| NBC’s Commander-in-Chief Forum suffered from numerous shortcomings. Matt Lauer, whose forte is clearly asking chefs every spring how to grill salmon, was clearly out of his depth, either because he was too enthralled with Donald Trump or too ignorant of national security issues to ask incisive follow-up questions. Lauer also interrupted Hillary Clinton numerous times while allowing Donald Trump all the time he needed to voice his lies and inanities. |
| Lauer devoted about one-third of the 25 minutes allotted to Clinton to ask about her emails while ignoring any of the scandal-tinged issues the media had raised about Trump such as his financial contribution to the Florida attorney general when she was considering launching an investigation of one of his business ventures; a lawsuit that has been filed alleging the rape of a minor; an on-going trial for defrauding attendees at “Trump University;” his failure to make public any tax returns, including those that are no longer being audited; and his courting of the white nationalist alt right. In addition, although the forum was supposed to involve national security issues as well as veterans’ issues, no questions were asked about what was learned from our involvement in the middle east; how the U.S. could pivot to other parts of the world; what should the U.S. do with respect to NATO; and how should the U.S. handle Russian and Chinese aggression. Following the forum, there was a pretty good review of what had happened with members of the audience. One of the audience members who was interviewed had asked why Hillary could be trusted when servicemen who had mishandled classified information had lost their careers. Clinton responded that she was wrong in how she had handled her emails, but reaffirmed that she had never sent or received any emails that were correctly marked as classified. And, noted that she had an entirely different State Department system for classified emails. In a later interview the audience member asking the question acknowledged that the three emails Clinton had sent were incorrectly marked, nevertheless claimed that she had access to information that she should have known was classified even though it was not marked, and by implication, that she had emailed that information. There is no evidence of that this happened and every reason to give Clinton, by virtue of her position as Secretary of State and the authority responsible for classifying State Department information. This interview does highlight the limited role of evidence in judging Hillary Clinton. Most of these shortcomings could easily be fixed by turning it into what it ought to have been: a debate on national security and veterans affairs. In a debate format, much of the unevenness that Matt Lauer demonstrated would not have been possible. Unfortunately, the Commission of Presidential Debates has conceded to the desires of the political candidates to ensure equivalency between the candidates at the cost of ensuring that the public was informed. As a result, there are not enough debates; forums have been developed as a substitute. Forums are a poor substitute because of the shortcomings mentioned. As much of a disaster as this forum was, however, it did spawn one good development. |