On Tuesday, CBS This Morning sounded like members of the Obama administration during an interview with Carly Fiorina as its hosts repeatedly defended the newly agreed upon Iranian nuclear deal from criticism.
Throughout the discussion with the Republican presidential candidate, co-hosts Charlie Rose, Gayle King and fill-in host Jeff Glor offered up White House talking points in support of the Iranian deal without once expressing any skepticism surrounding the controversial deal.
When the segment began Jeff Glor immediately touted “President Obama says this morning the deal is good for U.S. national security and reduces the chance of a Middle East war...The president welcomes upcoming debate in Congress but he says he will veto any bill that tries to block the agreement.”
When he introduced Fiorina, co-host Charlie Rose chose to not ask his guest a question about the nuclear deal but instead declared “the president announced a historic agreement and saying that it's much better than the alternative. And he will go about trying to explain to Congress all of the aspects of this.”
After Fiorina expressed skepticism over the value of the deal because “our Arab allies” say it will increase the likelinhood of a "nuclear arms race” Rose immediately challenged his guest as to “[w]hy do they think it makes an arms race more likely?”
Fiorina detailed how Iran has repeatedly demonstrated to be a dishonest player in the international world and have already tried to cheat on this deal, but once again Charlie Rose defended the Obama administration and used more White House talking points to promote the agreement:
But as the president said this is not about faith this is about verification and verification measures will prevent that and if, in fact, they do not work and if, in fact, Iran does not live up to the agreement, he is prepared to take action.
The Republican highlighted how “Iran has already cheated on sanctions and inspections regimes, so there is no real guarantee right now that they’re going to play fair” but Rose peddled yet another White House line that “ that’s the reason for the verification.”
Once again, Fiorina listed off the numerous instances in which Iran had deliberately tried to hide its nuclear ambitions from the rest of the world but this time co-host Gayle King jumped in to defend President Obama’s Iran deal:
He also pointed out that it has the backing of the international community. That must mean something about the strength of the deal.
As the interview wrapped up, the discussion turned to 2016 politics and Charlie Rose acted as a spokesman for Hillary Clinton when he promoted her recent economic speech. The CBS host then proceeded to ask Fiorina if she accepted the liberal premise of Hillary's economic agenda:
She made yesterday her vision of a fairness economy to close the income gap and she said “the defining economic challenge of our time is raising income so the vast majority of Americans whose wages have remained virtually stagnant for 15 years as the cost of housing, college, and child care and health care have soared”. Do you agree with her on that? On the mission? On the objective?
See relevant transcript below.
CBS This Morning
July 14, 2015
JEFF GLOR: President Obama says this morning the deal is good for U.S. national security and reduces the chance of a Middle East war.
--
GLOR: The president welcomes upcoming debate in Congress but he says he will veto any bill that tries to block the agreement.CHARLIE ROSE: Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina says this week that she would have walked away from the Iran talks. The former Hewlett-Packard CEO was one of the first contenders to enter the race. She says it's time for a citizen leader to become president instead of a career politician. The first woman to lead a top 50 company is also a former U.S. Senate candidate in California. Carly Fiorina is with us in Studio 57 and we’re pleased to have her, welcome.
CARLY FIORINA: Thank you. Great to be with you.
ROSE: So the president announced a historic agreement and saying that it's much better than the alternative. And he will go about trying to explain to Congress all of the aspects of this.
FIORINA: Yes and unfortunately, he says it makes a nuclear arms race less likely. Our Arab allies have said just the opposite. So has Israeli. So there is reason for suspicion here that is not partisan. You have a whole set of Arab allies, Saudi Arabia and Israeli as we know don't agree on very much, but they do agree that this is a bad deal.
ROSE: Why do they think it makes an arms race more likely?
--
ROSE: But as the president said this is not about faith this is about verification and verification measures will prevent that and if, in fact, they do not work and if, in fact, Iran does not live up to the agreement, he is prepared to take action.
FIORINA: Yes. I think, unfortunately, as we know, Iran has already cheated on sanctions and inspections regimes, so there is no real guarantee right now that they’re going to play fair.
ROSE: But that’s the reason for the verification.
--
GAYLE KING: He also pointed out that it has the backing of the international community. That must mean something about the strength of the deal.
FIORINA: Well, maybe. But as I said, China and Russia have never been on our side of the table with this. China and Russia have an interest in opening Iran's economy, they always have. So they have been negotiating on Iran's side of the table. The European Union has negotiated, frankly, a number of weak deals. We have seen some of our European partners, France most specifically, raise objections up until this point in time.
And, again, I don't think -- I can remember sitting in a private meeting with Bibi Netanyahu five years ago. Five years ago in Israeli. He was talking about the danger that Iran represented to the region. And I don't think this is partisan on his part when he raises an alarm over and over and over about this deal and about Iran as a player in the region.
--
ROSE: Speaking of Hillary Clinton, she made yesterday her vision of a fairness economy to close the income gap and she said “the defining economic challenge of our time is raising income so the vast majority of Americans whose wages have remained virtually stagnant for 15 years as the cost of housing, college, and child care and health care have soared”. Do you agree with her on that? On the mission? On the objective?
