On Monday, both CBS This Morning and NBC's Today seized on the same talking point that 2016 Republican candidates were "struggling" with questions about the Iraq war and that the issue "keeps tripping everybody up."
On This Morning, co-host Charlie Rose proclaimed: "Florida Senator Marco Rubio is the latest Republican presidential candidate to run into trouble defending the 2003 invasion of Iraq." The headline on screen read: "Struggling with Iraq: Rubio Challenged on Question over 2003 Invasion."
After playing a clip of Rubio's supposedly "struggling" with the topic in a Fox News Sunday interview, Rose turned to newly named Face the Nation moderator John Dickerson and wondered: "Why is this so difficult?" Dickerson replied:
It's difficult because Republicans and Marco Rubio in that interview does not want to say that the signature event of the last Republican president was a mistake. That's politically a problem....they don't want to say it's a mistake, they also have to deal with the reality of the fact that the vast majority of the country thinks that war was not worth it.
Fellow co-host Gayle King followed up: "It keeps tripping everybody up, John. What is the best way to answer that question?" Dickerson explained:
Well, I think the best way to answer it is what Marco Rubio tried to do, which is to go back to the moment and say that President Bush was faced with a difficult decision and he had to choose between two bad options. One was to do nothing and perhaps have Saddam Hussein coordinate with terrorists or do something to try to stop him.
Rose was baffled: "I don't understand why they have a hard time saying if we didn't know there were weapon of mass destructions there, we wouldn't have gone in. I think that's Hillary Clinton's position." If only CBS could interview Hillary Clinton to determine her actual stance on the issue.
Dickerson responded: "[Republicans] have a difficulty because the country's not with them on that question....they would be arguing a position that most of the country does not believe in, which is that all of this carnage was worth it just to get rid of Saddam Hussein."
Later in the 8 a.m. ET hour, in an interview with South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, co-host Norah O'Donnell declared: "Two of your fellow Republicans – Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio – have been asked about whether we should have gone into Iraq in the first place and some discussion about whether they stumbled that question....we heard [former Defense] Secretary [Robert] Gates say with Bob Schieffer yesterday he's not been very impressed by some of the foreign policy answers by some of the Republicans."
Moments later, Rose pushed the false notion that Rubio would have gone to war regardless of hindsight: "Marco Rubio couldn't reach that point, to say, 'Even if we – if we knew what we know now, then we wouldn't have gone into Iraq.'"
In reality, Rubio repeatedly said he would not have invaded Iraq knowing the weapons of mass destruction intelligence was incorrect.
On Today, co-host Savannah Guthrie announced: "The war in Iraq is still dominating the Republican presidential race. In the wake of Jeb Bush's fumbles last week, some of his rivals now getting grilled on that very same issue. Senator Marco Rubio had a fiery back and forth over whether the war in Iraq was a mistake."
Like This Morning, the headline on screen asserted: "GOP's Iraq Issue; Candidates Struggle in Wake of Jeb Comments."
Unlike This Morning, Guthrie actually explained the full Republican argument: "Rubio and all-but-declared candidate Scott Walker both say there's an important distinction between the information President Bush had at the time of that invasion and what we know now. Both arguing that had the President known the intel was false, he probably would not have invaded."
ABC's Good Morning America did not cover the topic on Monday.
While CBS and NBC fretted over whether or not Republicans would have invade Iraq 12 years ago, all three networks downplayed President Obama's responsibility for failures in the current war against ISIS.
Here is a full transcript of the May 18 coverage on This Morning:
7:10 AM ET
CHARLIE ROSE: Florida Senator Marco Rubio is the latest Republican presidential candidate to run into trouble defending the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It happened during a Sunday television interview.
[ON-SCREEN GRAPHIC: Struggling with Iraq: Rubio Challenged on Question over 2003 Invasion]
CHRIS WALLACE: Was it a mistake?
MARCO RUBIO: It was not a mistake for the president to decide to go into Iraq, because at the time he was-
WALLACE: I'm not asking you that. I'm asking you-
RUBIO: In hindsight. The world is a better place because Saddam Hussein is not there. But I wouldn’t characterize it-
WALLACE: So was it a mistake or not?
RUBIO: But I don't understand the question you’re asking because the President-
WALLACE: I'm asking you, knowing everything, as we sit here in 2015-
RUBIO: But that's not the way – a president cannot make a decision on what someone might know no the future.
WALLACE: But that's why I'm asking you. Was it a mistake?
RUBIO: It was not a mistake for the president to go into Iraq based on the information he was provided as president.
ROSE: CBS News Political Director John Dickerson, the future host of Face the Nation, is with us from Washington. John good morning.
JOHN DICKERSON: Good morning, Charlie.
ROSE: You've been watching politics for quite a while. Why is this so difficult?
DICKERSON: Well that was quite a trip around the mulberry bush. It's difficult because Republicans and Marco Rubio in that interview does not want to say that the signature event of the last Republican president was a mistake. That's politically a problem and it also leads then to the next question about the sacrifice and service of the people who were engaged in that effort. So they want to get past that but the problem is that they’re having difficulty because while they don't want to say it's a mistake, they also have to deal with the reality of the fact that the vast majority of the country thinks that war was not worth it. So they're trying to work that out and there having some difficulties with that.
GAYLE KING: It keeps tripping everybody up, John. What is the best way to answer that question?
DICKERSON: Well, I think the best way to answer it is what Marco Rubio tried to do, which is to go back to the moment and say that President Bush was faced with a difficult decision and he had to choose between two bad options. One was to do nothing and perhaps have Saddam Hussein coordinate with terrorists or do something to try to stop him. Again, I don't usually give advice to political candidates but in this case is to try to take people back in time. And that's what Marco Rubio tried to do. But his problem is his answers are intentioned when he looks back at the lessons learned from this war.
ROSE: Well, what's interesting about this John, as you know, is Dick Cheney has no problem saying even though even if we knew they did not have weapons of mass destruction, we should have gone ahead. The President says, "Look, I regret very much we had bad intelligence but sort of on balance it's good that Saddam is gone." I don't understand why they have a hard time saying if we didn't know there were weapon of mass destructions there, we wouldn't have gone in. I think that's Hillary Clinton's position.
DICKERSON: They have a difficulty because the country's not with them on that question. The country thinks it was, that means basically they would be arguing a position that most of the country does not believe in, which is that all of this carnage was worth it just to get rid of Saddam Hussein.
ROSE: So you're suggesting that in fact by saying what they're saying, that they're in tune with where the country is?
DICKERSON: That's right. And then they're trying to just move on to the next question which they'd like to be about this current president.
ROSE: Thank you, John.
