Skip to main content

tv   Media Buzz  FOX News  September 16, 2019 12:00am-1:00am PDT

12:00 am
see you next on "fox news sunday". howard: breaking news on the buzz meter, two new york times reporter say there was a second incident of brett kavanaugh exposing himself at a party. president trump says the supreme court should sue for libel. as abc frames the democratic debate mainly around liberal issues, the pub admits -- pundits grudgingly call joe biden the winner. >> biden is senile. >> there are so many things with that. rookie, low blow. >> yeah, it was personal. that was disgraceful. it was way too low. >> that was like a mugging.
12:01 am
i didn't like it, i didn't appreciate it. it was the rude, it was ill-mannered. i think it was factually incorrect. howard: and should the network be embarrassed that the jorge ramos was denigrating president trump? john bolton is out with leaks on both sides about the two men clashing on foreign policy. >> john bolton is reported to have been maybe the key player in stopping the taliban visit to camp david, and that frustrated the president, and now john bolton's gone. this is what happens if you do tell the president the truth. >> it is great news for america, especially for the large number of young people who would have been killed in wars if bolton had stayed on the job. howard: i'm howard kurtz and this is "mediabuzz." ♪
12:02 am
♪ howard: fox news alert, "the new york times" began by deleting a tasteless tweet by two of its reporters. it's an odd opinion section piece that waits until the ninth paragraph to describe what's called new information about the allegations by deborah ramirez, the woman who took six days to assess her memories before telling the new yorker that kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a party at yale, which he flatly denied. the authors say they spoke to seven people who heard about the event many years ago, and they published a second allegation about another drunken party where kavanaugh supposedly pulled down his pants, and friends pushed a woman into touching him. they talked to two officials who communicated with the man who claimed it happen. president trump: now the radical
12:03 am
left and the mainstream media are after brett kavanaugh again. he is an innocent man who's been treated horribly, such lies about him. they want to scare him into turning liberal. and the president said: brett kavanaugh should start suing people for libel. joining us now to analyze the coverage, ben domenech, founder and publisher of the federalist, susan ferrechio and gene zano. is it fair for "the new york times" to have the appropriators drop this into an analysis piece, a charge of this magnitude against a sitting supreme court justice, without the backup that ordinarily is required of a hard news story? >> absolutely not. there's a number of things that, frankly, they leave out, things that are in some cases included in the book in a very quiet way. they just kind of go right past the point that you made in your open that this accuser, the
12:04 am
supposed second accuser is not someone who actually is making this claim. this is being claimed by someone associated. they also don't make clear about who ben styier is, mainly that he and brett kavanaugh have been on opposite sides in the past, the clinton/lewinsky battle where they clearly had, you know, an experience of opposition. that's something that should be included in any story of this magnitude. howard: if the times says that a foreman classmate is making this allegation about another drunken party -- remember, this is more than three decades ago -- and he refuses to talk and they talk to two people that talked to him, is that secondhand information enough to go with? >> it's not enough. you need two sources. the second allegation is the one i have the problem with. they say there is this allegation, but the person who's making it we haven't been able to talk to, but we talked to officials who talked to this
12:05 am
person. that is not enough to print it, particularly in the newspaper. if there's an excerpt from a book that they are advertising on behalf of these reporters sticking it into the newspaper in the opinion section and using that as a basis to make these allegations, i think both of those things are problematic journalistically. howard: susan, these may be lies, but we don't know. it's two journalists reporting a book. is the president on solid ground in saying, first of all, these are lies; second of all, they are trying to intimidate kavanaugh into making more liberal rulingsing, and finally, in suggestion that he sue for libel? >> well, he's a public figure the, kavanaugh, so i don't know about i suing for lie -- libel. but the president makes a point that "the new york times" is trying to say he was a drunken sexual offender in college. it's not backed up even in the book, and i think that why, you
12:06 am
know, you and i are reporters, why did they write the story this way, maybe it's so far down in the story because it's really not backed up by facts, it's just implied. can you really make that kind of accusation against somebody without real facts, saying witnesses saw this? it's not there. so i don't understand why they framed it that way other than to back up what the president is saying, which is that they want to portray kavanaugh as some kind of sexual offender. howard: i reached out to kavanaugh for comment, his team is deciding not to comment for now. they don't want to fuel this story, although the president's kind of done that for them. i obtained the relevant pages from this forthcoming book which is " the education of brett caf nawmpleght an investigation." the woman, the allegedded victim here at this long-ago yale party, she is named, by the way, although according to this telling she's a sexual assault victim. she refused to discuss the incident, though several of her
12:07 am
friends say she does not recall it. now, that was left out of what "the new york times" published today. if this happened, wouldn't she be very, very likely to recall it? and how do you leave that out of an account about a supreme court justice? ben? >> i just think this is so irresponsible on the part of the times. i mean, we kind of skipped past one of the things, this was not a good week for "the new york times"' social media team who had to delete and apologize a couple of different tweets. i think what you're talking about is to be essential to be included in it, you can't just, to susan's point, make this kind of implication, this massive kind of claim without including all the necessary facts that people need to know in order to make a fair assessment of it and to know what they don't know about the claim and what details -- howard: this woman, i'm not going to name her. the times does identify her for by name, the alleged victim here whose friends say she does not remember this long-ago incident,
12:08 am
the book has a, quote-unquote, written statement by her. it's about vouching for her friend deborah ramirez, saying she's honest and has integrity. >> yeah. and, you know, i think that, again, is part of the problem that we haven't had the benefit of reading the entire book. obviously excerpts, we haven't read it. the times pulled out sections of this book which to all of these points is the problem. because you have allegations that are unsubstantiated. i do think we have to differentiate between the first allegations for which there are apparently seven people corroborating and the second for which there is no corroboration. and to ben's point, the tweet is absolutely despicable. to describe, if it end happened, to describe it as harmless fun, to do that to a young woman is absolutely unacceptable. howard: deborah ramirez did not testify in the hearings. the seven people, according to this book, said they had heard
12:09 am
about it, but they're not eyewitnesses. so i'm left thinking they don't have the classmate directly who is claiming this, and they don't have an on the record comment from the woman herself and her friends say she doesn't remember it. what do they have? >> okay. so it's the way you package the story: you write it as though it's fact, and then you put the lack of facts further down the story where nobody reads it. so the public perception is that it's fact. i watched it all unfold last night on social media. people are looking at this as if it's another likely true allegation against kavanaugh backed up by zero facts. it's changing the narrative, and it's really about the media's own accountability here. are we going to keep reporting stories like this based on our own political biases? to target people or support people depending on whether we like them or hate them? reporters need to write about facts, and that's what they were supposed to do here. howard: obviously, many of us will have more to say after
12:10 am
we've seen the book. let me turin now to john -- turn now to john bolton, former fox news contributor. here's what the president said, he made pretty clear in speaking to reporters that he was unhappy with bolton. >> he made some very big mistakes when he talked about the libyan model for kim jong un. that was not a good statement to make. he's somebody that i actually had a very good relationship with, but he wasn't getting along with people in the administration that i consider very important. howard: ben.com niche, there's obviously been -- domenech, there's been commentary about this is his third national security adviser, almost everybody in his orbit flames out eventually. has that overshadowed their fundamental differencens on -- differences on several fundamental policy issues? >> someone will join the white house team and immediately be criticized as a terrible choice, you know?
12:11 am
john bolton is this warmonger coming in -- howard: the wild man. >> he's a wild man that's going to lead us into war, and as soon as he leaves, oh, strange new respect. it's, oh, no, he was a strong hand at the wheel, you know? the now the president's going to be even crazier. to me, t kind of ridiculous. the president clearly has differences with a lot of people that he brings around and adjudicating those differences is something that's very important for a managerred to do. in this case i think the problem wasn't just that john bolton didn't see eye to eye with the president, it's that he had a difficult relationship with secretary pompeo and with other members of the president's team, and that made things more and more difficult to function. but the way this was depicted whenever someone leaves always cracks me up. howard: in particular, liberals were outraged by john bolton's appointment because he does have this very hawkish record and all he'd say on fox over the years, and now many of the same liberals are saying this is a terrible thing, that trump pushed him out. >> yeah. you almost get whiplash, right?
12:12 am
when he's appointed, it's bemoaning the fact that he would make this appointment, somebody that is such a hawk, is and all of a sudden it's become being fired by the president is somehow a hallmark that you have moved up your status or retiring or resigning, however this came out. but, you know, to me, it's really non-story. the story here should be a story about the impact on our foreign policy and donald trump's approach to foreign policy and leading the nation. that should be the story, not the comes and goings of bolton. howard: well, in fairness, some have tried to deal with that. look, the president has a lot of turnover in this white house, fact. president does like to hire tv commentators, larry kudlow from cnbc. but on iran, on russia, on syria and, of course, on the afghanistan summit at camp david which got canceled, it cannot have been a secret to donald trump. >> i was surprised when he
12:13 am
joined the administration just based on what the president campaigned on; getting troops out of afghanistan, more focus on the united states versus trying to change the world abroad. i was surprised. i didn't think he would last long, and i knew once they got to afghanistan, things would start to clash. but the president said i'm really easy to work for because i make all the decisions. warning to whoever takes bolton's place. howard: a little more on this after the break, and we'll also look at the coverage of the democratic debate. ♪ ♪ one of the benefits we as a country give our veterans is eligibility for a va loan for up to 100% of your home's value. thank you, admiral. so if you need money for your family, call newday usa. i/p ú:]÷ug< enterprise car sales and you'll take any trade-in?rom that's right! great! here you go... well, it does need to be a vehicle. but - i need this out of my house. (vo) with fair, transparent value for every trade-in...
12:14 am
enterprise makes it easy.
12:15 am
here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not?
12:16 am
how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today. ♪ ♪ howard: the democratic debate in a moment, but just to finish up our conversation here with the panel on john bolton leaving the white house, the final straw, ben, was bolton being opposed to
12:17 am
president inviting taliban leaders to camp david to sign a peace deal in afghanistan. of course, the president canceled it in the wake of a car bombing. at the same time, there were a lot of tensions about leaking to the press, and when president trump met with the kim jong un at the dmz, bolton disputed a new york times story about an interim deal with north korea. he said this publicly, some were trying to box in the president. then bolton was accused of leaking reporters' notes from an off the record leaking. >> you know, i think that the president is certainly someone who dislikes people on his team leaking, and i think that, you know, john bolton, you know, whatever you think of him, is someone who has somewhat of a cozy relationship with a lot of people in the media. he's been in the media for years, and you tend to talk to people like that. i think this is something the president needs to be cognizant of when he's hiring people from the media to go into his administration. howard: just briefly, why shouldn't he have somebody who
12:18 am
agrees with him on the major foreign policy issues and someone who he's comfortable with? it's not like other presidents haven't had various top aides for political and policy reasons. >> brookings has done a fascinating accounting of the turnover, and it is higher in the third year, it's even lower than obama. presidents turn over fast, they turn over appointments. that is their absolute right to do that. howard: now, the press is often accused, susan, of palace intrigue. there's a lot of stories about tension with bolton and the president and others. washington post on august 30th that the white house had sidelined bolton on afghanistan, and an embassy spokesman at the time said this was a biased report based on unconfirmed leaks and there's more truth in the "national enquirer." ten days later, he's gone. >> this happens a lot, doesn't it, where the white house denies something only for it to be confirmed later through the president's actions. i think the big problem is so
12:19 am
many leaks occupant of the white house. -- out of the white house. howard: i want to get to the debates. jorge ramos of univision was on the panel, take a look at a couple of the questions that he asked the candidates. >> are you prepared to say tonight that you and president obama made a mistake about deportations? why should latinos trust you? >> we didn't lock people up in cages, we didn't separate families. >> president trump has called mexicans rapists and killers, do you think people who support president trump and his immigration policies are racist? >> anyone who supports this is supporting racism. >> do you think trump supporters are racist? how was he able to sit on that abc panel and crusade? is that an embarrassment to the network? >> you know, in 2016 i think everyone would agree that the most embarrassing debate moderation was done by john harwood of cnbc.
12:20 am
it was insulting. he talked to now-president trump saying he was running a comic book campaign. jorge ramos, i think, on the scale of 10 being harwood, he was a solid 8. it was a situation where he was saying all of these things that are so opinionatedded and so aggressive and suggesting, offering all these different defenses up. you can't i put someone who is that strong of an advocacy role on a debate panel and expect it to go well. howard: abc certainly knew what it was getting with ramos. i don't see anyone in the main stream media saying he's supposed to be neutral. remember, fox can't host a dnc debate because it's so biased. >> and, you know, my problem is having networks at all host these debates. there was a time when the league of women voters was hosting debates. and when they were pushed out of that position, they said this is a charade and pushed on the american public by institutions that are designed to make money. that is the problem.
12:21 am
you need independent organizations running these debates, not networks. howard: my point is that bret baier, martha mccam lumbar would be a lot more solid. let me ask you, super, i thought maybe he'd make an attempt to tone it down. you know, how dare the obama administration enforce the law by deporting people who were here illegally, three million of them. your take. >> i think they wanted that. i think abc was looking for some sparks, and they got them. i think the debates for the primaries, it's okay to have someone like him doing that. they don't hide it anymore. they don't hide the bias in these debates anymore. i say it all the time, it's fine when you're just talking just to democrats. my concern is what's going to happen when we get to the general debate. that's when we need to be very careful who we put up there. i know there were accusations of bias last time. i say let c-span do it this time. we need a real neutral person -- howard: it's a great suggestion. i don't see it happening. we have more to say about this.
12:22 am
of course, the decision was made to put him on. back in a moment.
12:23 am
12:24 am
12:25 am
♪ ♪ howard: the most buzzed-about moment at the democratic debate in houston was julian castro taking on joe biden. we're going to play the exchange, and we'll talk about it on the other side. >> are you forgetting what you said two minutes ago? forgetting already what you said just two minutes ago? i can't believe that you said two minutes ago that they had to buy in, and now you're saying -- you're forgetting that. >> anyone who has -- [inaudible] you're automatically enrolled. howard: this was a dispute about what biden had said about his medicare option proposal and, in fact, the unanimous verdict, susan, of journalists was that castro got it wrong on the facts.
12:26 am
we can debate that the, but what also happened is that, as we plaid at the top, pundits just completely came down on castro for what was described as a low blow. is this an example of journalists blowing the whistle as referees? >> i don't think they should have blown the whistle on this one, because i thought it was right for him to question what really is in his plan here. do they have to buy in? you just said they didn't, but now you're saying they did -- howard: that's not exactly what he did. by saying are you forgetting, are you forgetting, each though cats troh said later -- castro said later he wasn't -- he was trying to imply that the vice president can't keep his facts straight. >> the media have been writing endlessly about bias, mixing up facts, forgetting stories, all these blunders along the way, questioning his age, so why shouldn't one of the candidates? howard: all right. maybe because he denied that he was doing that very thing the. ben, i'd like to hear you on this but also in a broader sense. and, again, i think
12:27 am
stephanopoulos did a good job, but with abc's heavy focus on racism, universal health care, not even a challenge to beto o'rourke's hell, yes, we'll take away your guns -- was this conducted in the left lane? >> it was entirely conducted in the left lane. i feel there were so many questions that were extremely important that weren't asked, we didn't get a question about the economy, about how a lot of these ambition plans that they have are ever going to be the passed or come to fruition given the makeup of the congress, how would you make these impossible dreams a reality? those are things that are practical and real and completely ignored by the debate that focused on the most hot button issues, trying to create the most hot moment, trying to create television as opposed to answers for the voters. howard: in fairness, they only had three hours. [laughter] and then joe biden was asked about a 40-year-old vote, essentially about slavery reparations. i'll be damned if i feel responsible to pay for what
12:28 am
happened 300 years ago. jeannie, i think the consensus was that this was joe biden's best debate. he had missteps, but isn't it clear that most reporters and commentators are not fans of this 76-year-old winning the nomination? >> yeah. of course, because he's been leading in the polls most of the time -- howard: despite next week he's going to implode because this bad debate happened or he made this mistake, and i'm not saying we shouldn't cover his misstatements and gaffes, but the media seems to think that he's going to slip on a banana peel any moment. >> well, i think's what they're waiting for. and to ben's point, this is how you get ratings. you can't write that, you know, he's the front-runner, and he's made no unforced errors. the more mistakes he makes, the happier they are to report it which is fine, but it's not in the interest of democracy. howard: democrats told politico they think i any of the 20 or
12:29 am
30-something reporters covering biden think he's just not cool enough -- >> he talked about record players -- [laughter] >> those are cool again. howard: i don't know, i like mine. jeannie, super, ben, thanks finish for kohing so much -- covering so much ground. nfl star antonio brown ready to to debut with the patriots today. but first, the ouster of john bolton leads -- [inaudible] sean spicer's up next.
12:30 am
12:31 am
12:32 am
♪ howard: joining us now from los angeles, sean spicer, former white house press secretary and senior advisor to the america first pact. welcome. you're talking - good morning to you. we were talking about john bolton being pushed out of the white house and you had the experience of resigning from the
12:33 am
white house with the president was unhappy and after bolden and mattis and shut-ins and asked to listen and others the media verdict seems to be the president loses patience with almost everyone who works with him. your thoughts? >> i think in this case is different. ambassador bolton has served his country well but at some point the president needs people started him with his agenda and not theirs. there's clearly right now the divide between what ambassador bolton thought was the correct foreign policy particularly with respect to syria and other libyan or hot spots. secretary pompeo and the president think otherwise and the president clearly deserves to have people around him that agree with his foreign-policy. they may challenge him to bring up ideas but don't fundamentally have a different way of thinking. howard: washington post analysis is the president sometimes has a kafkaesque management style which he does not want to get bad press but does not want to get too much good press and
12:34 am
demands fealty in the words of this article. >> again, this is a policy thi thing. john bolton was not on the cover up to any magazines or out in front of it but what press there was was talking about the divergence they had on the hot spots currently exist particularly in north korea and syria and other places, i ran where ambassador bolton showed a difference of what he wanted or what he thought the right president wants. the president deserves to have people around him that understand his agenda and ready to implement and not go in a different direction but it's one thing to challenge them to bring up new ideas and another thing to not follow through in the direction what the president hears you out and makes a decision. howard: let's turn to breaking news. new york times story today to reporters written a book about pets, not nomination saying there is a second all legends, 35 years ago drunken dorm party which the now supreme court justices he has exposed himself
12:35 am
but the problem is with the story that we talked about earlier is that the former classmate who made this claim didn't talk to the porters but they talked to two people who talk to the classmates of a woman who allegedly was the victim of this was an incident did not talk at all and her friends that she doesn't remember. howard: and they did talk to brett kavanaugh either. howard: they did asked to speak to kavanaugh but he declined. >> corrects. but there are two sources in the spring one is cap not in one is mr. ramirez and neither one spoke to the times. that seems problematic on its face than either person who our primary sources in this particular story were spoken to. i, howie, i know it's getting lost in the coverage for the tweet the times but out was unbelievably well beyond the word insensitive and i don't
12:36 am
know what even words come to mind right now but the idea that there is not out rate on the left where is kristen angela brandt or hillary clinton in the idea to use the language that they did and i will not repeat it here on television but in that tweet and there's no outrage from these people who stood up and talked about fighting for women and these inappropriate remarks is disgusting. the idea that other colleagues at the new york times who sit there and watch this happen aren't speaking out and say not acceptable. time and time again the new york times has a pattern of doing inappropriate things but last week we thought the political editor reveal all these anti-semitic tweets and everyone in the new york times that that there lets it go by is complicit. for all the talk about what donald trump says and does coming from the new york times they need to mind their own house first. they have a problem with anti-semitic comments from their own staff and this was clearly a highly inappropriate tweet put out another example of the folks online doing stuff and the idea that everyone washes it away.
12:37 am
new york times has a serious problem in the idea that every one of those journalists the work there and other colleagues and folks on the left the claim to have this holier than thou attitude are silent just shows you the hypocrisy that goes on. howard: let me jump in and clarify. the time to delete the tweet. >> the way they thought it was hold on, hold on, they said it was poorly worded then they got hit again and then they deleted it and then they finally said they apologized. howard: without repeating it had to do with being woman confronted with someone's genitals and it was utterly tasteless. the comments from the editor were from ten years ago but i agree with your overall point. let me turn to andrew mckay, former fired director of the fbi. he was seen as a hired at a cnn contributor and he's facing the likely indictment what position does it put cnn in which put them on the air and colleagues as a his great colleague but he could well be facing, charges? >> , i'm about to go on dancing with the stars and brian seltzer
12:38 am
is the online pr person for cnn literally had a meltdown that i was doing a dancing show and yet they hire a guy that's about to be indicted for lying and they sit there and make excuses over and over why that's acceptable. let's call it. he lacked candor and was faulted with all the buzzwords except for lying. everyone in the trump world is a liar but when they hire someone that lacked candor or weren't - all these other buzzwords. cnn has two standards. one for everyone against trump and one for everyone who works with trump. they can't have it both ways. they want to excuse everybody that supports this president but as long as you lying to go against the president for this greater good they brought in on that is okay. howard: we got to go but tomorrow with dancing with the stars, will you win this thing? >> its life. howard: actually boost expectations, are you going all the way?
12:39 am
>> the odds are 15 to one so if you're looking to make box you might make a few shows. i'm going for that mirror ball and the campaign starts. howard: i'll save my money. john spicer, thank you. after the break cia flatly devise a story blaming the president in part for having the u.s. yank a kremlin's buyout of moscow.
12:40 am
12:41 am
are you a veteran, own a home, and need cash? you should know about the newday va home loan for veterans it lets you borrow up to 100 percent of your home's value. the newday va loan lets you refinance your mortgages, consolidate your credit card debt, put cash in the bank, and lower your payments over $600 a month. call today. and get the financial peace of mind every veteran deserves.
12:42 am
12:43 am
♪ howard: this contain an explosive charge with a single unnamed source by the u.s. told a russian spy out of mask out in 2017. the report was by anger, jim. >> person directly involved in the discussion that the removal of the russian was driven, in part, by concerns that the president trump and the ministration repeatedly mishandled classified intelligence and could contribute to exposing the covert source as a spy. howard: new york times very much not that down fighting formal intel officials saying quote, there was no public evidence of the trump directly endangered the source and washington post agree. cia flatly denied the story as it is former chief. secretary of state, mike pompeo's practicing that report and that is material and inaccurate but you should know i don't talk about things like this often and it's only the occasion when there's something
12:44 am
i think that puts people at ri risk. howard: joining us now, steve hayes, fox news contributor a former editor of the weekly standard with is launching a new media venture with john and. welcome back to what you make of the single store story with two major newspaper saying the part about it being trump's fault is in true. >> not just the fact that the times of the post knockdown the story or it seems it was in the beginning but how they did it. you read the comment from the new york times knocking down from the story and washington post reported that the x filtration is not the reason for the decision to remove the cia source. that's a pretty categorical reputation of what jim reported. the question to me anyway is a timeframe. the original asset was originally offered out of russia in late 2016.
12:45 am
howard: that was before trump was president. >> f, six months before the meeting in the oval office were sensitive information was disclosed by president trump to russian. howard: but jim says in the story that in the end of the obama administration officials had expressed concerns about the safety of the fight but he doesn't mention he was the political appointee it does not mention on air or online version but does this cast a shadow over the report came back. >> it's an interesting question. one of the most interesting questions we deal with as a journalist on one hand i think it's tremendously valuable to have someone with the kind of experience inside the administration the gym brings to reporting. on the other hand you want to disclose that is often as is feasible or possible to let his consumers know that this could be shaping the way you are delivering the news. >> obviously, [inaudible] i
12:46 am
think it's a fair-minded answer. let me turn to the foreign policy the president this was a bombshell from last weekend revealing that he canceled this plan with the taliban leaders at camp david days before the 911 anniversary to basically sign a peace deal with the taliban and that was vigorously opposed by john bolton and was the triggering reason for the final straw and leaving the white house and even fellow conservatives were highly critical of the president for even considering this. >> it's an incredible story in fact the president had kept this a secret suggest that this is a different way of operating for this president. the news media was blindsided. most people including intelligence folks that i have been talking to did not have any idea . howard: raising the question how did not leak? >> they did not tell people it is a demonstration to correct the security enough important.
12:47 am
>> as i think if you look at history of the president's decision-making like i ran it's an ad hoc decision. he changes his mind a lot and will do last minute height dra drama, high-stakes. >> ten minutes from bombing iran and the present without that he gets criticized for this but he just has a different - i think they don't like his management style and they don't like the last minute with things like trade negotiation back and forth but maybe it's time to stop parading in the way traditional previous presence have run that office let me ask you about the bolden situation because it was such a huge new story. john bolton very high profile guy with hawkish views that were no secret and do you think the story overall was overplayed? all these people - on the other
12:48 am
hand the argument is that he's a formal national security advisor and there was a messy exit, i would say disputing i resigned, no you were told to resign. >> actually, it was probably underplayed honestly. if you look at this in historical context that this wasn't the trump presidency and something unfolded like one unfolded it would be the only story. it would be the thing that we were talking about for a week but in this case . howard: why was it underplayed? >> as he said, this is way the president makes a decision but it such a different high-level turnover, 51 very senior and ministration officials have come and gone at a rate much higher barack obama or george w. bush or bill clinton. it's significant that it tells us about the way the president makes decisions and i'm a reporter i want to know or provide as much insight as i can to help the president makes the decisions. what is most interesting in the media missed on this is the president's suggestion that he did not know what john bolton believes but john bolton has
12:49 am
made the same arguments for three decades. howard: in fact, the president publicly joked about me have been in for wars now and i have other voices and i think he wanted them in as a dissenter but maybe the dissent got to be too much and it became abrasive overtime. >> that's a plausible theory but if you look at what the president tweeted he's basically saying this guy did not agree with me but he did not agree with you before you came in for donald trump is one whose views have changed more than john bolton's. howard: steve hayes, thank you for joining us. still to come, controversial for the new england patriots to sign receiver antonio brown.
12:50 am
12:51 am
12:52 am
12:53 am
♪ howard: it was controversy over the new england patriots find antonio brown. best wide receiver in nfl but off the field clashes with coaches and team it for the last two teams dumped him but suddenly it became far more than a sports story. >> we begin with a bombshell in the world of sports. one most prominent wide receivers in the nfl antonio brown has been accused of rape and a lawsuit with the complaint from this woman against antonio brown is explicit in graphic and sounds violent. howard: joining us now, former espn reporter, britt mchenry how should the press recover this former trainer freddie taylor and says she habits that happen in 2018 that happen to be filed the day after he joined the patriots and brown, of course, denies these allegations and his lawyer says there was one account that was consensual.
12:54 am
>> they need to stick to statements that have been set to the facts of this case as they unfold. i would like to believe in what i have noticed from several of my former colleagues in sports media is they have done a good job up to this point but i was not satisfied with pregame coverage today on the nfl network was talking about how much of a great target he will be for the new england patriots and the team that won six championships. espn got right when they said is a former captain of the patriots i would not be happy with this man coming onto the team and still playing and being in that locker room. i agree with them. howard: nfl is about getting and they are waiting on that litigation surround is eligible to play today. is a quick bite of coach belichick dodging the question. >> were you aware of the lawsuit when you signed antonio brown? >> i will not make a statement. it's already been given. >> when we know more will say more. howard: famously taciturn.
12:55 am
what about the way in which the whole saga has been covered with all the past problems and altercations but now this very serious allegation of rape and other forms of sexual assault? >> it's been nothing short of a circus sent what now seems to be campaigning actively to leave oakland with juvenile antics. i think the press as a whole could have been better at the time it was an example of twitter journalism work each insider wanted to break the neck story and will he stay there but i think in this case as i said there's been thoughtful reporting about allegations but she speaking to the nfl tomorrow and their fast tracking that. howard: the lawsuit includes pretty ugly tax sent by antonio brown to his former trainer with washington post sport columnist says it's hard to give brown the benefit of the doubt when he texted this woman that she was a week pitch and a fake hope. this includes shoving him to the ground and it's hard for the press to separate his
12:56 am
controversial history with weather these allegations are true. >> he set himself up to have a wrestling heel persona in the worst kind of weight leading to a serious situation now. yes, i agree with you, howard. he is not put himself in a great light. it's disappointing. i think, personally the patriots could have decided to sit him for the game today at least until the woman is able to testify in front of nfl officials. he won't get the benefit of the doubt in the media and has not so far but again i think it supported for people not to speculate one way or the other and report the facts. howard: good advice. not sure everyone will follow it but great to see you. that is it for this addition of media buzz but i'm howard kurtz, check out live podcast media buzz you can subscribe at foxnews podcast .com. apple or itunes or google play with will help you continue the conversation on twitter at howard so no one we had a lot of breaking news and that's what
12:57 am
always is challenging about the television business but we are back your next sunday, you know the time, 11:00 a.m. eas
12:58 am
12:59 am
1:00 am
heather: it is monday, september 16th. happening right now at 4:00 a.. on the east coast, breaking overnight, taking to the streets, 50,000 general motors employees walking off the job nationwide. so will their union begin to bargain and reach a deal during talks today? plus, bombshell bust, democrats surviving the efforts to impeach justice brett cavanaugh over new allegations from decades ago but the crucial correction that was just made by the new york times and how it changes everything. and bringing the heat, what caused these massive flames to shoot out during a pregame performance.

73 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on