It’s strange to watch a leader of a country answer questions for an American audience, knowing that the United States is mulling over a decision to send rockets his way. What did Syrian President Bashar al-Assad think he could get out of Monday night’s interview with Charlie Rose — a chance to warm Americans to his perspective, a chance to scare them away from conflict in the country with talk of retribution?
During the interview, Rose, stoned-faced as ever, asked a person whom many consider to be a ruthless dictator with the blood of a hundred thousand citizens on his hands, point blank: “Why do you have such a stockpile of chemical weapons?”
For the record, Assad denied responsibility for the Aug. 21 chemical strike that reportedly killed some 1,400 people. He wouldn’t comment on whether Syria had a stockpile of chemical weapons. He said he “didn’t know” if chemical warfare is comparable to a nuclear attack because “we haven’t tried either (laugh).” He thinks those U.S. intelligence reports that say he did, indeed, try chemical weapons are “nonsense.” Of the Aug. 21 attack, here’s his exchange with Rose:
BASHAR al-ASSAD: We — we’re not in the area where the al — where the — where the alleged chemical attack was happened, as it alleged. We’re not sure that anything happened because —
CHARLIE ROSE: Even at this date, you are not sure that chemical weapons, even though you have seen the videotape, even though you’ve seen the bodies, even though —
ASSAD: No, I have —
ROSE: — your own officials have been there.
ASSAD: I haven’t finished. Our soldiers in another area were attacked chemically. Our soldiers. They went to the hospital — as casualties because of chemical weapons. But in the area where they said the government used chemical weapons, we only had video and we only have pictures and allegations. We’re not there. Our forces — our police, our institutions don’t exist. How can you talk about what happened if you don’t have evidences?
But perhaps the scene-stopper of the interview came when Rose asked Assad what he thought about Obama’s red line, or the world’s red line, on chemical weapons. Without pause or affect, Assad replied, “What red line?”
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."