Matthews And National Review Reporter’s Tense Interview About GOP’ers Conduct Evolves Into Battle
On Friday, Chris Matthews and National Review reporter Robert Costa engaged in a tense back and forth over the appropriateness of Senate Republicans grilling President Barack Obama’s nominee to become the next Secretary of Defense, former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE). Their tension quickly evolved into a battle over the appropriateness of Senate Republicans conduct in a string of recent congressional hearings.
The demeanor between Matthews and Costa immediately became tense when the host declared that he agreed with Huffington Post reporter Sam Stein’s characterization of those hearings as having been a debacle for the Republicans who engaged in grandstanding because they stole the spotlight away from the ill-prepared Hagel.
Costa responded to that assertion with sarcasm about the predictability of Matthew’s agreement with Stein. The Hardball host did not appear to appreciate the remark.
The interview soon evolved from simmering tension to outright argument. Turning to last week’s congressional hearings, Costa defended remarks made by Sen. Rand Paul towards former Sec. Hillary Clinton during her testimony about the Benghazi attacks. Costa claimed that the senator has the right to have the opinion that Clinton resigned over those attacks. Matthews countered that Paul’s opinion was invalid and challenged Costa to defend its validity — a challenge Costa declined.
Their exchanges ended on a cold note, with Matthews thanking Costa for “defending the indefensible.”
Watch the segment below via MSNBC:
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com