Fox Host: The Government Has To "Share Some Blame" For The Murder Of San Francisco Woman

From the September 2 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:Previously: Fox Host: "The President, Himself, Has Blood On His Hands" Due To His Federal Immigration Policies Fox & Friends' Doocy: "Sadly, People Are Murdered All The Time By Illegals" Right-Wing Media Use Murder Of San Francisco Woman To Defend Trump's Immigrant Smear

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 11:42 am

Fox Host Exploits European Migrant Crisis To Fearmonger About Terrorists Entering The U.S.

Fox News' Pete Hegesth exploited the migrant crisis in Europe in order to stoke fears that terrorists may now be able to cross the "porous borders" into the United States. The European Union is facing the "Continent's largest mass migration since the end of World War II" as the region grapples with how to address thousands of asylum seekers migrating "mostly from the Middle East and Northern Africa," reports The New York Times. Hegseth suggested the influx of asylum seekers could "leave an opening for terrorists." From the September 2 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends: PETE HEGSETH: So you've got a lot of migrants leaving because of the violence, innocent men, women, and children fleeing the violence. But does it not leave an opening for terrorists? Those to blend in inside them. Through a pipeline to either get to the Europe -- get to Europe or the United States? SYLVIA LONGMIRE: Sure. It's something that we're always concerned about. We're worried about any kind of porous borders, any kind of openings and people that can blend in. One thing that you really have to remember though is, what is the path of least resistance for terrorist organizations that have the means to find and recruit people that have no criminal history, that can obtain real ID's or really really good fraudulent ID's, and also real travel documents? Right now, the path of least resistance is for these terrorists to either to fly into Europe, come in by rail, and into the United States, either fly into our airports or even cross the border from Canada on a car. So you have to take a look at what's the easiest way for them to get here right now. Crossing the border from Mexico may be a little too dangerous and too difficult for them right now.  HEGSETH: Sure, so legitimate means through flights and others -- certainly a pipeline. We've also heard, though, Hezbollah has a lot of roots in Latin America. Could an organization like this take advantage of that -- the chaos around the world, to say 'hey, there's porous borders still, in light of that, we're gonna drive a few more people in?'  LONGMIRE: Sure, and we know that Hezbollah's had a presence here in the United States for a very long time. We know that they've come through Mexico, particularly through Tijuana, and they have settled here selling fake purses, fake cigarettes, fake shoes to raise money to send back home to support their cause. So of course that's always a concern. The main thing that we want to focus on is how do we stop operational terrorists, those who are coming here to blow things up. How do we identify those, separate those from real refugees and make sure that they don't come into the country? HEGSETH: How do you do that? How do you separate them out? LONGMIRE: Intelligence right now is the best way. And that's where we really have to focus our efforts on. Whether it's covert operations, whether it's finding really really good human sources, sadly the budgets for those kinds of operations have been dramatically cut in the last few years, especially under the current administration. So I think that's where we need to focus our efforts. HEGSETH: Ambassador John Bolton had a column at FoxNews.com yesterday talking about chaos as the cause. Is chaos in the Middle East, the fact that the lid seems to be off it, is that the primary cause for this insecurity and where does it stop? LONGMIRE: Sure, and we see that -- we had our own border surge, as you well know, last summer because of the chaos and the criminal activity going on in Central America, particularly in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. Any time that you have any instability, whether it's in Latin America, whether it's the Middle East, you're going to see people who are fleeing to other parts of the world or other regions that are close by in order to find that kind of safety and security. Whether or not we can or should play a role in stabilizing those regions, that's kind of a subjective question. But that's the result of any kind of political, government, criminal instability and especially if there's some kind of Islamist presence in those regions. 

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 10:22 am

NBC's Nightly News Highlights "The Real Threat Of A Climate-Caused American Refugee Crisis"

From the September 1 edition of NBC's Nightly News:Related: Native Alaskan Villagers May Become the First U.S. Climate Refugees Previously: NBC's Nightly News Explains Role Of Climate Change In Texas "Weather Whiplash" NBC Hits Home On Climate Change Special NBC Shows How To Report On The Economic Costs Of Climate Change STUDY: How Broadcast Networks Covered Climate Change In 2014

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 10:12 am

On CNN's New Day , General Wesley Clark Debunks Conservative Media's False Comparison Of Hillary Clinton's Email Use To David Petraeus

From the September 2 edition of CNN's New Day: ALISYN CAMEROTA: You said people are looking for clean, clear answers, and that leads to the next question about Hillary Clinton. How big of a deal do you think it is, this investigation into her e-mails? CLARK: Well, I think it's a great political boon to the Republicans. But if you ask is there any real substance to this issue, the answer is don't think so. All of us who have been in government and especially those who have worked at high levels and seen the interplay between the various intelligence agencies, the Pentagon and the State Department, know there's a lot of, let's call it slack in the system. There are people who say things, refer to things, send e-mails, have telephone conversations, that if you went strictly by the guidelines and tracked it back afterwards, you'd say well, he shouldn't say that because that could be classified. But people say things in a way, and some of this stuff got into Hillary's e-mail system. CAMEROTA: Yeah.CLARK: And it wasn't classified at the time. It wasn't marked classified. And she would never have tried to use that system to handle classified data. But when you go back and look at it, there's some junior person who says, your responsibility is you tell us if this could have been classified. Of course they're going to say, oh, that could be classified.CAMERTOA: Because you know, General --CLARK: There's just a lot of fluff in this.CAMEROTA: You're an interesting person to talk to about this, because so many people say General Petraeus lost his standing and was, you know, investigated and prosecuted over this very same thing. I mean, you know both sides of it, from the military and from being a supporter, as you are, of Hillary Clinton. How can you say there's nothing there when the investigation isn't done yet? CLARK: Well, because the two circumstances are entirely different. Now, General Petraeus had a great military career. He was an outstanding director of the Central Intelligence Agency by all reports. However, what he did was put together a collection of classified documents, highly sensitive documents that were marked with classification and delivered them to a writer, someone he was involved with personally. And he did that intentionally. He then attempted to conceal that. This is totally different. From people in the normal course of the day e-mailing the secretary of state and saying, are you going to be able to make the dinner tonight, and, what about the issue with the tariffs on the gefilte fish and things like this. It's entirely different. There's just no connection to this. Previously: Intelligence Experts Debunk Speculation That Hillary Clinton Could Face Criminal Action For Email Use Conservative Media's Fact-Challenged Comparison Between David Petraeus And Hillary Clinton Prosecutor Who Led Conviction Of Petraeus: Comparison With Hillary Clinton's Email Use "Has No Merit"

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 10:04 am

NRA Host Addresses His Warning To Parents Of Slain Virginia Journalists To Not "Become So Emotional"

Colion Noir, a commentator and web series host for the National Rifle Association (NRA), addressed his widely criticized claim that the parents of slain journalists Alison Parker and Adam Ward should not "become so emotional" in response to the fatal shooting of their children so as to misdirect their "grief-inspired advocacy." In an interview with Lynchburg, Virginia ABC affiliate station WSET, Noir said that as a gun rights activist he felt compelled to respond to Andy Parker, who said following the killing of his daughter that he would make it his "mission in life" to get stronger gun laws passed. Noir told WSET, "Let's be very clear about something. The father has projected himself into this conversation, with much vigor. So I am addressing the idea and am hyper-focused on the firearm." The NRA and Noir have been criticized in the wake of an August 30 video posted by Noir where he told the parents of Parker and Ward that "sometimes in a fight we can become so emotional everyone and thing starts looking like the enemy, even if they're there to help us." WSET reported that Noir's claims are "causing quite the controversy online." The NRA often attacks calls for stronger gun calls by claiming such advocacy is based on emotion rather than logic, despite consensus among academic researchers on gun violence that stronger gun laws help reduce homicide. More from WSET on Noir's "warning for the grieving parents of Parker and Ward": On the other side of the conversation is NRA Commentator Colion Noir. "Turning this murder into a gun control dog and pony show minutes after the shooting, because you can't make sense of what just happened, is ridiculous" said Colion Noir on a Youtube video. Noir uploaded this Youtube video on Sunday... with a warning for the grieving parents of Parker and Ward. "Sometimes in a fight we can become so emotional everyone and everything starts looking like the enemy, even if they are there to help us" said Noir. The video has gotten more than 54-thousand views, but Noir says he almost opted out of making it. "From the NRA perspective, if they don't say anything they are considered cold and callous, if they say something immediately then they are considered capitalizing off of a tragedy" said Noir. Noir expresses his condolences to the families of Ward and Parker in the video, but says as a gun rights advocate he felt the need to address Parker's comments. "Let's be very clear about something. The father has projected himself into this conversation, with much vigor. So I am addressing the idea and am hyper-focused on the firearm" said Noir. The Parkers are already reaching out to leading gun control advocates including Astronaut Mark Kelly and Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 9:59 am

Fox Host Stokes Fears That Obama May Send "Terrorist Prisoners To Your Town"

From the September 2 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:Related: Military Team Surveys U.S. Sites for Potential Guantanamo Bay Transfers Previously: Fox News Pushes GOP Horror Story Of Obama Setting Gitmo Terrorists Loose In U.S. The Flawed Recidivism Statistic Fox Personalities Are Using To Criticize Release Of Guantanamo Detainees Fox Dismisses Experts' Conclusion That Gitmo's Existence Helps Terrorists' Causes Top Five Gitmo Falsehoods

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 9:58 am

Two Recent Reports On Renewable Energy Media Could Talk About Instead Of Solyndra

Two recent major analyses project a positive outlook for renewable energy, bolstering President Obama's recent initiative to implement more clean energy. But the media have largely ignored these reports -- and conservative media have instead seized upon an Inspector General report on Solyndra to cast doom on the future of renewable energy. In July, the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released a report examining and applying methods for estimating the current and future economic potential of domestic renewable energy. According to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), which recently crunched the numbers, NREL's analysis shows that renewable energy sources have the potential to supply anywhere from "35 percent to as much as 10 times the nation's current power needs." As UCS noted, NREL found that solar and wind power have the greatest economic potential. On August 31, a joint report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) found that renewable energy sources "can produce electricity at close to or even below the cost of new fossil fuel-based power stations." The report stated that over the past five years, there has been a "significant drop in the price of solar and wind generation costs, especially for solar photovoltaic (PV) installations, as a result of sustained technological progress." In the meantime, on August 24, President Obama announced new executive actions intended to support renewable energy and encourage energy efficiency in households nationwide. The actions included supporting projects to improve solar panel energy production, bringing solar energy to more homes, making it easier for residents to invest in clean energy technologies, and making $1 billion in additional loan guarantee authority available for clean energy ventures. As expected, conservative media have been seizing upon defunct solar company Solyndra -- which received funding from the same loan guarantee program before going bankrupt -- to dismiss the president's clean energy actions and renewables as a whole. This time, Solyndra mentions did not come out of the blue -- but they still don't work to cast doubt current or future renewable energy policies. The Department of Energy's (DOE) Inspector General released a report on August 24 finding that Solyndra officials misled DOE officials to receive its loan. The report found that DOE officials felt pressured to approve the loan, but the IG report stated that "the actions of the Solyndra officials were at the heart of this matter, and they effectively undermined the Department's efforts to manage the loan guarantee process." Further, a 2014 DOE audit found that the department has sufficiently implemented recommendations to improve oversight and management of the program.   But the new Solyndra report should not be used to cast doubt on the future of renewable energy as a whole. Conservative media may never stop talking about Solyndra to smear other clean energy programs. But problematic Solyndra reporting has not been limited to the right-wing; mainstream media also have a history of uncritically reporting inaccuracies and airing one-sided coverage. Hopefully, in coverage of Obama's clean energy actions, media will discuss the prominent forward-looking reports, which unequivocally show a bright future for renewable energy. Image at the top via Flickr Creative Commons. 

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 9:38 am

Media Debunk False Comparison Of Hillary Clinton's Emails To Former CIA Director's Improper Access Of Classified Materials

News outlets are calling out a misleading conservative media claim that Hillary Clinton's email use mirrors the improper acts of former CIA Director John Deutch, who intentionally created and stored top secret material on unsecure systems. By contrast, "State Department officials say they don't believe that emails [Clinton] sent or received included material classified at the time," which is why experts conclude the Deutch case does not "fit[] the fact pattern with the Clinton e-mails."News Outlets Explain That Clinton's Permitted Email Use Is Not Comparable To Deutch's Improper Access Of Classified Information Washington Post's David Ignatius: Unlike Clinton, Deutch Knowingly Used An Unsecured CIA Computer To Access Classified Information Improperly At Home. Washington Post's David Ignatius explained on August 27 that Deutch's use of "an unsecured CIA computer at his home to improperly access classified material" does not "fit[] the fact pattern with the Clinton emails," despite the fact they've been "cited as parallels": Potential criminal violations arise when officials knowingly disseminate documents marked as classified to unauthorized officials or on unclassified systems, or otherwise misuse classified materials. That happened in two cases involving former CIA directors that are cited as parallels for the Clinton e-mail issue, but are quite different. John Deutch was pardoned in 2001 for using an unsecured CIA computer at his home to improperly access classified material; he reportedly had been prepared to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. David Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in April for "knowingly" removing classified documents from authorized locations and retaining them at "unauthorized locations." Neither case fits the fact pattern with the Clinton e-mails. [The Washington Post, 8/27/15] Associated Press: Unlike Deutch, There Is No Evidence That Clinton Improperly Stored Indisputably Classified Emails. The Associated Press' Ken Dilanian wrote on August 31 that contrary to Deutch's improper handling of highly classified material, "there is no evidence of emails stored in Hillary Clinton's private server bearing classified markings" or being self-evidently classified "whether marked or not": Some Republicans, including leading GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, have called Clinton's actions criminal and compared her situation to that of David Petraeus ... Others have cited the case of another past CIA chief, John Deutch, who took highly classified material home.  But in both of those cases, no one disputed that the information was highly classified and in many cases top secret. Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor; Deutch was pardoned by President Bill Clinton.  By contrast, there is no evidence of emails stored in Hillary Clinton's private server bearing classified markings. State Department officials say they don't believe that emails she sent or received included material classified at the time. And even if other government officials dispute that assertion, it is extremely difficult to prove anyone knowingly mishandled secrets. [...] A case would be possible if material emerges that is so sensitive Clinton must have known it was highly classified, whether marked or not, McAdoo said. But no such email has surfaced. And among the thousands of documents made public, nothing appears near the magnitude of the Top Secret material Petraeus and Deutch mishandled. [Associated Press, 8/31/15]  Deutch Intentionally Created And Mishandled Classified Information, A Stark Contrast To Clinton's Approved Use Of Personal Email Deutch "Intentionally Created The Most Sensitive Of Documents On Computers Configured For Unclassified Use." The Inspector General for the CIA concluded in 2000 that Deutch intentionally placed classified material he created on personal computers not configured for classified use. As explained by the IG, "Deutch intentionally processed on those computers large volumes of highly classified information to include Top Secret Codeword material": 87. (U/ /FOUO) During his tenure as DCI, Deutch said that he intentionally created the most sensitive of documents on computers configured for unclassified use. Deutch stated that if these documents were created on the classified CIA computer network, CIA officials might access the system at night and inappropriately review the information. Deutch said that he had not spent a significant amount of time thinking about computer security issues. 231. (U/ /FOUO) Throughout his tenure as DCI, Deutch intentionally processed on those computers large volumes of highly classified information to include Top Secret Codeword material. ["Improper Handling of Classified Information by John M. Deutch," Central Intelligence Agency Inspector General, 2/18/00]  But Conservative Media Have Repeatedly Likened Clinton's Email Use To Deutch's Improper Mishandling Of Classified Material  National Review Likens Clinton's Email Use To Deutch's Access Of "Classified Material On Unsecured Home Computers." National Review likened Clinton's email use to Deutch, writing "Perhaps [Clinton has] forgotten" the "presidential pardon to former CIA director John Deutch" for "keeping classified material on unsecured home computers":  Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton insists she did nothing wrong by running all of her government communications, including classified material, through her unsecured, home-brewed computer server. Perhaps she's forgotten one of her husband's final acts in the Oval Office: issuing a presidential pardon to former CIA director John Deutch. Deutch's offense? Keeping classified material on unsecured home computers. [National Review, 8/21/15]  Fox's Dana Perino Likens Clinton To Deutch Because "He Had Classified Information On His Home Server." On the August 21 edition of Fox News' The Five, co-host Dana Perino compared Clinton to Deutch and insinuated she should be convicted of a crime just as Deutch nearly was: PERINO: But why would her husband -- Jedediah, Bill Clinton, as president, had to actually pardon John Deutch from the CIA. Why? Because he had classified information on his home server. JEDEDIAH BILA: That's exactly right. PERINO: Why do you pardon somebody? You don't pardon them for burping at the table. You pardon them because they were going to be convicted of a crime. [Fox News, The Five, 8/21/15] Marc Thiessen: Deutch Case Represents An "Ominous Precedent For Hillary Clinton." In an August 24 Washington Post opinion article, columnist and Fox News contributor Marc Thiessen wrote that Deutch's case represents an "ominous precedent for Hillary Clinton," asserting, "The parallels between the Deutch and Clinton cases suggest that come January 2017, instead of planning her presidential transition, Clinton may find herself lobbying for a last-minute pardon of her own": Former CIA director John Deutch was also found to have stored classified documents -- including top-secret intelligence -- on computers in his homes in Bethesda and Belmont, Mass., leading to an investigation by the CIA inspector general and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. Deutch was stripped of his security clearance and ended up reaching a plea agreement admitting to his crimes -- but was saved by a last-minute pardon from none other than . . . President Bill Clinton. The parallels between the Deutch and Clinton cases suggest that come January 2017, instead of planning her presidential transition, Clinton may find herself lobbying for a last-minute pardon of her own.  [...]  Another parallel with Clinton: The inspector general found that Deutch had used the same unclassified computers to process both classified information and conduct personal business, which made the "classified information residing on Deutch's computers . . . vulnerable to possible electronic access and exploitation." [The Washington Post, 8/24/15] Wall Street Journal's Mary Kissel: Deutch Was "Held To Account For Less" Than Clinton's Actions. On the August 23 edition of Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures, Mary Kissel, a member of The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, claimed Deutch was "held to account for less than" Clinton's use of a personal email: ALAN COLMES: There's a server in the State Department, state.gov, which is also not secured. There's secure and non-secure within State. [CROSSTALK] COLMES: The same issues could appear if you were using a State Department server. We've seen hacking at the Pentagon. She might have been safer on a private server.    [...]  KISSEL: Well, David Petraeus and John Deutch and Sandy Berger were held to account for less than this. COLMES: She didn't put stuff in a sock and sneak it out of a room like Sandy Berger. KISSEL: This is worse. [Fox News, Sunday Morning Futures, 8/23/15]

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 8:37 am

"Gender Bender": The Troubling Way Fox & Friends Discusses A Transgender Student's Use Of Her High School Girls' Locker Room

Fox News used an on-screen graphic reading "Gender Bender," to highlight protests against a transgender student's use of the girls' locker room at her high school, and emphasized the protesters' claims that she "is still physically a male." Right-wing media have consistently spread myths about transgender-inclusive bathrooms that experts and school districts have debunked. From the September 2 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

Posted by on 2 September 2015 | 8:17 am

Fox's Tamara Holder: Deceptively Edited Planned Parenthood Videos Are "A Violation Of Public Trust"

From the September 1 edition of Fox News' Hannity:Previously:  A Comprehensive Guide To The Deceptively-Edited Videos Used Against Planned Parenthood Independent Analysis Finds Evidence of "Manipulation" In Undercover Planned Parenthood Videos Media Matters Calls On Center For Medical Progress To Release Full, Unedited Source Footage Of Anti-Planned Parenthood Smear Videos

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 10:26 am

Fox's Katie Pavlich Says BLM Is A "Movement That Promotes The Execution Of Police Officers"

From the September 1 edition of Fox News' The Kelly File:Previously: Criminology Professor Explains To Bill O'Reilly Why It's Wrong To Link BLM To Murders Of Police Officers Fox's Bill O'Reilly Says Black Lives Matter Is A "Hate Group" That Wants Police Officers Dead Fox's Kimberly Guilfoyle On Black Lives Matter: "Their Agenda Is It's OK To Go Ahead And Kill Cops"

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 9:18 am

Criminology Professor Explains To Bill O'Reilly Why It's Wrong To Link BLM To Murders Of Police Officers

From the September 1 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:Previously: Fox's Bill O'Reilly Says Black Lives Matter Is A "Hate Group" That Wants Police Officers Dead Fox Host Demands Forcible Shutdown Of Black Lives Matter Protests: "People Are Drunk On Rights In This Country" Fox News Graphic Calls Black Lives Matter The "'Murder' Movement"

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 8:25 am

Fox's Shannon Bream Acknowledges Planned Parenthood Smear Videos Show Legal Activity

Many media outlets have already reported that the videos show no illegal behavior by, or on behalf of, Planned Parenthood. From the September 1 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier:Previously: A Comprehensive Guide To The Deceptively-Edited Videos Used Against Planned Parenthood Fox News To Air Hour-Long Special In Support Of CMP's Smear Campaign Against Planned Parenthood Fox Cites A For-Profit Company's Website To Falsely Suggest Illegal Activity At Planned Parenthood

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 6:32 am

On Special Report , A Fox News Correspondent Denies Scientific Consensus On Human-Induced Climate Change

From the September 1 edition of Fox News' Special Report With Bret Baier:Previously: Fox News Host Attacks Pope Francis For Addressing Climate Change Fox Attacks Obama For Calling Climate Change An Immediate National Security Threat Climate Change Poses Huge Challenge To The Coast Guard, But Fox News Would Rather Dismiss It

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 6:26 am

Media Hype Poll Showing Public Disapproval Of Iran Deal But Ignore Polls That Show Majority Support When Respondents Hear Details

Media outlets are playing up the significance of a new poll that found a majority of Americans opposed to a deal recently signed by the U.S. and major world powers with Iran, believing it will make the world "less safe." But that poll gave respondents no information about the deal, while other more comprehensive polls have found  that when respondents are actually informed about the terms of the deal, a majority support it.Media Hype Quinnipiac Poll Finding Majority Of Americans Oppose Iran Deal, Believe It Will Make The World "Less Safe" Wash. Post: "The Iran Deal Is Unpopular." In a September 1 article, The Washington Post reported on a Quinnipiac survey of 1,563 registered voters taken August 20-25 that suggests that the agreement reached by the U.S. and world powers with Iran to limit that country's nuclear program is unpopular with voters. According to the Post: House and Senate Democrats appear to get little politically, at least in the near term, out of going on the record for or against the Iran deal -- except yet another chance to take one for the team. A Monday Quinnipiac University poll revealed that just 25 percent of Americans support the deal, while 55 percent oppose it, yet Obama is close to his magic number of 34 in the Senate to save the deal from Republicans in Congress. [The Washington Post, 9/1/15] Fox News' MacCallum: 56 Percent Believe The Deal Would Make The World Less Safe. On the September 1 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, host Martha MacCallum cited the Quinnipiac poll finding that 56 percent of respondents believe the nuclear deal with Iran would make the world less safe: GEN. JACK KEANE: Yeah, I totally agree with the Cheneys here, Martha. The most stunning revelation in this nuclear deal is the thing that they just put their finger on. The entire nuclear infrastructure stays in place, except for some significant reductions of centrifuges and enriched uranium. But in 10 years, they can activate those centrifuges and begin to enrich uranium again with some restrictions. In 15 years, those restrictions are entirely removed and Iran has a clear pathway to a nuclear weapon, and as the Cheneys suggest, they wouldn't stop with one weapon, it would actually be a nuclear arsenal. I mean, that is absolutely extraordinary that that's part of this framework agreement. And the president's thesis is he's blocking Iran from having a weapon when actually he's providing a pathway to that weapon. MARTHA MACCALLUM: Well, he has said he believes that it's exactly the opposite. But a poll of the American people shows that they are in agreement more with the Cheneys, I guess, and with you on this one. Do you think the nuclear deal with Iran is going to make the world safer? And 56 percent say that they believe that it will make the world less safe. And you also referenced something written by Henry Kissinger that is quite surprising. Tell everybody about that, general. KEANE: Well, when you posit the fact that Iran will eventually have a weapon, what choice do Iran's enemies in the region have when that begins to take place? Clearly they have to protect themselves. Iran is seeking regional domination and it's had a measure of success in doing it so far. So they will -- they will arm themselves. They will at least begin with a nuclear threshold and eventually a nuclear weapon. What Henry Kissinger has said, Iran having a nuclear weapon is the most dangerous threat to civilization he has seen in his lifetime, to include Nazism and communism, because it will lead to what we're just talking about -- nuclear proliferation in the region -- very volatile, dynamic region, which would likely lead, in Dr. Kissinger's mind, to the first ever nuclear exchange. And that is catastrophic. [Fox News, America's Newsroom, 9/1/15] Quinnipiac Poll Asked Respondents Simplistic Questions About The Deal, Did Not Provide Details Of Its Terms Or History Quinnipiac Polls Respondents On Simple Questions. From the results of Quinnipiac's poll: [Quinnipiac University, 8/31/15] A More Detailed Poll Found That A Majority Of Americans Support The Iran Deal When They Know More About Its Terms Poll That Actually Explained The Deal Finds Majority Support. A poll conducted by the University of Maryland's Center for International and Security Studies found that when respondents were provided with background information about the terms of the deal, a majority favored congressional approval: Citizen Cabinet surveys are not meant to simply be another poll. Rather the goal is to find out what a representative panel of registered voters recommends when they are given a briefing and hear arguments for and against the key options. The process they go through is called a 'policymaking simulation,' in that the goal is to put the respondent into the shoes of a policymaker. The content of the simulation is vetted with Congressional staffers and other experts to assure accuracy and balance. In the current Citizen Cabinet survey the simulation focused much more deeply on the terms of the deal, especially the terms that have been highly criticized by Members of Congress. Panelists were first briefed on the origins of the international dispute over Iran's nuclear program and the main issues during the negotiations and given a detailed summary of the agreement's main features. Then panelists evaluated a series of critiques--some general, some quite specific--prominent in the Congressional debate, and assessed a rebuttal offered for each. [...] After considering the various arguments and options, panelists reassessed the options separately. Approving of the deal was found slightly more acceptable or tolerable, and not approving of the deal slightly less so. Panelists were finally asked whether they would recommend that their Members of Congress approve of the deal. Those that did not recommend approval were offered other options. Ultimately 55% recommended approval, including 72% of Democrats, 61% of Independents and 33% of Republicans. Twenty three percent recommended ramping up sanctions, 14% seeking to renegotiate the deal, and 7% using military threats. [University of Maryland, September 2015] Approval Findings Mirror Results Of CNN Poll That Also Gave Respondents More Details CNN: Respondents Support Iran Deal When Provided With More Information About Terms. CNN asked half of the respondents to its poll a question that explained the agreement's "major restrictions on [Iran's] nuclear program" and provisions for "greater international inspection of its nuclear facilities." The other half of respondents were asked a question that provided no details about the deal but simply asked whether Congress should approve or reject it. CNN's poll found that 50 percent of respondents supported the deal when its details were provided. From the poll: [CNN/ORC International poll, August 13-16, 2015]

Posted by on 1 September 2015 | 5:35 am