you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

It was certainly a sound bite. But he only clarified "within international law" after the line of questioning became about the siege and resource denial, so he did actively change/update the sound bite to address that specific thing.

He did somewhat seem on auto pilot with it after hearing the question, so I could believe he might choose to phrase it less poorly given a second chance, but It's pretty presumptuous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's the sort of thing he could clarify in an apology I think.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    He should apologize for not condoning the siege? I don't think that would be a politically savvy choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments