Sunday Talks: Kellyanne Conway -vs- John Dickerson…

President-elect Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Kellyanne Conway appears on CBS morning show to be interviewed by one of Paul Ryan’s BFF’s, John Dickerson…. about, wait for it… Yeah, muh Russians.

Conway does a great job dealing with the insufferable moonbattery:

hillary-clinton-press-we-can-2

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Stupid Government, CIA, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, media bias, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Sunday Talks: Kellyanne Conway -vs- John Dickerson…

  1. milktrader says:

    I get more impressed with this fine lady every time she speaks

    Liked by 13 people

  2. Disgusted says:

    Why are Trump’s spokespeople going into these outrageous situations giving todd and this other guy a forum to attempt to get their false narrative out. I watched both. It feels like they were both ambushed, but they voluntarily showed up for these interviews instead. WHY????

    Liked by 2 people

    • scott says:

      They were not ambushed. They knew it was coming.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Rick Caird says:

        I would have counter attacked. I would have ask Dickerson why, after a week of complaining about false news, why was he now a purveyor of false news. Why did the Washington Post even publish this piece of fake news?

        Liked by 2 people

    • IMO to not show up would imply weakness. We should always be willing and able to defend our positions no matter the opponent or setting. If there ever comes a time where we can’t, that is the time to reevaluate our positions.

      However, it’s also important to make sure the MSM continues their descent into irrelevancy so keeping these kinda of interviews to a minimum is still a good idea.

      Liked by 9 people

      • TheseTruths says:

        “We” are not the Trump administration. In my opinion, they can’t cut the media off before he even takes office. He has already done a great deal to circumvent them and call them out. I think we need to keep our power dry for now.

        Liked by 6 people

      • lastinillinois says:

        Cmon, Dr P.
        Of course we know that they are liars and thieves.
        Of course we are aware of their treachery.

        So, only go into friendly environments, then?
        And only when there is good news to report, I assume?
        What’s next – only go to the friendly environments, to report the good news, on sunny days?

        You come across as someone who’s never had to work very hard at attaining something worth having.
        You come across as soft.

        Liked by 6 people

      • grainofsalt2 says:

        “IMO to not show up would imply weakness. We should always be willing and able to defend our positions no matter the opponent or setting.”

        Exactly! We must not allow them to run with their lies unchecked. We must nip it in the bud from the get go.

        Liked by 4 people

      • snaggletooths says:

        Your right about needing to cut off the MSM as long as we keep tuning them in they will continue to do what they do. Alternative sources the best bet.

        Like

        • 2zymos says:

          Asymetric attack and continually calling the “program-host-liars” insane, to their faces, looks to be a better path now that the election is over.
          Calmly discussing and “letting them get their “barbed hook” questions out there is likely self-defeating at this stage.

          In the mean time, some folks need to temporarily cancel cable — until the media get over their HOPEFULLY temporary insanity, or fire some folks in an effort to become more connected to reality.

          Liked by 1 person

      • My point was, and remains, that we cannot always reside in friendly environments and that restricting ourselves as such implies an ideological weakness. I don’t know about you but seeing how Hillary and Obama avoid Fox News like the plague does not give me the impression that they have ideological strength.

        Also, there are occasions where there is a form of “guilt through silence” so avoiding these knowingly unfriendly situations can potentially lead to implied guilt by refusing (or hiding) from discussion. We saw this multiple times with Hillary Clinton where she refused to discuss certain topics (her health, etc) and the consensus was her silence was proof of her guilt. Not saying this is the case all the time, but it is an issue that must be addressed carefully. One must walk a fine line between brushing something off (ie silence) and giving something too much attention.

        Either way, I am NOT advocating that anyone watch or support these programs, but when there is a knowingly false narrative being driven the administration should not completely ignore it. Until alternative media sufficiently kills MSM this balance will need to be struck, but ensuring the MSM’s continued irrelevance should also be a top priority.

        Many apologies if this exasperates you again! 😉

        Liked by 1 person

    • MaineCoon says:

      Totally agree. I am repeatedly frustrated to see Trump team submitted to this false news narrative. Also ambushed. No matter how any of them response, I do not imo think they are winning these narratives — even though they usually have meaning responses. I still think they are losing this MSM on MSM turf. Agree. WHY????

      Like

  3. Pissed in Cali says:

    I think I’m in love with KAC

    Liked by 5 people

  4. freepetta says:

    Will they ever give up?

    Liked by 3 people

  5. rashamon says:

    For Kelly, it’s a target-rich environment. She’s simply honing her skills.

    Liked by 8 people

  6. “And how are you defining cooperation?” Brilliant! I love that right away she began asking for a more specific question regarding Trump’s “cooperation” with any investigations. Liberals always hide behind obtuse and overly general questions because they have no factual basis for asking any such questions. Their entire motive is to get a “gotcha” answer that they can play on an endless loop across their propaganda networks. She combats that right out of the gate by demanding more precise questions; effectively limiting the scope of a gotcha question, while simultaneously exposing their lack of ability to rationalize a reason to ask said question in the first place.

    More winning please! 😀 😀 😀

    Liked by 14 people

  7. Craig W. Gordon says:

    Man, we dodged a bullet (actually a nuclear missile) in hilLiaRy as President. Based on her war drum beat posture during the debates leading up to the election, and now the lies being spewed by the LSM about Russia … we’d be going to war with the rushkies soon if she were elected.

    Liked by 5 people

  8. MrE says:

    Not a huge fan of KAC, but credit where credit is due – she handled that fruitcake fantastically.

    Liked by 4 people

  9. 4bleu says:

    “why go back 15 years to the worst of the intel …”
    because it was absolutely used as the basis for a political attack. duh
    love the way Trump has them in a spot where they have to twist into pretzels justifying the old lies to defend the new ones.

    Liked by 5 people

  10. Ono says:

    Dickerson…”but but but but but…why why why”?

    KAC “you are not looking at the truth of the matter”

    Outa of the park Home run!

    Liked by 9 people

  11. Suzanne says:

    she needed to look this jerk right in the eye and ask him just WHY they think the Russians would try to swing the election for Trump… why on earth would the Russians try to get a hard-nosed Alpha Male elected who has pledged to up-end everything when Putin could have blithely continued his little incursions here and there relatively unmolested by Clinton? it’s utterly ridiculous

    Liked by 3 people

  12. WhyNot132 says:

    Conway did a great job? Even Sundance is saying that. Something must be seriously wrong with me. I watched this interview – I think she sucks. Many people in Trump’s campaign, Katrina, Rudy, Newt, heck, even many people on this forum – would have been able to argue much more clearly than she did.

    And her main problem is that she never attacks: she never asked the question where is your evidence that Russia is behind all this? Anonymous sources? Why you as a journalist are not doing your job of figuring out who said what and instead just follow a Democratic political charge?

    She never attacked his framing of Trump’s response “the same people lied to us us about WMD”, that it is a vicious attack on the weakest point in the history of the intelligence community. First tt’s political hacks supported by media hacks and not the entire “Intelligence community”, second it was not one of the millions of otherwise wonderful reports, it was a key finding behind US policy, and money, and blood for years. SO some hesitance to immediately accept unnamed sources as some final truth is at least understandable.

    And WTF is “Will Trump cooperate?” She was just sitting there. I don’t know guys, She is not an A level.

    Liked by 1 person

    • MaineCoon says:

      Agree. The correct PC answers, but never attack. Nothing is gained from tt interviews with MSM. Only defense. No offense. Playng nice. No tt purpose is served. Waste of time. Freeze MSM out. No MSM interviews.

      Like

      • 4bleu says:

        Think about it for a moment: If they don’t show, then the vacuum will be filled by some obnoxious critter. All they have to do is show up, occupy the time batting away stupid questions and go home. One more day to inauguration.

        Liked by 1 person

    • UKExpat says:

      Or she could have simply asked ‘Do you believe the Russians INVENTED these hacked emails or are they true and if so what is your problem with them being released’

      Like

    • incisor says:

      Precisely. And she got so flustered that she uttered the dreaded “D” word.
      America is not a Democracy, we do not have democratic elections.
      America is a Representative Republic and we have a POTUS that is elected by representatives of the people, not majority vote.
      I like Kelly-Ann but my 23 year old daughter wouldn’t have blabbered on like that.

      Like

  13. Daniel says:

    “Is [P.E. Trump] going to cooperate with this investigation?” Holy crap. That’s the worst accusational tone I have ever heard from the vicious media.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. WeThePeople2016 says:

    “The Russians Did It” & That Pesky $600 Million CIA Contract with the Washington Post

    http://ipatriot.com/russians-pesky-600-million-cia-contract-washington-post/

    Liked by 1 person

  15. JustSomeInputFromAz says:

    Great job Kellyanne!

    Liked by 3 people

  16. repsort says:

    She’s a bad ass.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. Mr. Morris says:

    Kellyanne Conway is sharp as a tack, she smiles as she answers questions too. John Dickerson was trying his obnoxious best to trap Kellyanne but she was having none of it. At the end of the segment Kellyanne gave a bright smile and signaled that she had John Dickerson’s number. It was a beautiful thing to watch.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. UKExpat says:

    I wish someone would say to these Meejah hacks just one time ‘So what if the Russians hd hacked the DNC and released the emails are you saying the Russians INVENTED the emails and their contents because if not then what are you whining about”

    Like

  19. Abster says:

    Sadly, there are enough people out there who believe this propaganda. I certainly hope this electoral college Russian briefing is another flop. We are in dangerous times, more dangerous the closer PETrump gets to taking office. I pray his legal team and advisors are all over this. There seems to be no end to this evil. God bless us all.

    Like

  20. Rush pointed out how amazing the Russians are on the show today, I was impressed!

    RUSH: I want to ask some questions about Vladimir Putin and his competence, because the Democrats and the Drive-Bys are claiming that Putin involved himself in our election illegally. He interceded and his desire was for Trump to win. He wanted Trump and he wanted Hillary to lose. So I have some questions about some things from the WikiLeaks dump about Democrat meddling, Robert Creamer previously explained hiring — at $1500 per person — people to disrupt Trump rallies and cause violence.

    Donna Brazile was giving the questions to Hillary in a series of debates. But I have questions about this. Did Vladimir Putin secretly persuade Hillary Clinton to take off most of August? Did Vladimir Putin tell Hillary, “You don’t need to go to Wisconsin! You got it in the bag. You don’t need to go to these Blue Wall states. You own them, Hillary! Don’t waste your time. In fact, Hillary, you don’t even need to campaign. Just sit there and recuperate. You don’t need to even leave your house, Hillary.”

    Did Vladimir Putin drug Hillary Clinton causing her to collapse into a van and have a seizure on 9/11? Did Putin secretly tell Trump where to go and do his campaign right in the middle of the urban core? Did Putin tell Trump to make a pitch for votes based on an economic message of jobs, jobs, jobs, and Make America Great Again? Did Putin do all that? Did Putin come up with Trump’s campaign slogan? Did Putin secretly cut a deal with that babe on Saturday Night Live to portray Hillary Clinton to Millennials as an unlikable, power-hungry, humorless, robot politician?

    Did Putin tell Trump, “Go out there and spend all kinds of money and hold all these rallies! You do all these rallies and just get thousands of people showing up at these rallies. You just keep shouting ‘Make America Great Again! Make America Safe Again!'” Did Putin secretly fund Robert Creamer? Did he make Obama meet with Creamer and Black Lives Matter all those times in the White House? Did Putin run out there and tell Democrat Party to base their election on transgender bathrooms and gay marriage and Black Lives Matter and the cops deserve to be shot and all the other things the Democrat Party stood for?

    Did Putin do that?

    Was Putin responsible for the campaign strategy of the Democrat Party? Was Vladimir Putin responsible for Donald Trump’s campaign strategy? Did Putin secretly influence this election so Donald Trump would put a bunch of warrior generals in positions of high responsibility in the U.S. military? You’re telling me that Vladimir Putin wants a bunch of George Patton-type people in our cabinet? You’re telling me that’s what Vladimir Putin wanted and he cheated this election so that that’s what Trump would do?

    Versus a woman who would continue the disarmament policies of her predecessor, Barack Hussein Obama, who thinks that the nuclear arsenal of the United States poses the greatest threat to freedom in the world and so we had to downsize? You think Putin wants a Trump and all these great military guys, or would he have preferred to have Hillary who was going to disarm the United States anyway? This Putin? I tell you, folks, he’s one sneaky, ingenious SOB the way he pulled all this off! He had to be a brilliant guy for the Clinton campaign to be so special kind of stupid the way they lost this election.

    BREAK TRANSCRIPT

    RUSH: Did Vladimir Putin tell Hillary Clinton to pile up all those votes in California and New York instead of focusing on electoral battleground states? When did Vladimir Putin tell Hillary Clinton to call half the country deplorables? Man, oh, man, oh, man. What power Putin has!

    END TRANSCRIPT

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s