tv Media Buzz FOX News January 18, 2016 12:00am-1:01am PST
? . this is a fox news alert, president obamaing the nuclear deal with iran at the white house this morning. the president calling it a victory for diplomacy and avoiding another wart in the middle east. mr. obama saying we have cut off every possible path for iran to build a bomb. his critics might view that differently. only then did the president turn to a second major development, as he called it. release of four americans, one of the these "the washington post" former bureau chief jason rezaian, the president calling him a courageous journalist for "the washington post" and he embodied the brave spirit of freedom of the press. a fast-moving day. joins is kristin columnist for the washington examiner, and kiersten powers, a fox news
contributor. that sounded like a victory lap from a president who has been hammered, coming against the backdrop of the release of two americans. >> certainly. this as soon as a week of president obama sounding very upbeat and positive about the state of the his administration, and of course republicans in mum ways the polls tell a bit of a different story. here this was a bit of the manages accomplished moment for president obama, but let's not forgot in the middle east you still have nations like saudi arabia their severing diplomatic ties with iran. this story is not over. >> kiersten, the president set only briefly the u.s. was releasing seven iranian prisoners, involved in sanction violations and so forth. it sounded to me like he was anticipating and responding to the way he's been getting hammered by the gop over what is essentially a prisoner swap,
though the white house doesn't call it that. >> he casts it as a day of victory for diplomacy, i think that's probably right, as it relates to at least the sailors. i don't its it's confide as fair to say the release of the prisoners was a victory, in fact it was a prison irswap. it was a hostage swap. people in iran being held hostage. they were not actually convicted of anything in any legitimate way, versus the people in the united states who were actually convicted criminals and convicted of aiding iran. these were people that were sending technology to iran in violation of u.s. sanctions, in one case hacking on iran. and they were legitimately found guilty versus the american hostages who were being held hostage for essentially being americans. >> i want to focus on jason
rezaian, the tragedy of 18 months where he was mistreated, and in declining health, and he was doing a job. the charge we are so bog g-- bogus, the trial was held in secrecy. >> i think for many reporters, it's personal, it feels different than other stories. this could be your colleague, this could have been you. i think that will in many ways reflect the coverage of this story as we move forward and the debate rages about whether the swap was a good deal for the united states or not. >> it was interesting that president obama didn't lead with the release of these americans, which is a happy story -- i acknowledge what you say, the fact it was done to release convicted criminals in the u.s. for people who were essentially taken hostage by this iranian regime. that's a pretty happy occasion as far as americans getting their freedom.
>> i think he was also determined to cast this as a diplomatic victory, so he's trying to cast this swap as a victory which which is a result of the deal. so he's setting up this framework to say, see, we did this deal and good things have come from it, when there's nothing to suggest this deal didn't have anything to do with it. it was not part of the deal. the reason they were released is because of this swap. it's not a diplomatic victory. so, you know what? i agree, it's a good thing. i'm glad they're coming home, but he shouldn't cast it as a result of an iranian deal. we will have more on this in the program later. let's turn to the south carolina debate. donald trump and ted cruz dominating the stage, and there were some pretty tough jabs. >> senator cruz, you suggested mr. trump, quote, embodies new
york values. can you explain what you mean by that? >> everyone understands the values in new york city are socially liberate or pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, focus around money and the media. >> when the world trade center came down, i saw something that no place on earth could have mand more beautifully or more humanely in new york. that was a very insulting statement that ted made. >> the media often focuses on one moment, and i think that was one moment. >> i think the reason why the media is so focused. the media is specifically mentioned. so in this way. >> that so much of the media are based in manhattan? >> this is ted cruz' words, that this is all about the media and money. this is one of those moments of conflict where, you know,
regardless of your policy positions, which issues you agree with, was driving a wedge. you had donald trump actually having this moment that was particularly tron, which i think surprised a lot of people. you also have "new york daily news" with a cover of the statue of liberty giving cruz the finger for this -- >> i think the mediaacy wroefr played it. i consider myself a new yorker, i lived there for ten years. a lot of us lived in new york, we love new york, even people who don't live there, and identity i fill frankly with a lot of the values. the truth is average republican voters doesn't think that way. they think the way ted cruz does. if we're talking about who had the most effective answer, i think cruz is the one connecting with the gop voters. >> they have finally taken off the gloves, and the nastiness
haz continued. yet "the washington post" front page piece says after the debate, can donald trump actually be the republican nominee? can the mainstream media be asking this question after all these months? >> this has been such a bizarre election, at this point being humble about what we can know is not the wrong strategy. the big question is whether or not these new donald trump supporters, folks who have not participated in primaries in the past will suddenly change their behavior, will enter the process. will this be a change that -- >> what about ted cruz accusing "new york times" of a hit piece, in hi words for reporting on goldman sachs loan that he took out, as much as a half million to help financial think 2012 senate campaign. one of the things i observed he doesn't dispute invite specific, but he thinking "new york times" is hostile. does he score points? >> he does.
that's catnip for -- in fact it wasn't to his piece, but we saw his debate skills, the storied debate skills that we keep hearing about, i think we saw them in this debite where he managed to answer that question without ever addressing what happened. >> i asked him today, and he thought it was a nothing story, and that the "new york times" blew up way too much. here's proof of what i've been saying, the media are treating this as a two-man race. new analytics found donald trump dominating on mondays through thursday. way more than ted cruz with nearly 3300 mentioned. everybody else now far behind, on friday the day after the debate, trump doubles to 12,000 mentions, but cruz triples, nearly catching trump, marco rubio way down at 2400. you can bare le see them on the
these are two separate matters? i think it's a -- under the auspices of the sort of imperatives that were incumbent upon them for this deal. >> you heard president obama earlier today calling this a victory for diplomacy, and dechting the negotiation, and only second dearly talking about the americans that were freed. or trying to preempt -- andfuls a prisoner swap, as well as the details of the nuclear deal. >> this was a fantastic days for the american prisoners and their families, undhowedly. >> let's not lose sight of that. >> but a better day for iranian
administration, for president rouhani in particular. the implementation of this deal is giving him precisely what he promised, and staked it on -- the sanctions and the incorporation of iran, and back into the global -- this gives him a degree of legitimacy and man day that nothing could give him. >> basically the critics were wrong and the deal worked? >> the other things that were called upon have been certified, and as a result we have the hostages back, appeared the sanctions are being lifted. do you see the press plying that as down the middle or media very skeptical of whether or not iran can still have a path to nuclear weapons, could be lying about this, could break its word?
how do you see the coverage? >> i think the coverage has been for the most part skeptical. i think in this situation, the media has an obligation to present that side of the equation to the american people, because the administration, the iranian regime, the europeans are certainly not taking that upon themselves, so i think there's a right to be skeptical here. they absolutely are going to maintain, if not the ability to develop a nuclear weapon overnight or as quickly as they were in the past, remember what they are gang here is access to hundred hundreds of billions of a virtual path on some of their really egregious human rights violations, so it's important to point out those weaknesses. >> i glad you mentioned those. i would include in that keeping innocent americans behind bars. could this prisoner swap -- and that is what it is, encourage rogue rejeeps like iran to grab more journalists as hostages in
the hopes of winning concessions on other issues? >> yeah. that's a huge worry. if you break down this swap, it becomes less appealing than on the surface. it's always great to have americans back on home soil, but let's break it down if we're going to be honest about this. the iranians released four americans. in the exchange united states has dropped charges against seven iranians, three of whom who were already convicted, serving time here in prison in the united states, and additionally agreed to drop charges against 14 other iranians. that amounts to a total of 21. additionally, i would point on the where is robert levinson, someone tragically and shamefully left behind. >> he's been languishing for so long. economic sanctions that the u.s. was prepared to -- perhaps
a raucous republican debate the other night was shaped by the moderators. i sat down with neil cavuto and maria bartiromo, host of fbn's "mornings with maria" and "sunday morning futures", which airs right before our program. this one, you two were on steroids. what changed? >> the candidates. i think we were even mentioning privately today they're more
agitated, getting a little more desperate, in a good way. >> did you sense that going? >> i think in the beginning, we didn't. >> well, look, at this at that stage of the game, here we are, you know, two weeks before iowa, a month before new hampshire, two days after the state of the union and it was really the first opportunity we had to get the candidates all together to hear their reaction, on top of that, a lot has changed. let's face it you had san bernardino, paris, the stock market the worse year ever, some things that actually require some real analysis and some real thinking. so i think that played into it as well. it wasn't saying hey, let's be aggressive, as we were saying, hey, people would like answers. >> if your goal was to get them
to slap around, you succeeded, but maybe they didn't need much -- there was no way you couldn't ask it, right? >> you're right. others, to be fair to donald trump as well. and rand paul, it doesn't help, you know that senator cruz has not been a warm and fuzzy figure in the united states senate, so what comes around goes around? i think a lot of colleagues are pouncing on it and making a bigger deal. >> in terms of the pace, did you decide to let them go on -- >> it's an inexact science. >> yeah. >> in the beginning we were not doing that, because we thought let it breathe a bit, and then they weren't interrupting each other. >> i don't think you can plan it. >> no way. >> we were just very present, waiting -- in fact we would give each other a signal to say, wait a second, i need to follow up. obviously we don't want to step
on one another, but wanted to make sure we got answers. when a follow-up was required, the two of us knew that hold on, don't ask your question, i need to follow up. >> for example, when you were asking marco rubio about guns, and his comments about president obama wantsing to take away the guns, and you followed up, what fact that president obama wants to take guns around? >> i do think it's a leap to say that the president now wants to walk into every american's home and take their guns away from them. but hyperbole works in this campaign, no doubt about it. i think when maria got into the issue with donald trump responding to the whole -- what was it -- >> the new york values. >> you pointed out like you were from new york. >> well, i basically said new york values, i'm from new york, can you explain this? we want to know what you're talking about here. >> most angry i have ever seen
her. [ laughter ] it's like, are you talking to me? >> part -- i grew up in brooklyn, like explain it. >> so did i, i get it. >> probably the signature moment of the dizzy bait. >> i think it was probably one of donald trump's best moments. he had an opportunity to show sensitivity, and of course we all remember 9/11, i was there, you were there, we all were there knowing the resiliency that new york has had. >> and i do think, to maria's credit, i thought that was the signature moment, because i do think it showed trump in an entirely different -- he knew probably that question was coming and was ready for it, but his whole tone was recalibrated, very emotional, so people think he's just a bombastic billionaire, that pin i think shifted. >> you asked ted cruz about the
story about the campaign loan. >> a million and inadvertent? >> that's right. i think that was a question we really had to ask. whether it was knead versant or his campaign said it was inadvertent i don't not believe him, but he needed to explain it. that the american people need to hear from him. me immediately turns it on the publication that printed it. whether it's talking about an item in the specifics, where did you get that? where did you make that leap?
>> that week, he walked back, but you kept on pushing and pushing, which is really important. if he didn't believe it, fine. >> you two need to take this on the road. you have the chemistry down. >> thank you. >> thank you. up next, chris christie hits back against pressure saying he's taking more conservative positions than in new jersey. and later, sean penn says thinks "rolling stone" interview was a failure, but not for the reason you might think.
you total "the washington post" that marco rubio was trying to slime his way to -- >> i don't think that's harsh. if you're new jersey, that's how you say hello, how are you? >> not a high-five. >> they doesn't deserve a high-five. last time we talked, i said you were kind of going easy, and you said you have to know when it's tiv to bring out the driver. now it seems like you're bonks on the head. >> if i responsibility i'll certainly spot, but it's hillary clinton, that's what i've been talking about on the campaign trail. >> now that you were doing somewhat better in new hampshire, do you feel like the
media are giving you the flip-flop treatment? >> sure. that's the next thing that happens. they never shoot behind, always to the -- and that's fine with the media. a democratic legislature in 2009. if any of these folks, either the media our my opponents thinking this bothers me in the least, it's just another day. >> let met respond to the specifics, quoted as say on the issue of keeping the state's assault weapon ban -- this is the issue that energized me to get into the race. nobody needs a semiautomatic weapon. now your experience as a federal prosecutor changed your view? >> absolutely.
>> but when you ran for governor the first tiyou said then -- he me understand why you have changed. >> over time what i have learned in my state they're not doing don't abide -- and so from my perspective, first of all it's misnamed, but nonetheless i've changed over time. sang thing on background chex? >> no. i'm for the background checks in north carolina now, and i have no problem with that. >> marco rubio sudden you wen do you nated to planned parenthood. you say that's wrong, and i take you at your word. a newspaper quoted you as saying there's no secret you're
pro-choice, that's not your position today? >> i said in 1995 when my wife was pregnant with our second child, i went to one of the early visits at the doctor's office. she was just barely three months. he put the doppler on her and meant. as i drove back to work today, i thought myself unmy position i thought that was not a life, but i thought that sounded like a life to me. i'm the first pro-life governor, and spoke to rallies on the steps of our statehouse and defunded planned parenthood for the last six years in a row. this is something that chinaed in my heart it 1 years ago. we want converts. we want converts. we want to change people's heart. and that's the way i've tried to do. the journalistic indictment
here is that you had certain positions that were a little more moderate, and now that you're running in a national presidential primary on the republican side, you have evolved into more conservative positions. >> not true. i ran in 2009 as an unabashed pro-life candidate and i was reelectioned. so that's simply an unfair accusation and untrue. that's okay. you get the chance to explain it. i think most people will understand exactly what i said. i changed my view on abortion in 1995, i ran as ahn unabashed pro-lifer in 2009 and will continue to be that way the rest of my life. it wasn't that long ago that "new york times" said you were running a vanity race, any message now? >> here i am. i think i'll be in the final four when we get down with iowa,
new hampshire and south carolina and competing with i think senator cruz, senator rubio and mr. trump the rest of the way. most politicians don't like to make those kind of predictions. >> you asked me before it was too early. we're now 2 1/2 weeks ago from iowas 3 weeks away from the new hampshire primary. i think we'll move on and we'll be competing all the way through the convention. i think i'll seed in cleveland. >> you heard it hear, thank you. i appreciate it. >> and later, fox's trish regan and sandra smith on their role in the charleston gop debate.
bernie sanders is drawing huge crowds, but the press didn't think he can win. some pundits are questioning whether he can derail hillary clinton. and the former first lady now aggressively mixing it up with him. >> you're going to go around saying you stand up to special interests, well, stand up to the most powerful special interests,
the gun lobby. >> she feels herself in trouble. we started this campaign at 2%, some have us winning in iowa and new hampshire. let me start off by saying secretary clinton is quite inaccurate on both those charges. >> we're back with our ladies in red. "new york times" has the headlines today, clinton campaign underestimated the strength, to which i say, what about every pundit on the planet? has the media made a huge error -- this was going to be a hillary coronation? >> i don't think so. if you look at hi campaigns, it's true he's picking up in polls in iowa and new hampshire. he's been polling pretty well there, but if you look down the race, year not seeing that happening in later states. >> i agree if you look at the entire race, it's hard toss how the socialist senator beats the former first lady, but now
pundits saying if she loses the first two, it could change the whole nature of the contest. >> i agree, but if you're looking at people covering the race, he's a phenomenon, he's been covered that way. but it's not reporters' jobs to say, you know, he's going to beat hillary, when there's nothing showing up in the polls to subject that. >> exhibit sanders has been blaming the media for the tiny frakes shun of coverage, do you do you feel a shift that's saying let's take a second look. >> covering something that is a forgone conclusion, it's not interesting. all of a sudden hillary clinton and bernie sanders, at least in the two states we are focused on are so close, while the republican race, if you look at the chart of where all the these
candidates have stood, the lines are all over the place, but the democratic contest with those two lines coming together at the end, it could be down to the wire. >> tonight there's an nbc democratic debate moderated by lester holt. the last two were on saturday nights, this is up against the football playoffs on the martin luther king hold day, but i think the networks were complicit because they didn't want to give up their primetime revenue by having something during the week. they could do -- >> like you said, that's the whole point. this was meant somehow to protect hillary clinton from any kind of -- and people seeing her challenged or beat up and now bernie sanders who is somebody who will raise all sorts of issues about the fact she's not in line with the progressive bass as she would like people to think. i think this was the purpose of this and it's angered people,
frankly. >> some of these were last-minute bookings, bernie sanders is on the circuit. she's been on to msnbc, she was on rachel maddow the other night. is that a measure that they were word? it used to be very collective. you're right, this is a big shift. she used to be walled out with many layers of protectors out there. i think it's trying to make the case we do need our supporters to turn out, trying to give the impression we're not taking this primary for granted. >> chris matthews had a bit of a -- but rachel mad douse challenged her campaign, now that they were mixing it up more personally, that it's not this high-toned discussion of the issues, does that generate more
coverage? >> sure. this is more interesting, because it is clear that they are now going to come after each other more, and who knows, maybe bernie sanders might be regretting earlier opportunities to criticize her. >> yes, so. >> think now that he's on the receiving end of some pretty awful attacks, when you have chelsea clinton saying also some pretty disingenuous. >> that would get some attention. thank you both for joining us. after the we'll have
bumped he decided to boycott. i sat down with the two fbn moderators. welcome. >> thanks. >> trish, you got booed during a question on guns when you noted that a majority of americans in polls support background checks. why is it back to bring that up? >> i think we're in south carolina and people are very adamant that they want their guns and it's not a popular thing to say in south carolina. but it wraent meant to be anything other than it was. in other words i was stating a fact. mat jort of america according to most polls are in favor of universal background checks so why is it that everyone on this stage has such a problem with the president's proposal. >> that was the question. >> it was the question and they answered it and it that was it. but there was quite a respond
from the crowd. >> we had good questions for him. >> we'll never know. >> but that's part of the debate process, howie. it is constantly modifying update changing throwing out adding questions. we were dog that right into the final moments. right before we went on. i mean, at one point i was like, it's 5:45 we've got to do bf what is a last minute change you made. >> just wording. the structure of the questions. the flow changed. we thought, we'll start with this and he we'll go to that. and we wound up changing that around really at 4:00. but overallit was really just the wording. >> and even in the days leading up to the debate howie we were having to shuffle around the issues based on what were the most important issues for the many american voter because that was changed, a, significantly since our last fox business debate but also in the weeks just leading up to the debate it's been national security
foreign policy, the economy and so -- >> it's a realtime event. it's interesting because you had the last two iowa caucus winners and carly fiorina who had been on the main stage obviously everyone wants to be on the main stage but the nr card gets a big audience. >> millions of people. >> you mentioned the economy. in the state of the union, president said 5% unemployment, deficit slashed. did the media paint an unduly gloomy picture of the economy right knew? >> no. i think there's legitimacy to being concerned. this what we're hearing from so many experts, investors, economists, on wall treat right now. they are worried about us slipping back into recession. and that's why you're seeing volatility in the markets. china is in a bad spot, europe is in a bad spot. it all affects us xs it's a legitimate concern.
sure, a lot of jobs have been created. they're not great job, wages aren't going up. so people are concerned. >> did you try to reflect that sense of economic anxiety in the way you approached the debate? >> look, this isn't something that zwrorjournalists are makin out of thin air. fox news polling this week did reveal that the average american feels worse now about the economy significantly worse than they did this time last year. so people just aren't feeling great. and even if you are seeing, you know, as the president pointed oud added manufacturing jobs, he highlighted some areas of the economy where we've seen growth. but if the american people aren't feeling good, that is the most important thing because you're not going to spend money, buy a home, buy a car, if you don't feel safe and secure an confident in the economy. >> sandra smith trish regan, thanks. fox news will continue to
mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again. hope we have time to talk about the coming to al jazeera america a victim of low ratings and the fact that it just wasn't much of a market what it was doing internal turmoil. hired some big names but wasn't able to find a market. sean penn was sharply criticized for that highly sympathetic interview with el chapo with "rolling stone" giving veto power over the piece n. a 60 minutes interview tonight, the actor brushed off ethical concerns saying, quote, when you get the story that every journalist in the world you
wanted. >> i have a regret that the entire discussion about this article ignores its purpose, which was to try to contribute to this discussion about the policy and war on drugs. >> you're saying there's not much dialogue dabout -- >> my article failed lext me be clear. >> let me be clear. it failed because it doesn't advance your ideological agenda to blame americans for drug use as much as a mass murdering fugitive and it failed that the journalist who you dismiss was jealous green eyed monsters care about the ethics of greeting veto to an international criminal and you obviously don't. that's it for this edition of "media buzz." i'm howard kurtz. a lot of breaking news to deal with today. we hope you'll like our facebook page. feel free to write to us. also, dvr the show.
fu miss it, watch it back at your convenience. we'll be back next sunday 11:00 and 5:00 eastern when we bring you the latest buzz. the beginning of the end of what an american prisoner held in iran is calling a 545 day nightmare. as our people are leaving iran, others are reportedly taken inside iraq. first iran. for hours we have been watching as three americans freed in a prisoner swap began their long journey back to their homes, their families to freedom. here is the video showing a plane landing with three of the freed americans on board. they then boarded another plane where they are right now in germany. those three are at the top of your screen that you see here. washington post reporter and a