Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton on Monday sidestepped a question on Senator Chuck Schumer’s decision to break with their party and the administration over the Iran nuclear agreement.
At a press availability in Exeter, N.H., as Clinton walked away from reporters, she was asked about the Iran deal and the decision by Schumer (D-N.Y.) not to support it.
“Madame Secretary, any comments on the Iran deal?” a reporter asked her. “Senator Schumer’s not supporting it – are you disappointed in him?”
Video footage shows Clinton hesitate, then look at the reporter and gesture briefly in his direction before walking away without answering the question.
“Thank you all,” she was heard saying indistinctly as she left.
Schumer is a longtime Clinton ally who endorsed her 2016 campaign for the White House long before she declared it. The two served together as senators from New York for eight years.
Schumer’s announcement that he will oppose the deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) when a resolution of disapproval comes to a vote next month has brought an angry response from liberals.
The Senate’s third most senior Democrat, he is in line to succeed the retiring Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) as party leader in the Senate at the end of next year, and Democratic critics are now questioning his suitability for the post.
A notable exception was former senator Jim Webb (D-Va.), who himself opposes the JCPOA and defended Schumer on Sunday, saying it was time “to put country ahead of party.”
Webb is also running for the Democratic nomination in the primary race currently led by Clinton.
Schumer also spoke to reporters on Monday, for the first time since he announced his opposition to the Iran agreement in the form of a 1,660-word statement setting out his reasons.
“This was one of the most difficult decisions that I’ve had to make,” he said, adding that he had read the JCPOA multiple times, held many meetings and interviews with people on both sides of the argument, and took part in “three classified briefings – where you can ask questions that are not in the confines of the document but very relevant to making the decision.”
“I have found, when it’s such a difficult decision as this one has been, you’ve got to study it carefully, come up with a conclusion, not let pressure, politics or party influence your decision, and then do the right thing, as one sees it,” Schumer said.
“That’s what I’ve done and I will support the motion of disapproval against this agreement. This deal has too many flaws to support, and therefore I must oppose it.”
After restating his main reasons for opposing the JCPOA, Schumer tackled the argument that the alternative to the negotiated agreement is war.
“What is the solution? Some say the only answer to this is war. I don’t believe so. I believe we should go back and try to get a better deal.”
Asked whether he thought that was realistic, Schumer replied that he believed it was worth trying, “given the many holes in this agreement.”
As to the White House suggestion that perhaps he should not be the next Democratic leader in the Senate, he said, “Look, this is a decision of conscience, and my colleagues respect that as I will respect their decisions of conscience. So no, I don’t think that means very much.”
Also coming out publicly against the JCPOA last week was another influential Democrat on the Hill, Rep. Eliot Engel of New York, ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which has held a series of hearings on the deal.
“The answers I’ve received [about the agreement] simply don’t convince me that this deal will keep a nuclear weapon out of Iran’s hands, and may in fact strengthen Iran’s position as a destabilizing and destructive influence across the Middle East,” Engel said in a statement released to the media.
Meanwhile, President Obama refused to back down from his earlier comments linking congressional Republicans with “Death to America”-chanting Iranian hardliners.
In a recorded interview aired on Sunday, he told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria that the debate on the deal in the coming weeks should be about substance, and “not get distracted by tone, vote-counts, [or Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell’s feelings hurt.”
Obama said drawing the link between the Iranian hardliners and Republican caucus was accurate.
“What I said is absolutely true factually,” he said. “The truth of the matter is, inside of Iran, the people most opposed to the deal are the Revolutionary Guard, the Qods force, hard-liners who are implacably opposed to any cooperation with the international community.”
“The reason,” he added, “that Mitch McConnell and the rest of the folks in his caucus who opposed this, jumped out and opposed this before they even read it, before it was even posted, is reflective of an ideological commitment not to get a deal done. And in that sense they do have a lot in common with the hardliners [in Iran] who are much more satisfied with the status quo.”
Obama did not say whether he placed congressional Democrats who oppose the deal in the same category.