During the first “All-Star Panel” segment on Tuesday’s Special Report, Fox News Channel (FNC) contributor Charles Krauthammer offered blistering criticisms of Senate Democrats for their support of the Iran deal along with Senate Republicans for not invoking the nuclear option by introducing a resolution disapproving of the deal.
Leaving no stone unturned, Krauthammer first tore into the Democrats for filibustering the resolution of disapproval that could have future implications if passed: “[T]he whole idea of any of this is to get on the record for the future what the vote is on this treaty, which will live for a very long time, so that any future president will have an easier time getting out of it to delegitimize it.”
Krauthammer then switched over to hitting the Republicans and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for tactics that he ruled have not been “the wisest move” in simply pushing for Democrats to go “on the record for something involving Israel” when he should instead:
Introduce an amendment that says what the House bill does that the treaty was never submitted as required because it didn’t have all the documents, meaning the secret IAEA deals, which allow Iran to inspect itself. In the absence of that, it was never transmitted an thus there’s no clock running out on this.
Continuing to unload on the Senate GOP, the syndicated columnist wondered why McConnell won’t employ the same Senate procedural moves that Harry Reid once used:
The other thing I would say is why allow the Democrats to filibuster at all? Apply the nuclear option. Harry Reid applied it so he could three – two or three judicial appointment through the Second Circuit, then why not do it over the most important treaty of our time. There are a lot of options here. They will only expose the Democrats.
Fellow panelist Mara Liasson of National Public Radio followed by toting the Democratic line that they don’t view the Iran deal as “a voting issue” despite the reality that a large majority of Americans oppose the deal. In addition, she touted the claim that the Obama admistration has submitted the proper documents pertaining to the deal and the so-called side deals “are not theirs to disclose.”
<<<Click on the image below to help us with your tax-deductible gift>>>
<<<Thank you for your support!>>>
On that second point, Krauthammer interjected with pure disgust, quipping that such a claim is “ridiculous” because the United States “sit[s] under the committee of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency)” and “[e]very country has a right to ban document itself and we have not done that.”
A few moments later, Krauthammer went on another tear against Democrats engaging in “the definition of playing politics” with filibustering the Iran deal resolution for what he argued is “the most important agreement of our generation [and] it will be with us for decades.”
When Liasson and host Bret Baier tried to get a word in, Krauthammer cut them off and continued his stinging critique of deal supporters:
How can you read an agreement and come out as a true believer where Iran inspects itself in Parcin, where you have a one-month delay in inspections, where you giving them $100 billion in advance after having said, we're not going to lift the sanctions immediately have to be shown.
The relevant portions of the transcript from FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier on September 15 can be found below.
FNC’s Special Report with Bret Baier
September 15, 2015
6:40 p.m. Eastern
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Look, the whole idea of any of this is to get on the record for the future what the vote is on this treaty, which will live for a very long time, so that any future president will have an easier time getting out of it to delegitimize it. The Democrats want to hide that by noting having a vote. That’s why they are filibustering. McConnell wants to put them on the record for something involving Israel. I don’t think that’s the wisest move. You want to put them on the record? Introduce an amendment that says what the House bill does that the treaty was never submitted as required because it didn’t have all the documents, meaning the secret IAEA deals, which allow Iran to inspect itself. In the absence of that, it was never transmitted an thus there’s no clock running out on this. The other thing I would say is why allow the Democrats to filibuster at all? Apply the nuclear option. Harry Reid applied it so he could three – two or three judicial appointment through the Second Circuit, then why not do it over the most important treaty of our time. There are a lot of options here. They will only expose the Democrats. They would only delegitimize the deal, but that’s going to be important after Obama is gone.
BAIER: Senator Murphy says it’s not right to play politics here, but there’s politics in all of this, Mara. If you look at polls, it’s upside on this Iran deal.
MARA LIASSON: It’s upside on this deal. Yet, the Democrats were firm and they kept the number they needed to filibuster this. Not just to uphold a veto, that was the first bar, but they went even further and a lot of Democrats I talked to say this might be unpopular in polls, but it's not a voting issue. In other words, it's not going to motivate people to vote against you. Trade, on the other hand, is for Democrats. So, they feel pretty safe on this. The interesting is this isn't a traety. If it was, it would have taken 67 votes in the Senate. It's not technically a treaty and I don't know what the Democrats are going to do to counter this. Maybe say Saudi Arabia should recognize Israel, but I do know that the White House they say they have submitted everything. The documents from the IAEA are not theirs to disclose.
KRAUTHAMMER: Oh, that's ridiculous.
LIASSON: That's what they say.
KRAUTHAMMER: We sit under the executive committee of the IAEA. Every country has a right to ban document itself and we have not done that.
(....)
KRAUTHAMMER: One point. You said earlier that Democrats aren’t worried about this because it’s not a voting issue. That’s the definition of playing politics. Here’s the most important agreement of our generation, it will be with us for decades and you’re telling me that the Democrats are calculating it's okay to support it even though it's going to be a catastrophe for the country because it's not --
LIASSON: No, they’re not believing it’s going to be a catastrophe for our country.
BAIER: True believers,
KRAUTHAMMER: Yeah, true believers, all of them? How can you read an agreement and come out as a true believer where Iran inspects itself in Parcin, where you have a one-month delay in inspections, where you giving them $100 billion in advance after having said, we're not going to lift the sanctions immediately have to be shown. We’ll bring what North Korea is doing to its deal, which we did, Wendy Sherman and others wanted to negotiate the Iran deal and negotiated in the 90s, throwing it out, trashing it, 20 years later, recurring now. No, I'll believe that some of them do who are diluted, but I agree with you. For a majority of them, the calculation is it won't cost me my seat. I go with the President. That's a political vote.
