On Friday, CNN Reporter Jim Clancy conducted an eight-minute interview with Palestinian spokesperson Hanan Ashrawi and former Israeli Ambassador Dore Gold that was unique in its level of bias and lack of professionalism of the interviewer.

Clancy allowed Ashrawi to regurgitate the Palestinian talking points about the Fatah/Hamas reconciliation deal for the first four minutes of the interview and trash Israel in the last minute and in-between accusingly asked Gold if an Israeli attack on terrorists in Gaza was done to try and scuttle the reconciliation deal (and ignored his answer).

The interview began with Clancy asking Ashrawi to describe the deal. He helped her out by asking her to explain how the deal didn’t really create a unified government, just a mixing of technocrats expecting the audience to believe that the Hamas leaders will have no say. Not once did Clancy ask a probing question about Hamas terrorism, or itsstatement made earlier that day doubling down on its commitment to violence and the destruction of Israel.

When he turned to Ambassador Gold, his first question was, “Did he [Prime Minister Netanyahu] personally order that strike on Gaza as they were in the midst of celebrating this deal?” making the implication that the strike was done to break up the celebration. Gold responded that Israeli military actions in Gaza had no link to the deal or its celebration. Cutting off Gold in the middle of his answer, Clancy asked about the civilian casualties. Finally the former Ambassador was able to return to the Hamas/Fatah deal and Hamas’ long record of terrorism.

take our poll - story continues below

Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses? (1)

  • Did SCOTUS make the right decision on medical mandates for large businesses?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Lid updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Clancy wasn’t done; echoing Ms. Ashrawi he said, “Are you sure you are interpreting it the correct way, because the way I’m seeing it, it’s leading to fresh blood in the political system running the government making way to elections.” Again Clancy ignored that the “fresh blood” comes from an organization recognized by the U.S. and Europe as a terrorist entity, and that they just promised to maintain their terrorist ways.

Finally when Gold said talks could continue if Hamas recognized Israel and renounced violence, Clancy went back to the Palestinian spokesperson and asked if the peace process was dead with this deal, Ashrawi’s answer was a minute-long uninterrupted rant about the evils of Israel.

As Ed Morrissey commented in his Hot Air post about this interview:

Israel’s policies in the West Bank and Gaza are certainly not above scrutiny or criticism. However, one would expect a news organization to approach this fairly and hold all sides to the same scrutiny or at least to acknowledge the attacks from both sides. Clancy’s performance here is simply jaw-droppingly awful.