The same network that wondered if Sen. Rubio's sip of water was a "big
deal" is now asking just why Republicans are "so fixated on Benghazi"
when they asked Defense Secretary nominee Chuck Hagel about the Libya
fiasco.
"This, despite testimony on Benghazi from General Petraeus,
Hillary Clinton, Admiral Mike Mullen, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta,
General Martin Dempsey, among others. But it's not enough," an obviously flustered Carol Costello huffed on Friday. The CNN headline later flashed, "Why are Republicans so fixated on Benghazi?"
[Video below. Audio here [1].]
Then, during the 10 a.m. ET hour, Costello lashed out at the GOP's
"partisanship" and contrasted it with President Lincoln's passing the
13th Amendment. So nominating Hagel is akin to abolishing slavery?
"History in the U.S. Senate. Not the Lincoln and the 13th Amendment kind of history, but the partisanship kind," Costello lamented. And she continued her juvenile whining about "partisanship."
"[Y]you get a chance to poke your finger in his [Hagel's] eye, and you
take it if you're a senator. That's what they do for a living," GOP
strategist Rich Galen explained. Costello replied: "[T]hat's ridiculous.
They just did it to poke you in the eye, or poke Democrats in the eye?"
She also asked "what's the most danger? What do they most fear about
Chuck Hagel?" as if the GOP has no real reason to oppose him. "[I]t
boggles my mind," she insisted on the GOP delaying Hagel's nomination.
A transcript of the segment, which aired on February 15 on CNN Newsroom at 9:32 a.m. EST, is as follows:
CAROL COSTELLO: History on the Senate floor, and in a special
"Political Buzz" today, three minutes of hot talk on Benghazi, Chuck
Hagel, and of course, partisanship. Playing today, chief congressional
correspondent Dana Bash, CNN contributor and ESPN senior writer L.Z.
Granderson, and Republican strategist Rich Galen.
RICH GALEN, GOP strategist: The only person that's being paid on this program.
(Laughter)
COSTELLO: Oh my gosh!
LZ GRANDERSON: Wow, we're starting there already. Boy!
GALEN: I've been sitting here trying to think what to say.
COSTELLO: Before we begin the conversation, a little explanation.
Republicans have successfully blocked the confirmation of Chuck Hagel
for Defense Secretary in part because of Hagel's controversial remarks
on gays and Jews and his terrible performance during his confirmation
hearings, but also because five months ago, terrorists attacked the U.S.
Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Sen. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-S.C.) We will continue pushing and asking
questions about Benghazi, not because it's personal, not because we're
Republicans and he's a Democrat, but because America needs to learn what
happened and we need to learn from our mistakes.
COSTELLO: This, despite testimony on Benghazi from General Petraeus,
Hillary Clinton, Admiral Mike Mullen, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta,
General Martin Dempsey, among others. But it's not enough. Republicans
now want to know more about what happened as the attack in Benghazi went
down and who changed those talking points. They want more answers from
the President. So, let's talk. So Dana, is Chuck, is the blockage of
Chuck Hagel's confirmation because of Benghazi, as Lindsey Graham
illustrates, or is it because of something else?
DANA BASH: It really is mostly because of Chuck Hagel. Benghazi was,
they sort of have been on a crusade to get more answers for Benghazi and
like you see many, many times here in the Senate, they saw Chuck Hagel
and his nomination as a way to use that as leverage to get answers and
they did.
[HEADLINE: "Why are Republicans so fixated on Benghazi?"]
BASH: They got an answer about what the President's role was on that
day. But really this is mostly about Chuck Hagel and you know, John
McCain is actually the perfect example of why it is about the man
himself. And that is he said last night after he had kind of given lots
of different explanations, all of them I think are credible from his
point of view, that the real fundamental thing that has bothered most of
Hagel's fellow Republicans here, former colleagues here, is the way
that he defied his party, defied his president, then George W. Bush, on
Iraq. And that really did not sit well with many Republicans here, and
they remember that. It's a whole bunch of other issues but that at its
core is the fundamental problem.
COSTELLO: So Rich, I'll ask you as a Republican strategist, are the
concerns over Chuck Hagel serious enough to filibuster and block
confirmation? That's the first time this has ever happened in the
history of U.S. politics.
GALEN: Well, everybody says that, but that would get two thumbs up in
the political fact-checks. John Bolton was blocked and I think at that
time, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. was a cabinet level slot. But here's
the thing about – the Republicans, I think Dana, have said that they'll
probably let this thing go after the ten-day Presidents' Day holiday. So
they're holding it up for another 10 or 12 days. The president only
nominated him on January 6th or 7th, whenever that was, so it's not like
this thing has been hanging around for six or seven months and the
Republicans are dragging their feet, dragging their feet. I suspect
Senator Hagel will be the Defense Secretary and from somebody who has to
write three days a week, having Hagel at Defense and Kerry at State,
that's like manna from heaven.
COSTELLO: Yeah but still, it boggles my mind, L.Z. – that – okay so,
we're pretty certain that Chuck Hagel's going to be nominated or
confirmed anyway, so why waste our time?
GRANDERSON: It makes for good theater. You know, I encourage all of
your viewers, you know, when they get done watching us, to just google
Chuck Hagel and Senator McCain. And you don't have to go very far before
you see quotes from Senator McCain praising Chuck Hagel, calling him an
outstanding citizen and someone that he would be proud to serve with
had he become president back in 2008. What has changed since when those
quotes were given, to today? The only thing I can think that has changed
is the fact you have a president they don't like and they want to stick
it to him. This is about theater more than anything else. Mitch
McConnell praised him as well on the way out, so I'm trying to figure
out what has happened over the short period of time. Everything he said
about defying W, that happened prior to those comments being made. And –
GALEN: But L.Z., he has given speeches and written and joined, been on
the board of organizations that frankly make me a little uncomfortable,
and again I'm on the side of giving a president wide latitude in picking
his cabinet. But those things have happened since he left the Senate,
so I'm not sure it's fair to compare what McCain said four or eight
years ago and what he is saying today.
BASH: And if I could just maybe shed some light on that, it was back in
2000, when Chuck Hagel was actually John McCain's national co-chair of
his presidential campaign, that's when McCain said that he personally,
he would even have Chuck Hagel as his Defense Secretary. And what did
change is what I mentioned before, it really was Iraq that changed, that
sent them on their separate ways personally, but much more importantly
on a policy level. And that was the fundamental problem at its
foundation but there's no question that Republicans see Hagel's
positions on Iran as a big problem, and then, yes, of course, that's on
top of that is the fact that they don't love the fact that the President
nominated him, someone who they think is, for lack of a better way to
say it, a political traitor, to be the next Defense Secretary.
GALEN: And Dana you're reporting on the day that –
(Crosstalk)
GALEN: Let me just get back to this. On the day that – and I'll stop.
On the day that he testified, your reporting was fantastic in the dismal
job that he was doing and I believe he used, you used the word
"shocked" coming from senators' mouths. So I think for a lot of, for
some Republicans that feel like me, that the President should get who he
wants, they think that if that's how badly he did in that forum and
he's been a member of the Senate, that maybe we need to give this just
one more breath before we vote yes.
COSTELLO: Okay. L.Z., wrap it up for us.
GRANDERSON: I just, well I just wanted to point out that while it's
true his initial quotes, John McCain's initial quotes were in 2000, the
Associated Press has quotes from him as early as 2008-2009 still
praising the man, so it's not as if I'm reaching all the way back for a
decade for old quotes. These are still relatively new in the political
cycle. And so I agree, Chuck Hagel did a horrible job. I'm just trying
to figure out why are these two men who praised him fairly recently in
the cycle, why are they trashing him this hard? I think it's personal,
in addition to his performance.
-- Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center