• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

Jon Stewart Decimates Judith Miller

Last night, Jon Stewart’s guest on The Daily Show was former New York Times reporter, who was of course one of the most prominent journalists writing stories asserting that Iraq and an active WMD program in the years before the Iraq War, and the result was perhaps one of Stewart’s best interviews in some time:

Stewart may not be a journalist, but he seems to have a better idea of how Miller should have done her job than she does.

Update Comedy Central has now posted the full unedited interview, which runs 22 minutes:

Related Posts:

  • None Found

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Wow, she is completely unwilling to take the least bit of ownership or responsibility over this. Despicable.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. C. Clavin says:

    Stewart went too easy on her.
    The Bush White House would tell her what to write.
    She wrote it, the Times published it.
    Then the Bush Administration would go on TV and say;

    look its right here in the NY Times.

    She has the blood of 4000 troops on her hands, along with the rest of them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Paul L. says:

    So Jon Stewart is a hard hitting news journalist again to progressives.
    The guy who photoshopped Ted Cruz killing a panda is the gold standard of progressive journalism.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Paul L. says:

    THERE WERE NO WMDS IN IRAQ.
    Report: CIA Bought Hundreds of Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction in ‘Operation Avarice’
    But that is Bush lies printed in the NY Times.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. michael reynolds says:

    @Paul L.:

    Those are chemical weapons and chemical weapons do not create mushroom clouds. Chemical weapons were not the excuse, that’s bullshit, because we not only knew Saddam had chemical weapons, we helped him to target them against Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war.

    Something for you to remember about Saint Ronnie Reagan, and remember as well next time you decide the Iranians are irrationally hostile to us.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. C. Clavin says:

    @Paul L.:
    Ooooh…an article from “The Blaze”!!!!
    Except it is about old unusable chemical weapons that posed zero threat to to US citizens…meanwhile the Stewart piece with Miller is specifically about nuclear weapons. You know…

    mushroom clouds over our cities

    .
    Keep trying to defend the loss of blood and treasure in the biggest foreign policy blunder in US history..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Pinky says:

    It’s “destroys”. Everyone knows it’s “destroys”.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. Neil Hudelson says:

    @Pinky:

    Eh, normally I would agree with you on this but language is very democratic. It’s dictated by the population using it; dictionaries document said usage.

    In common parlance, “decimate” no longer means “to reduce by 10%.” It means to eviscerate. Is that usage wrong regarding the technical definition? Of course. Nonetheless, that is what it now means.

    I say this as someone who has, on more than one occasion, corrected bloggers on the use of the word “ironic.”

    I realized at a certain point I just looked insufferable.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. michael reynolds says:

    @Neil Hudelson:
    Maybe he only destroyed a tenth of her.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. C. Clavin says:

    @Neil Hudelson:
    She’s making oodles on a book deal…I doubt he took 10% out of her profits. She already has no respect anywhere but the Fox News Nation.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    Anyone who is not perfectly in sync with Stewart’s prejudices and sensibilities is an idiot to go on The Daily Show. Ambushes, selective editing, lies, outright fraudulent editing — all perfectly normal practices. After all, they are not a real journalistic program, they are a comedy show. Their purpose isn’t to inform, it’s to entertain. They make a huge point of saying so on a regular basis.

    Megan McArdle nailed it last fall. Or, to use the appropriate vernacular, “destroyed” them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. Neil Hudelson says:

    Since the interviews are lightly edited–and usually fully available on the website–and since I have yet to hear of a guest on the daily show (not the field segments) complain about such an ambush, your gnashing of teeth rings a bit hollow.

    The most legendary interview–Cramer, this one, John Yoo–were all with people who knew the subject matter ahead of time, and indeed were experts. Are you really complaining that Jon Stewart asked Miller to defend her writing false information, and the fact that she couldn’t is Stewart’s fault? The fact that Cramer couldn’t defend his publicly recorded admissions to manipulating stock markets for his gain again is not the fault of Stewart.

    John Yoo knew what the interview would be about, and seems to have prepared himself aptly–he came out ahead against Stewart.

    It really sounds like you are complaining that people who consider themselves experts in their field aren’t able to live up to their own meritocratic standards.

    Kind of odd hearing a “conservative” complaining like that, isn’t it?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Mikey says:

    @michael reynolds: What happens is the Bush defenders do an unstated swing from the specific kinds of WMD it was asserted Iraq was developing (nuclear) to the general definition of WMD (which officially also includes chemical and biological weapons). So when some decrepit, unusable pile of chemical weapons is found, they bluster on with “see, Iraq DID have WMD!” without admitting they weren’t the sort of WMD Bush defenders pushed us into going to war over.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. C. Clavin says:

    @Neil Hudelson:

    your gnashing of teeth rings a bit hollow.

    Again. And again. And again.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. jewelbomb says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Megan McArdle nailed it last fall. Or, to use the appropriate vernacular, “destroyed” them.

    Yeah, McMegan’s basic argument is that, since the Daily Show frequently exposes stupid/dishonest people for the stupid/dishonest people they are, then the best course of action for conservatives is not to go on the show at all. Not sure how urging her ilk to run in fear from the Daily Show is the same as “destroying” them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. An Interested Party says:

    After all, they are not a real journalistic program, they are a comedy show. Their purpose isn’t to inform, it’s to entertain. They make a huge point of saying so on a regular basis.

    This only serves to make her decimation all the more powerful…if she couldn’t get past an entertainer, how credible can she really be? This whole thing is also an indictment of the media and how pathetic their members are in that they should have been confronting people like this long ago…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. michael reynolds says:

    So let me get this straight: conservatives are defending the central pillar of the liberal elite mainstream media?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Kari Q says:

    Stewart is typically polite to the point of being deferential to controversial guests. He’s hardly a tough, hard-hitting interviewer. Granted, he’s pretty firm with Miller here, but an interviewer determined to ‘decimate’ or ‘destroy’ her could have been much tougher.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. Hal_10000 says:

    @michael reynolds:

    To be fair to Reagan, Iraq was in danger of being overrun in the war and we correctly identified them as the lesser of two evils. We’ve allied ourselves with scummy regimes when we’ve had to.

    Funny how Reagan understood the danger of Iraq falling and allowing Iran to expand its power in the region. This was something that seems to have completely eluded the architects of the Iraq War.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. michael reynolds says:

    @Hal_10000:
    I don’t think Iraq was the lesser of the two evils, I think Iran was. In fact if you look at the last two decades of terrorist trouble for us and our allies, the epicenter of the problem is easy to spot: Saudi Arabia. The ideology is Saudi. The money is Saudi. The people are Saudis. Not Iranians, Saudis.

    Our problem isn’t with Persians or Muslims per se, it’s with Arabs – Saudis, Syrians, Iraqis. The Mullahs are aszholes but ask yourself: would you rather be a woman in the KSA or Iran? Would you rather be an artist, say, or a filmmaker in KSA or Iran? Would you rather get your education in the KSA or Iran? Would you rather be a Christian or a Jew or a Hindu in the KSA or Iran? Culturally Iran is waaay closer to us than the KSA.

    We’ve been backing the wrong team.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. Mikey says:

    @michael reynolds:

    In fact if you look at the last two decades of terrorist trouble for us and our allies, the epicenter of the problem is easy to spot: Saudi Arabia.

    That’s the last two decades–as in “since 1995”–not the early 1980s. At that time the Saudis were not even a tertiary concern. They had not had an Islamist revolution, taken American hostages, or begun exporting terror as Iran had. Remember what the Iranian Hezbollah did in the early 1980s–bombing the US Embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut in1983 and the Beirut embassy annex in 1984, hijacking TWA 847 and murdering an American sailor–and those are only the actions against Americans and American interests.

    Things are very different today, of course, and the Obama administration is making timely and appropriate efforts to create a level of rapprochement with Iran. And you’re correct that in many ways Iran, and especially the Iranian people, is far closer to us in culture and outlook than the Saudi kingdom will likely ever be. But you shouldn’t draw inferences from today’s situation to apply when looking at the region as it was in 1980.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. Scott says:

    @Mikey

    you’re correct that in many ways Iran, and especially the Iranian people, is far closer to us in culture and outlook than the Saudi kingdom will likely ever be

    I agree with both you and Michael and have been saying so for some time. However, I am struck about this belief not making any headway into the mainstream American thinking. No politician, pundit or anyone of influence dares express any such thoughts either out loud or in print. Curious.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Neil Hudelson: Conservatives have never been big fans of “meritocracy”. They are in favor of the “existing social order”, you know, the one that is dominated by white Christian males?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. anjin-san says:

    @ Jenos

    Why don’t you tell us again how horribly unfair it was of Katie Couric to ask a major party’s nominee to be the Vice President of the United States what newspapers she reads? How it was horrible, mean, unfair liberal “gotcha” journalism at it’s worst?

    I mean the woman conservatives call “Sarahcuda” could not answer a simple question that I could have handled with ease when I was 13.

    It must be Couric’s fault that Palin came off on television as a babbling ignoramus.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. al-Ameda says:

    @Paul L.:

    The guy who photoshopped Ted Cruz killing a panda is the gold standard of progressive journalism.

    The fact is, that guy conducts better interviews than just about any “respectable” journalist in television. He doesn’t bully his gusts and he is informed on the issues.

    What about that is objectionable to you?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    @anjin-san: Why don’t you tell us again how horribly unfair it was of Katie Couric to ask a major party’s nominee to be the Vice President of the United States what newspapers she reads? How it was horrible, mean, unfair liberal “gotcha” journalism at it’s worst?

    I don’t recall saying it before, so I don’t think I could say it “again.”

    Besides, it’s a comedy show. It’s entertainment, not news. Why even pretend that it should be taken seriously ever?

    I can’t find a clip of it online, but the time Rob Riggle went undercover to talk with the hippies in Berkeley… that was legendary.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Jenos Idanian #13 says:

    OK, here’s the Rob Riggle in Berkeley clip.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. al-Ameda says:

    @Jenos Idanian #13:

    Besides, it’s a comedy show. It’s entertainment, not news. Why even pretend that it should be taken seriously ever?

    Pretend to take seriously? I find that Jon Stewart and Bill Maher do a good job of interviewing guests, and exchanging viewpoints with panelists.

    Yes, all of this is in the context of a comedy show, and not ‘serious’ Sunday morning shows like MTP or FTN, where moderators ask softball questions, make false equivalence observations, and do not follow-up on questionable assertions.

    And yes, there is an important element of ‘entertainment value’ that is always there. However both Maher and Stewart let their guests have their say, and both Bill and Jon are, perhaps because of the format, unafraid to ask a hard question, or to be upfront with their opinions.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. grumpy realist says:

    @michael reynolds: What was that comment: “yeah, we know that there are Weapons of Mass Destruction there in Iraq, because we’re holding on to the shipping receipts!”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Just 'nutha' ig'rant cracker says:

    @michael reynolds: Only to the extent that said “pillar” repeats the flapdoodle conservatives believe in order to validate them.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0