Journalist Matt Lee questions State Department Spokesperson John Kirby about Ambassador Shapiro's remarks regarding Israel.
QUESTION: Why – in a particularly difficult moment or a sensitive moment like yesterday was in the wake of the Iran deals, the sanctions on Iran getting lifted, something that clearly was opposed by Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government, was it – in retrospect, was it wise to send Ambassador Shapiro out to give a speech castigating the Israeli Government on issues, and not making really any new points about your opposition to their activities in the West Bank?
MR KIRBY: Yeah, there’s really nothing new there.
QUESTION: Well, exactly. But why --
MR KIRBY: Well, this was --
QUESTION: You’re trying to heal the relationship with – that – with Israel, not exacerbate it. Not exacerbate the problems, I assume, right? So why have your ambassador go out and basically trash the Israelis for stuff that they already know you don’t like?
Mr. Kirby was also asked about the EU labeleing of settlement products. He responded, "We do not view labeling the origin of products as being from the settlements a boycott of Israel. We also do not believe that labeling the origin of products is equivalent to a boycott."
Murderer’s Father Changes Story 3X: First “Proud of murderous son” to “I’m a Victim” to “Boy is Innocent”
Michael Becker opines about the snail's pace of Trey Gowdy’s Benghazi hearings.
Really Trey? Really? You’ve been in Washington how long? And you missed the fact that the “mainstream media” are member members of the DNC with bylines?