Powered by Topple

Katie Pavlich to Dem pundit: ‘You’re not entitled to seeing intelligence … people like you don’t believe in it’

(Image: Fox News screenshot)

Powered by Topple

Katie Pavlich and Democratic strategist Richard Fowler locked horns in a heated debate over the U.S. handling of the situation in Iran.

The Townhall editor and Fox News contributor sparred with Fowler on “America’s Newsroom” Monday, as they discussed U.S. Military’s intelligence on Iran and who should get to see it in order to back up President Trump’s decision to order the drone strike that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani.

(Video: Fox News)

The president’s critics have argued that escalating tensions with Iran will lead to an unwanted war and, despite Trump’s assurances that he does not seek to amp up aggression, provocation by Iran’s government will be met with swift action by the U.S.

Fox News host Sandra Smith cited an opinion piece by Joe Lieberman a former Democratic U.S. senator from Connecticut, who wrote that Trump’s decision was “morally, constitutionally and strategically correct.” He called out the partisan responses to the move as detrimental to leaders trying to make decisions on foreign-policy events and national-security issues.

“Why can’t the Party’s candidates simply admit Qasem Soleimani’s death makes Americans safer?” Lieberman wrote in the op-ed published by The Wall Street Journal. “If enough voters decide that Democrats can’t be trusted to keep America safe, Mr. Trump won’t have much trouble winning a second term in November. That’s one more reason Democrats should leave partisan politics at the water’s edge, and whatever their opinion is of President Trump and other matters, stand together against Iran and dangerous leaders like Qasem Soleimani.”

Fowler weighed in on the topic.

“This is not about partisan politics,” the Democratic pundit and radio show host said.

“For Democrats, it is,” Pavlich interjected.

“This is about protecting our men and women, and those living in this country,” Fowler continued, noting the “keyword is that increasing the probability of an Iranian retaliatory attack against Americans.”

“We are living in a world where we got into Afghanistan and Iraq in 2003, we are still there today, and men and women are still dying today because of faulty intelligence, because of a lack of strategy,” he said. “So let’s not get into the same situation again.”

“They had the right intelligence on this move, and they made the right decision,” Pavlich said, prompting Fowler to interject, “I just want to see it.”

“You’re not entitled to seeing it because people like you don’t believe in intelligence,” Pavlich fired back, setting off a tense exchange as she battled Fowler to get her point across.

“Let me finish my point. This is about American lives. Iran would have attacked Americans in the future regardless of whether we took them out,” she argued.

“We took them out because the risk of keeping Soleimani and his deputies alive, who were also in that vehicle, was greater than killing him and taking him off the face of the Earth to plan other attacks. It’s about American lives. It’s also about Syrian lives and Iraqi lives, who are now celebrating in the streets, handing out candy and they’re happy that he’s dead,” Pavlich said.

Fowler began to rail against other decisions the president has made regarding the Middle East region, slamming his “feckless foreign policy” as Pavlich called him out for “mixing so many different topics.”

Smith finally interjected to cool things off and offered Pavlich the last word.

“President Trump has been very decisive in foreign policy,” she said. “He’s not getting us into another war in the Middle East. Iran has been at war with us for decades. He’s simply responding to attacks against Americans and the Iranians killing Americans in Iraq.”

Frieda Powers

Comments

Latest Articles