free and honest press and bemoaned how the current American press isn’t “half as responsible as the men who forged the nation.”
But O’Reilly didn’t just go after Williams, he said this is about a culture of deception in the liberal media. They need to, he said, “stop the corruption and begin telling the truth without an agenda,” otherwise the public’s trust in them will continue to plummet.
. . . he ended by telling his viewers, “Think about other news agencies that are distorting the facts.”
But it turns out, Bill O has been spinning lies for some time about his reporting in Argentina during the War in the Falklands, making it sound as if he was in the midst of combat when he never even set foot on the islands. At the time, he was covering the remote war for CBS News, a fact he has written about in his best-selling books and discussed on his show many times, saying he was in "fire fights" and "war zones" in Argentina.
But neither he nor any of his CBS colleagues were in the Falklands because the Argentine government wouldn't allow them there.
An article in Mother Jones magazine is calling out O'Reilly for his lies.
Here's just one quote from O'Reilly about the Falklands Via Media Matters
O'REILLY: I -- I was in a combat situation in Argentina during the Falklands War, OK?
KEVIN: Mm-hmm.
O'REILLY: And I can tell you when the Kool-Aid hits the fan, OK, nobody is locking in on anybody else. Nobody.
KEVIN: And you're right.
O'REILLY: OK, ad --
KEVIN: I know (inaudible; overlapping dialogue)
O'REILLY: -- adrenaline -- adrenaline surges and you veterans out there listening right now, you know exactly what I'm talking about here. Adrenaline surges, your senses become very attune, much sharper than they are ordinarily, and you are locked in, focused in, on your survival and achieving the means of staying alive.
O'Reilly responded to the story by launching a slew of personal invective. He did not respond to the details of the story. Instead, he called me a "liar," a "left-wing assassin," and a "despicable guttersnipe." He said that I deserve "to be in the kill zone." (You can read one of my responses here.) And in his show-opening "Talking Points memo" monologue on Friday evening, he continued the name-calling. In a way, it's impossible to win a debate with O'Reilly because he is not bound by reality. In response to the article, he told Fox News' media reporter, Howard Kurtz, "Nobody was on the Falklands and I never said I was on the island, ever." Yet our article included video of O'Reilly saying in 2013, "I was in a situation one time, in a war zone in Argentina, in the Falklands, where my photographer got run down and then hit his head and was bleeding from the ear on the concrete. And the army was chasing us." Note the words "war zone" and "in the Falklands."
. . . rather than bolstering O'Reilly's description of the anti-government protest he says he covered as a "combat situation," the tape corroborates the accounts of other journalists who were there and who have described it as simply a chaotic, violent protest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other correspondents with CBS who were in Buenos Aires with O'Reilly refuted his claims, only to be slammed by Bill-O.
Eric Engberg, a CBS correspondent who was also in Buenos Aires at the time, defended Corn in a Facebook post on Friday and said, "It was not a war zone or even close. It was an 'expense account zone.'"
Longtime NBC News correspondent George Lewis, who was also there at the time, agreed with Engberg, writing on Facebook, "Cushiest war I ever covered."
Did O'Reilly's photographer get "run down" and bloodied?
CNN has interviewed seven people who were there for CBS, and none of them recall anyone from the network being injured.
"If somebody got hurt, we all would have known," Alvarez said. . . . O'Reilly has repeatedly defended his claims, including on Fox News on Sunday morning. "I don't know if he was there," O'Reilly said, implying that Engberg may not have witnessed the riot. He called Engberg "Room Service Eric," alleging he often stayed in his hotel during unfolding news events.
Eric Engberg: He's completely nutty. There were five correspondents working that story for CBS. Four of them had been on that remote site for weeks because the Argentine government would not allow us to go to the Falkland Islands. We were hoping we could get in, but when we couldn't we had to stay in Buenos Aires and file stories... When the riot happened, and actually it was a slow-developing riot - O'Reilly has said in one of his books that the "crowd stormed the Presidential Palace." That is not what happened. What happened was the stupid government of Argentina, which was run by a collection - a junta - of murderous generals - they announced that they were going to hold a speech that evening at the Presidential Palace and that the public should come and watch the speech.
In the meantime, the British released the information about how the Argentines surrendered. And as people learned of the fact that the war was over, and that they had lost, they became increasingly angry and more and more of them started coming to the palace. So you had a large assembly of people, 4 or 5 thousand, who were angry at the government. I was one of those who was there. The other three correspondents were there. I frankly don't know where O'Reilly was. But the people who were there for our company will assert that 'yes, Engberg was there with his camera crew.' Does anybody believe that a reporter who is covering a war from 1200 miles away, hearing that there was a riot at the National Palace, would sit in his hotel room?
Engberg: It's ludicrous. It's nutty - He's Nutty! ... Nutty about me - he says I was hiding in my hotel room, which is another one of those classic O'Reilly responses to any kind of criticism of him. It's always to fire back some personal slur at whoever made the criticism, instead of to respond to the criticism.
Next, Bill O'Reilly attacked Bob Schieffer, veteran journalist and moderator of the Sunday news show, Face the Nation, accusing him of stealing and plagiarizing his stories in Argentina. Yeah, that's really going to turn out well . . .
BillO then blasted CBS's Bob Schieffer for "big footing" his story which happens all the time in the news business.
O'Reilly: If you write an article and send it in and another reporter put there name on the article, what's that called? it begins with a "p." Kurtz: I've always called it "big footing" and you're not happy if that happens. O'Reilly: What is it called in print? it begins with a "p." Kurtz: I'll let you tell me. O'Reilly: Plagiarism.
Kurtz: Oh, if it's your colleague and you're working together
O'Reilly:I wasn't working together with these guys.
Hmmm, but he WAS working with both Engberg and Schieffer, because they all worked for CBS News.His lying knows no bounds.
Nope RT @IceManNYR@KeithOlbermann Does O'Reilly have any other response to those he disagrees with besides them being on the "Far left"?
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) February 20, 2015
The Right Wing smells a new conspiracy - CBS edited Ted Cruz on Face The Nation with Bob Schieffer last Sunday. Apparently they didn't notice how Cruz was rambling on about Obamacare and denying that he was to blame for the government shutdown. Schieffer asked him at least three times to clarify his statements before he cut to another guest. But no one on the far right will ever let go of a good conspiracy theory! Maybe Cruz can come back to Face the Nation and ramble crazy again, perhaps during the GOP Primary - please proceed, Senator.
Apart from being the victim of Schieffer’s accusations that the Tea Party senator was to blame for the shutdown, it also appears that Mr. Cruz was the victim of editing by CBS.
~ Newsbusters
UGH: CBS Face the Nation cuts out RED MEAT portion of Ted Cruz interview, exposing OBAMA’S ABUSE OF POWER
This morning on CBS’s Face the Nation, hosted by Bob Schieffer, almost a full minute from Ted Cruz’s interview, where he went after the president for his abuses of power, were completely cut from the interview. It looked rather abrupt when it happened and was fairly clear they edited the interview, but host Bob Schieffer never mentioned it nor apologized for it to the viewers which is pretty irresponsible to those watching it live or DVR’ing it.
~ The Right Scoop
CBS News Denies they Edited Cruz Unfairly:
This was not uncommon at all, this was a quick turnaround pre-tape. That just happened to be at the end so it was easy to trim for turnaround. And we had breaking news of the [Maryland mall] shooter's name ... We had already gone overtime, that is pretty much the gist of it. ~ CBS Spokesperson via Media Matters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They cut it out bc they couldn't stand to hear anything negative about their Messiah
~ Phillycon on Right Scoop
Shades of fat Katie Couric leaving the best parts of the Palin interview on the cutting room floor!
~ Guest on Right Scoop
Wow, what a class a A-hole. What a bunch of A-holes. CBS (Certified Bull Shite company) The whole bunch of them CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC and all of the rag newspapers ought to be forced to look every American in the eyes and confess their shameless lying to America. After wards they should be publically caned.
~ armyvet10 on Right Scoop
Apparently its tough for an old turd like Schieffer to contain their contempt.
Good - let the nation see the bias in all of its partisan ugliness.
~ Skeeter on Free Republic
Shame On You @CBSNews for editing out Ted Cruz's scathing indictment of Obama's abuse of power on Face The Nation..More like Dupe The Nation
— #BENGHAZI Watch Dog (@DanMartin_cards) January 28, 2014
Face The Nation is such a junk show. Droopy won't led Ted Cruz talk issues, but Chuck U. Schumer can ramble about absolutely nothing.
— Country Strong (@CountryLife87) January 26, 2014
Senator Ted Cruz R-Texas is using the old Romney Etch-A-Sketch Trick and a severe case of Romnesia to say that he had nothing to do with the Government Shutdown last year.
Bob Schieffer of CBS called him out several times on Face the Nation this past Sunday, laughing at him in disbelief, but Cruz is sticking to his wacko bird story. The Senator has apparently forgotten all his own threats to shut down the government if Obama didn't "repeal Obamacare" as well as his "Green Eggs and Ham" filibuster to stop the vote on the budget agreement. It's the epitomy of childish behavior to not own what really happened, but believe that in this age of YouTube and Google anyone can rewrite history so soon after it happened. Just look at how many posts we wrote last fall here on Snark Amendment about Cruz's Filibuster of the Budget and the subsequent Shutdown, and this is an incomplete list but ridiculously long. On just one blog, so multiply this list by hundreds of thousands out on the interwebs.
SCHIEFFER: . . . Let me ask you this, you became a celebrity when you led the drive to shut down the government over Obamacare. But afterward your fellow Republicans said you led them over a cliff. Can you conceive of any situation in which you would do that again, try to shut down the government in exchange or in demand for some action by the president?
CRUZ: Well, Bob, with all due respect I don't agree with the premise of your question. Throughout the government shut down I opposed a government shutdown. I said we shouldn't shut the government down, I think it was a mistake that President Obama and the Democrats shut the government down this fall. The reason they did so, is that President Obama dug in and said he wouldn't compromise, he wouldn't negotiate.
In fact, I went to one of the most surreal meetings I've ever been at where President Obama invited all the senate Republicans to go up to the White House. He sat us in a room -- this is in the middle of the shut down -- and he said I invited you here to tell you I will not negotiate, I will not compromise on anything. That's why we had a shut down.
That was a mistake.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SCHIEFFER: All right, let me go back to one thing. And the question I asked you was, would you ever conceive of threatening to shut down the government again?
CRUZ: Well, as I said I didn't threaten to shut down the government the last time. I don't think we should ever shut down the government. I repeatedly voted to fund the federal government. SCHIEFFER: Senator, if you didn't threaten the shut down the government who was it that did? But we'll go on to something... CRUZ: It was Harry Reid and President Obama.
Bob, look, I understand that the White House said over and over again the shut down is the Republicans fault. And I understand, that's what you're repeating. But the reality is, I voted over and over again to fund the federal government and the reason we had a shut down -- look, the Democrats were very candid. I know they told you, they said, we think the shut down benefits us politically. Right now the Democrats are telling you that they want another shut down, because they think it benefits them politically.
Why is it hard to understand that they forced the shut down when they think it benefits them politically.
SCHIEFFER: Senator, I know what Republicans were telling me like John Boehner who said this was the disaster and never again.
Cruz is recasting his ineptitude as innocence. He’s asking you to believe that because the shutdown hurt Republicans politically, he never wanted it. He wants you to follow his logic instead of researching what he actually did. Logic is useful, but it’s not enough. Always check the record.
~ William Saletan on Salon
. . . the meeting Cruz refers to happened after the government shutdown had taken effect. Obama didn’t call up the Senate in advance to tell them he wouldn’t deal. He told them he wouldn’t deal on Obamacare. Funding of the federal government legislation could be passed without involving healthcare.
This meeting happened after Cruz and his cronies had already made their move to halt the government. Not before. Had Cruz and his Tea Party comrades negotiated the budget deal in good faith there would never been a necessity for Obama to call a meeting and clarify his position on his signature legislation. But after they committed to their strategy Obama let them know discreetly that their posturing would not bring him to the negotiating table
~ Greg Miller on Addicting Info
None of this makes a lick of sense, but by all appearances, being sensible isn’t the goal. For Cruz, coherence is irrelevant; what matters is to capture the Republican id – these are talking points intended to convey primal impulses, free of niceties such as reason.
At a certain level, Cruz is arguably insulting conservatives by preying on their worst instincts, presenting them with nonsense he probably knows to be false, but so long as he’s rewarded for it, Cruz will almost certainly keep these tactics going indefinitely.
~ Steve Benen on Maddow Blog
.@TPM who knew @tedcruz is a comedian! That's a good one, Senator Cruz!
