Sunday Talks: Rep. Chris Stewart -vs- Chris Wallace…

Representative Chris Stewart (R-Utah) of the House Intelligence Committee debates the insufferable Chris Wallace over the issues of corruption in the swamp.

Obviously the tradition of politicians selling their office for financial gain political hits a nerve with Wallace who must defend the practice in order to defend the swamp.  The level of pearl-clutching pretzel logic by Wallace is off-the-charts…. In essence, all corruption must be accepted while politicians are running for office.

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2016, Election 2020, Impeachment, Joe Biden, media bias, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, THE BIG UGLY, Ukraine, Uncategorized, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

84 Responses to Sunday Talks: Rep. Chris Stewart -vs- Chris Wallace…

  1. Just some guy says:

    I can’t stomach even one minute of a Wallace any more.

    Liked by 31 people

  2. montanamel says:

    WHY…….it’s Bagdad Bob Wallace to the rescue…..such an entertaining crash and burn for all to see!

    It is good to see the “corruption” word getting a work-out during these timely days of Oct…

    Wonder what ‘ol Chrissy would do if someone just pulled out a grenade, pulled the pin, and tossed it over to him with a smile….eh?… Check-6

    Liked by 8 people

  3. James Alan Groome says:

    What Wallace just put up says about investigating 2016… the democrat media love to conflate the investigation of 2016 with investigating Biden,
    UNLESS THIS IS A TACIT ADMISSION that the investigation of 2016 will necessarily, include BIDEN. eek!

    Liked by 7 people

  4. Sherri Young says:

    Excellent interview. Did not have the yelling that turns off so many people. Gets the message out.

    The media is getting bruised this weekend. Feel the pain.

    Liked by 13 people

    • skylark2016 says:

      It was a surprisingly good interview! Chris Wallace can be insufferable but Rep. Chris Stewart held his own and then some.

      Liked by 7 people

      • jeans2nd says:

        They always underestimate the quiet ones.
        Rep Stewart first flew rescue choppers, then became a B1-B bomber pilot.
        Surprising, huh?

        Liked by 4 people

      • GB Bari says:

        Yes I totally agree!

        Wallace tried hard to push The Narrative but Rep. Chris Stewart did an outstanding and commendable job holding fast to the truth and swatting down Wallace’s insistence on yielding to DemonRAT talking points.

        I was a bit surprised at Wallace’s relative civility here and at Stewart’s steady calm demeanor (I cannot remember watching him in any previous interviews) while just obliterating the Insufferable One’s attempted Gotcha! line of attack.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. smartyjones1 says:

    President Trump is well within the scope of his role to inquire with the president of Ukraine. Chris Wallace is an idiot trying to cover this up. He says there’s no specific allegation against the Biden Crime Family.

    There’s a damn videotape in the public domain of Joe Biden extorting money out of Ukraine. These are some very sick, twisted people who will lie right to the faces of Americans in order to protect major corruption and this is not a close call.

    How pathetic are these DNC Media tools?

    Liked by 18 people

    • Caius Lowell says:

      Pro-tip: You don’t get an Ivy League degree — a non-technical degree at any rate — without figuring out the political lay of the land and saying what your commie professors want to hear. These swamp dwellers have been trained to prevaricate for pay since their teens — if not many years before…

      Liked by 4 people

  6. James Groome says:

    What Wallace just put up says about investigating 2016… the democrat media love to conflate the investigation of 2016 with investigating Biden,
    UNLESS THIS IS A TACIT ADMISSION that the investigation of 2016 will necessarily, include BIDEN. eek!

    Liked by 3 people

  7. RJ says:

    I started to watch this video then after about 45 seconds I asked myself if I knew the direction Wallace would take and how the guest would respond…

    In other words, I left the video quickly knowing it was a waste of my time and would do nothing but irate me. Wallace is such a disappointment in so many ways, as if Fox as they move more to the left side of the aisle in presenting perspectives.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sherri Young says:

      You should have watched. IMO.

      Liked by 5 people

    • It was good; the Senator did a terrific job. He stayed cool, calm, and collected and kept repeating his points.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Scott Lyddon says:

      It was a good interview. Stewart was solid. Wallace looked like the hack he’s become.

      Liked by 5 people

    • GB Bari says:

      Recommend you go back and watch it to the end.

      It’s worth the few minutes to see and hear Rep. Stewart’s cool-handed and excellent swat-down of Wallace’s DemonRAT Talking Points and Narrative.

      Stewart handles Wallace like an old pro. I think by the end Wallace knows he’s been beaten fair and square in this little debate.


      • RJ says:

        Ok, I’ve read the responses to your earlier thoughts and did in fact go back and watch the entire video of Congressman Stewart with the ever popular and oh so fair dynamo Chris Wallace.

        Stewart certainly did hold down his side, presented his thoughts in a coherent manner, and rightly frustrated the oh so sneaky Wallace! You were right to suggest I view the video in its entirety. Thank you for this nudging.

        I also wish to point out that the Congressman had a great knot in his tie, centered right on the money with the fine white dress shirt. I also noticed what appears to be naval pilot wings on his left lapel…got to love that!

        Wallace still makes me sick!

        Liked by 1 person

    • Don’t listen to these other guys telling you that you should have watched. You know your own mind, and how much you know about the dysfunction in Washington by now. I’m even stopping reading these comments here, I’ve read enough.

      For the record, thanks to Sundance for a great lineup of posts this morning/last evening. Way to focus.




  8. Janice says:

    Great job by the Congressman Stewart!

    Liked by 7 people

  9. Shyster says:

    Chris Wallace is a lying skid mark on the soul of our nation! He flat out lies and said that it has been “corroborated” that Giuliani both before and after the POTUS July Ukraine call, along with POTUS linked military aid to an investigation of Biden. First, Rudy has repeated stated that he stop his investigation in March before Joe announced. Next, scumbag then reads texts and leaves out the text that says absolutely no quid pro quo allowed by POTUS. Wallace is a disgrace to journalism and acts like he works for corrupt CNN.

    Liked by 8 people

  10. Gunner says:

    Junior Wallace is a banner representative of the U.S. news media. They are all shills for the progressive/socialist left. There are no laws or ethics that will turn them. They and their political friends are shielded from all that is right.

    Nothing can be done about any of them — that is except keeping President Donald J. Trump in office for the next five years. And that means going to war, if that’s what they want.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. All Too Much says:

    Stewart did a great job. Calm ,direct, cutting down all of Wallace’s arguments.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Alec Rawls says:

    I wish someone in the White House would remind the press that there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with making “quid pro quo” deals with foreign nations so long as the “pro quo” is a service to our national interest, such as our national interest in criminal justice.

    If Trump did what Biden did, if he insisted on a particular criminal justice verdict rather than a legitimate truth-seeking due process as a condition for aid, THAT could be an abuse of power. Biden seems to have used quid pro quo to ELIMINATE proper due process and that ought to be investigated.

    It is only quid that are in exchange for abusive pro quos that are improper. Every trade deal is a list of quid pro quos committed to writing, signed and ratified. The idea that there is something wrong with making deals, where what we give is conditional on what we get, is insane and any attempt to enforce that view by Congress would be a glaring violation of the president’s Article II powers.

    Liked by 6 people

  13. Menotrite says:

    Chrissy keeps talking about people doing business with China and I he Ukraine. What he fails to mention is Quidprojoe is he wasn’t a business man. He was VP!!! Migh be a little different.
    And I agree. Chrissy is an ass of the first degree.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Menotrite says:

      Forgive my spelling. I was a bit riled up. Hopefully you get my point.

      Liked by 2 people

    • GB Bari says:

      Excellent point. I was thinking the same exact thought as I listened to Wallace attempt to make that point to Stewart.

      I was maybe a tad bit disappointed Stewart did not jump on that remark and call Wallace out “Geez Chris, do you realize what you just said? Businessmen? Chris, businessmen making deals aren’t trying to sell access to their high government office Congress or the White House to influence of U.S. foreign policy. Do you understand the difference? Holy cow!”


  14. Patricia Weir says:

    And Chrissy is friends with Rush. I’ll never get that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scott Lyddon says:

      Wallace gives him respect he doesn’t give any others on our side.


    • huecowacko says:

      Rush has been very critical of FNC recently, I wonder if he listens to the Wallace show since it is well-known, at least to Rush listeners, that he appears on it annually.


    • swissik says:

      I get it. Not being a Rush fan I believe that he, just like the politicos he criticizes is in it for himself first and foremost. Oh he may be saying the right things, but don’t forget he was a never Trumper. His talent is talk I give him that. The few times I listened to him I found that some of his callers sound more forthright and smarter than he is.


  15. Linda K. says:

    So, the democrats in the press will not look closely at dem politicians who are obviously corrupt? If the corrupt Hillary Clinton was held accountable in the press for her illegal server, we would’ve been spared the spectacle of her candidacy and the convolution of justice to save her from indictment in 2016.
    Do the Democrats really want to run corrupt Joe Biden in 2020?Go for it. He used his political position to get money from a foreign government for his kid. Is that what they want? Someone they know is corrupt.
    Trump is clean and he’s creating jobs. People are not stupid.

    Liked by 4 people

  16. Interested Observer says:

    The Biden thing is a distraction. The key thing is the investigation into 2016 meddling.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Amy2 says:

      And that’s why they keep talking about Biden. They know it’s a distraction, but they haven’t figured out that we know it too.


  17. Alec Rawls says:

    Special Representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker admits that that he pressured Ukraine NOT to investigate Biden. Why is he getting a pass for this? He even brags in his testimony to Congress that he thinks his advice/warning actually did have the effect of stopping Ukraine from investigating Biden:

    “To the best of my knowledge, no such actions by Ukraine were ever taken, at least in part, I believe, because of the advice I gave them.”

    Imagine if Volker had warned Ukraine not to investigate evidence of wrongdoing by President Trump, or by Don Jr.! Impeachment would be a slam dunk, likely in the Senate as well as the House, but because it is a Democrat Volker was protecting from Ukrainian law enforcement this is somehow okay?

    If Volker is right that her blocked Ukraine from investigating Biden then he is the whole reason Trump had to say anything to Ukraine about Biden at all. He presents himself as trying to convince the Trump administration that Ukraine had turned the corner and was no longer besotted by anti-Trump political corruption but his actual actions militated very strongly in the opposite direction.

    Trump was clearly wondering why the hell Ukraine was not investigating the obvious indications of massive political corruption by the Bidens, which must have been one of the reasons he suspected them of still being in the tank for the Democrats, but it wasn’t actually the Ukrainians who were responsible for this particular bit of corruption, it was Volker! By his own admission, his own sworn testimony!

    Liked by 2 people

  18. TANGO268 says:

    Wallace: “Can you name one other instance when the President asked for the investigation of another American?” Answer: “No, the President’s phone calls are classified. We wouldn’t know about this one if there wasn’t a second-hand whistleblower with TDS. Can you tell us, Chris, how many times Obama promised flexibility to world leaders, other than Putin?”

    Liked by 8 people

    • “Wallace: Can you name one other instance when the President asked for the investigation……” Ans: well maybe, 33,000 times President Putin, about emails from our Secretary of State (ex) named Hillary….?.? Can you help us look into that?

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Congressman Stewart was brilliant in this interview: understated, on-point, incisive, at all times occupying the highground of reason, honesty and truth!
    Many thanks, Congressman

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Tim Holden says:

    Wallace was again beaten in debate. Sundance correctly labels him as insufferable. Someone else on the thread appropriately calls Wallace a skidmark, which provides a decent depiction of the measure of Wallace’s role in the major battle at hand.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. 335blues says:

    Chris Weasel’s voice could be sold on a little tape recorder as an emetic.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Susan Harms says:

    they all forget to use the best line, all purpose line to answer these questions, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Susan Harms says:

    there is 16 min between the question asked of Sondland and the , “call me” — how dishonest is that to put them as if they are consecutive.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. chickenhawk says:

    sounded like chrissy and stephie had a phoncall this morning…you know, just to get on the same page…or is script?


  25. Maquis says:

    Butt Wallace is beneath contempt.


  26. gsonFIT says:

    Wallace is a bigot


  27. icanhasbailout says:

    After seeing all three of the Media vs. Republican vids posted here today, I am just sickened. All of those “journalists” are narrative-pushing intelligence operatives and will have to be hanged for this coup.


  28. Boknows says:

    smarty Jones, you rightly stated

    “He says there is no specific allegation against the Biden Crime Family.”

    My response to that: “That’s a problem and what we’ve been saying. Thank you for the reminder. We’ll add it to the list of Democraps that need prosecuted.”


  29. romy911 says:

    Wow – Representative Chris Stewart made a Chris Wallace interview tolerable, possibly even enjoyable.
    Rep. Stewart went off topic & pointed out that Dems are not sad “impeaching” President Trump, they are giddy.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Honestly, I think I see a bit of Wallace’s strategy … and it might not be quite what you think. He argues, represents, the position that the opponent takes, and circles incessantly back to it just as the opponent does. But this is not quite the same thing – from a journalistic point of view – as taking the position himself.

    Nonetheless, the position is untenable. If you are the country’s chief law enforcement officer, it does not matter who the criminal is. The fact that you are the President or the Vice-President not only “does not excuse” such blatant criminality, but makes it all the more intolerable. “Washington, DC” does not now think that way, but the American People most certainly do.

    As Wallace repeatedly circled back to that untenable position, again and again and again, using the exact “justifications” that we hear continuously, he portrayed this. But might this be … acting?

    What do you think?


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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