By Brad Dayspring
WASHINGTON, D.C. (Press Release)– On Nov. 10, Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Regency Hotel in New York. Early the next morning, after a handful of journalists asked for details, our office released a short readout divided into three different issue areas – Iran, the United Nations, and the U.S. election.
The following two sentences appeared about the election results:
“On the U.S. Election: Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington. He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”
This paragraph led Ron Kampeas of the JTA to write a blog post, “Candid Cantor,” in which he proclaimed, “Cantor tells Bibi outright: Gotcher back against Obama.
Kampeas wrote: “I can’t remember an opposition leader telling a foreign leader, in a personal meeting, that he would side, as a policy, with that leader against the president. Certainly, in statements on one specific issue or another — building in Jerusalem, or some such — lawmakers have taken the sides of other nations. But to have-a-face to face and say, in general, we will take your side against the White House — that sounds to me extraordinary.”
Extraordinary indeed. So extraordinary, in fact, that it never happened.
Unfortunately, his false assertion was heavily referenced in a piece by Politico’s Laura Rozen, who wrote, “Veteran observer of U.S.-Israeli relations Ron Kampeas said he found that statement “an eyebrow-raiser.” She then continued to repeat the accusation above.
These two stories were then expounded on and further mischaracterized by countless others, including Steve Benen of The Washington Monthly, Glenn Greenwald at Salon and Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic, who hyperbolically suggested that the incident was a scandal, or worse, a felony.
These are serious accusations and must be treated as such. As the author of these two sentences, I feel it is my obligation to set the record straight, starting with the first point: “Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington.”
This sentence was intended to summarize the portion of their conversation about the U.S. election. The checks and balances message was a dominant theme of the 2010 campaign, and certainly played a role in the defeat of many incumbent members. In that context, it would be difficult to imagine a serious conversation about the post-election shift in power without at least mentioning the role of the new Republican majority in the 112th Congress.
The separation of powers was designed by the Founders to prevent a majority from unbridled rule, prohibiting any branch of the new American government from attaining too much power. In a divided government, policy differences will naturally be more prevalent than during periods of one party rule.
With that in mind, it hardly seems shocking that a senior member of the House would reiterate the constitutional responsibility of checks and balances. Additionally, it is noteworthy that nothing in this sentence relates to, sides with, or advocates for Israel or its prime minister – despite efforts by Think Progress and others to insert that notion for argumentative convenience.
Second: “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”
To be clear, Eric understands this special relationship, and he felt it important to make clear to the prime minister that the new Republican majority does as well.
Do you know who else does? According to this White House Press Office readout, President Barack Obama does: “…The President and the Prime Minister reaffirmed the strong, unbreakable bonds that characterize the special relationship between the United States and Israel.”
In other words, Eric reiterated administration policy, according to its own definition.
The second half of the statement, “and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other,” is something that Eric wanted to stress, particularly in the current global environment.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton seems to agree, if her remarks to AIPAC are any indication.
“Given the shared challenges we face,” Clinton said, “the relationship between the United States and Israel has never been more important. The United States has long recognized that a strong and secure Israel is vital to our own strategic interests. And we know that the forces that threaten Israel also threaten the United States of America. And therefore, we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel’s security, we strengthen America’s security.”
Last, Rozen wrote on Politico, “Kampeas also characterized the one-on-one meeting between the prime minister and the lawmaker as unusual.”
Yet both Kampeas and Rozen failed to mention that on the same day Netanyahu met with Eric, the prime minister held a similar meeting with the New York Democrat, Sen. Chuck Schumer.
For some reason, neither found that meeting to be so unusual.
In the minute-to-minute news cycle in which elected officials must operate, there will no doubt be times when intent is misinterpreted and times when mistakes happen. Lord knows I’ve been guilty of both.
More concerning, however, is that not one of the individuals mentioned here inquired, called or emailed about the intent Eric’s remarks. Not one took the time to ask for additional details about this part of their conversation before putting their own words into his mouth, resulting in accusations of being a traitor or committing felonious acts.
In the four days since the original post, the charge has been repeated hundreds of times. This kind of echo chamber is not only sloppy, but terribly dangerous.
*
Brad Dayspring is the press secretary for the House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.).