Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Medicine Crow said:

Another very interesting "history lesson" tonight.  Go Rachel!!!

Absolutely, and I had no clue about this terrible history of assassinations of Turkish diplomats over the past 40 years.  Even though I heard her say "1973" for the Santa Barbara incident, when I saw the images of the victims, I thought she must have said "1923".  Just amazing, and horrifying. 

Edited by jjj
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

As a young kid in the early '70s, what I remember most was the rampant violence in the news and even in my exurban suburb. My first memorable current event was the '72 Munich Games, for both Olga Korbut but also for the men in black ski masks on balconies. I was only six, but those men scared me. Then it was Patty Hearst and being horrified that a girl could talk to her daddy like she did in the transcripts I read in the papers at age eight. 

Locally, I remember about that same year coming back from a field trip to my K-2nd grade school to see everyone standing outside without coats in late fall temperatures. Some jerk had called in a bomb threat to our school, in the middle of a corn field on the far edges of Chicagoland. 

Hearing Rachel talk about the assassinations of that time just brings it all back.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/18/2016 at 4:34 AM, Sesquipedalia said:

 

Was it just me, or did the reporter from North Carolina not appreciate Rachel calling his state a banana republic? I felt like he was trying to be neutral toward what the Republicans are doing in NC right now, but Rachel was having none of it.

Wait, a reporter trying to be neutral?  What is this world coming to?

Share this post


Link to post

Okay, the first twenty minutes of the show tonight was freaking genius.  Starting with Dionysus and Silenus?  Probably the first time Silenus has ever been on national news (he is an old friend of mine from dissertation days, so I was amazed to see him make an appearance).  Where would this go?  Aha, King Midas, and the curse of the "golden touch" -- and that indeed, turning everything to gold or money is indeed a curse when you start to turn your loved ones into inanimate frozen objects.  Was this going to lead to Trump turning Ivanka into a golden money-making statue (not much of a stretch).  But no, we turned to the ever-flowing wellspring of corruption in my former state of Michigan, and she focused on the Governor who installed the *Midas* system of people-free detection of unemployment fraud (hey, it was only wrong 90% of the time!  No prob!).  And we circled the drain back to Flint, to the state's obsession with saving pennies by poisoning children, and the most recent felony charges of public officials in Flint.  Making gold by forcing children to be the cost of doing business. 

Thank you, Rachel, again, for bringing the spotlight back to this desperate city of Flint, and by covering so much eloquent metaphorical ground in your first twenty minutes that I thought the entire hour must have gone by.  I could not believe she did all this in twenty minutes. 

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, arejay said:

Wait, a reporter trying to be neutral?  What is this world coming to?

I don't know what the world is coming to, but Donald Trump is about to become the most powerful person in it. Journalists reporting bad behavior like it's neutral helped a lot with that.

jjj, you really sold me. I can't wait to listen to tonight's show.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

But no, we turned to the ever-flowing wellspring of corruption in my former state of Michigan, and she focused on the Governor who installed the *Midas* system of people-free detection of unemployment fraud (hey, it was only wrong 90% of the time!  No prob!). 

They stole money from unemployed people!  And then poisoned an entire town.  How is the entire government not in jail. Honestly, I just want to see one Republican governor go to jail.  Just one.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

Quote

How about Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich  - sentenced to 14 years in federal prison. 

He was a Dem and honestly, while he probably did deserve to go to jail, what he did seems quaint compared to Christie, McDonnell and Snyder.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

Illinois has a long history of jailing its governors.  I believe you have a 50% chance of going to jail if you are elected as our governor.   I can only hope Michigan follows in our footsteps when it comes to Snyder and the criminal death sentence he and his minions imposed on Flint.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

Well, a rich recent history of jailing IL governors, that's for sure. I believe the jailing part only goes back as far as Otto Kerner (governor in 1968, jailed a few years later), then Daniel Walker (ten years after being governor in the mid-70s), then George Ryan in 2006 (for corruption in the 1999 campaign), but Blago was the first actually convicted and jailed while in office. There was one indicted in the 1920s, but he was acquitted after one of his lawyers, a former governor himself, actually said that the goernorship has the divine right of kings (8 of the jurors later received state jobs, as is the Illinois way).

Share this post


Link to post

Really Rachel? Why would you have that woman on when she flat out lied to you to your face the last time she was on your show. I'm certainly not watching tomorrow if she's on. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, M. Darcy said:

Really Rachel? Why would you have that woman on when she flat out lied to you to your face the last time she was on your show. I'm certainly not watching tomorrow if she's on. 

I agree. Everything she says is either an out and out lie or a distortion.  I can't stand to watch her, so I won't, and I feel like Rachel is really too polite to put her in her place.  Maybe I'm wrong and Rachel will be tough.  On second thought, I'll tape it and then come here for comments before I decide to watch it.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think we need a "designated watcher" for this episode, one person willing to report here.  I agree, Kellyanne is odious, the perfect content-free, truth-free spokesperson for the corrupt president-elect. 

36 minutes ago, SierraMist said:

I agree. Everything she says is either an out and out lie or a distortion.  I can't stand to watch her, so I won't, and I feel like Rachel is really too polite to put her in her place.  Maybe I'm wrong and Rachel will be tough.  On second thought, I'll tape it and then come here for comments before I decide to watch it.  

 

53 minutes ago, M. Darcy said:

Really Rachel? Why would you have that woman on when she flat out lied to you to your face the last time she was on your show. I'm certainly not watching tomorrow if she's on. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

Much as I dislike KAC, I will watch to see if Rachel asks her why she lied to her face the last time she was on.

And then play the video tape proving the lie.  And also ask why she is taking a job with Trump when she recently said that she wouldn't because women with children shouldn't be working.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

My bet is that Rachel will word it too softly and KAC's response will be "Are you asking me if I am a liar?"   Rachel is not the most confrontational interviewer and Lawrence is correct--KAC always answers questions she doesn't want to answer--with another question-- to divert attention.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, car54 said:

My bet is that Rachel will word it too softly and KAC's response will be "Are you asking me if I am a liar?"   Rachel is not the most confrontational interviewer and Lawrence is correct--KAC always answers questions she doesn't want to answer--with another question-- to divert attention.

She did exactly that when she was asked why Trump doesn't at least show the letter from the IRS to prove he's being audited, and her reply was "Are you calling him a liar?  

Since you're watching, I'll be looking for your comments.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I have to admit I watched part of it.  She is such a smooth truth manipulator.  I didn't believe a thing she said.  Thank goodness for the palate cleansing Lawrence O'Donnell show that followed.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

When I heard Kellyanne say first thing, in her baby-girl whisper voice, "Is he your president, too?," I gave up.  Glad you hung in there for the rest of us.  

14 minutes ago, SierraMist said:

I have to admit I watched part of it.  She is such a smooth truth manipulator.  I didn't believe a thing she said.  Thank goodness for the palate cleansing Lawrence O'Donnell show that followed.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Unfortunately, for whatever reason (Rachel wants her to come back), she was NO MATCH for the lying, manipulating, topic twisting POS that KAC is!  Just sayin'.  I need a palate-cleansing champagne glass of Prosecco!!!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

Wow.  KAC starts a sentence, then says "can I just say?"  and then goes off in another direction.

And she tells us -  the Trumps will sue when someone lies about them, because lying is wrong.  But Trump lying about a reporter?  No big deal.

Oh - and KAC also tells us that the American people don't care about seeing Trump's tax returns.  Really?  This American does.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

People who like Rachel will like what she did here, saying she was professional, tough but fair.  People who despise Rachel -- like me, for example -- will want to see the Crypt Keeper's Sister thanking Rachel for the lovely tongue bath.  

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, that was unpleasant & nauseating.  Rach knows her style & what to expect & was prepared . . . and yet Cryptkeeper still did what she always does.  Avoid, deny, dodge, deflect & outright lie -- all while smiling ever so creepy.  The woman gives me chills.  But now she's first-man-baby-in-chief-sitter.  Congrats on the wonderful gig, hun.

Trying to look to some bright side (when I know there isn't one & won't be one for 4 years), at least I don't have to look at that awful, wormy Lewandowski character anymore.  Please don't interview (er, suck up to) him, Rachel.

A whole hour with Cryptkeeper, Rach?  Really? Was it an hour?  It felt like an eternity & you pretty much accomplished nothing.  If she's back again, I'll skip it.  I would rather Rach have shown Ivanka's horrified mug when one of the little people actually told her to her face what a nightmare her con-artist father is.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

4 minutes ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Oh, that was unpleasant & nauseating.  Rach knows her style & what to expect & was prepared . . . and yet Cryptkeeper still did what she always does.  Avoid, deny, dodge, deflect & outright lie -- all while smiling ever so creepy.  The woman gives me chills.  But now she's first-man-baby-in-chief-sitter.  Congrats on the wonderful gig, hun.

Trying to look to some bright side (when I know there isn't one & won't be one for 4 years), at least I don't have to look at that awful, wormy Lewandowski character anymore.  Please don't interview (er, suck up to) him, Rachel.

A whole hour with Cryptkeeper, Rach?  Really? Was it an hour?  It felt like an eternity & you pretty much accomplished nothing.  If she's back again, I'll skip it.  I would rather Rach have shown Ivanka's horrified mug when one of the little people actually told her to her face what a nightmare her con-artist father is.

I didn't watch this but thought this was going to be a segment. When I flipped back and  forth and saw that it was an hour it was annoying as all hell. Conway doesn't deserve a whole hour. Who the hell is she? She's just a mouthpiece. Disappointing to be the last show before the holidays.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

And she tells us -  the Trumps will sue when someone lies about them, because lying is wrong.  But Trump lying about a reporter?  No big deal.

I really, REALLY wanted Rachel to ask if President Obama should sue Donald Trump about his near-decade of birther lies. But of course, she didn't hear me yelling at her, during the midnight rerun on a long drive home from watching my husband's beloved Giants lose to the freaking Eagles. I wouldn't have normally listened to this, but I needed the fury to keep me awake. I don't think I could bear seeing KAC's face.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post

Why, Rach, did you let her get away with saying nobody cares about his taxes?  Sure, the woman is maddening, but she outsmarted Rachel with her lies.  Sorry, Rach, but you are just no match for the evil of this woman & the Trump demons.  I beg you, Rachel, don't have her on again.  It ain't worth it.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I wimped out after a short time---I have it recorded, but I'll have to watch in short segments or it will make me crazy.

No Rachel tonight or next week--Ari Melber announced he'd be guest hosting her show next week.   She probably needs a week off after an hour with KAC.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

That interview could have gone on for five hours and Rachel would have never gotten KAC to go off the reservation and admit Trump is a lunatic and that she knows she's lying and pivoting and changing topics. 

I believe the point of these interviews isn't for Rachel to get them to change their song and dance, and have a big Gotcha moment.  iI's to make sure the viewers see how they lie and manipulate stories, and to bring up all the conflicts of interest, the problems with Flynn being batshit crazy, etc. 

It's maddening to say the least, and I almost started FF-ing thru it but decided to power thru.  My hats off to Rachel for being able to sit there with KAC for an hour and not reach across the desk, slap her and say "DO YOU EVEN HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?  HOW DO YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF?" 

Edited by teddysmom
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, ScoobieDoobs said:

Why, Rach, did you let her get away with saying nobody cares about his taxes?  Sure, the woman is maddening, but she outsmarted Rachel with her lies.  Sorry, Rach, but you are just no match for the evil of this woman & the Trump demons.  I beg you, Rachel, don't have her on again.  It ain't worth it.

The thing is there is video from before KAC joined the campaign, when she was a "pollster", pivoting from one topic to "we need to see Donald Trump's tax returns."  It's like he hired her to make her stop saying that.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, backformore said:

And she tells us -  the Trumps will sue when someone lies about them, because lying is wrong. 

And Rachel didn't mention that everything Gawker printed was the truth, never disputed by the overfunded "winning" side.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

And Rachel didn't mention that everything Gawker printed was the truth, never disputed by the overfunded "winning" side.

KAC would have said something like "well I haven't read Gawker so I don't know what they printed".

The shit about Melania being brilliant had me LOLing.  Brilliant? That word doesn't mean what you think it means. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I like Rachel but I don't think she did very well last night with that interview - that creepy blonde is like her boss - nothing sticks & somehow they get away with not answering any legitimate questions

How is the orange one denigrating Martha R. in public any different than someone maligning the wife? We were made to think that because an apology of sorts to either Martha or ABC took place behind closed doors it's all ok but yet the wife should be allowed to sue someone for a bazillion dollars because of something said against her in public because an apology isn't enough

My memory fails - did either the blonde or the orange one ever show up on Lawrence O's show? Have they been invited? I think he might do better than Rachel against either of them

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, backformore said:

The thing is there is video from before KAC joined the campaign, when she was a "pollster", pivoting from one topic to "we need to see Donald Trump's tax returns."  It's like he hired her to make her stop saying that.

Reminds me of LBJ's "Better to have 'em inside the tent pissin' out instead of outside the tent pissin' in."

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

9 minutes ago, Marathonrunner said:

My memory fails - did either the blonde or the orange one ever show up on Lawrence O's show? Have they been invited? I think he might do better than Rachel against either of them

Lawrence would definitely do better with them than Rachel. She is much too soft, wants people to like her too much. I think Lawrence could be tougher, and is actually angry about all this which would stiffen his spine, unlike Rachel who is invariably mild and pleasant.

For that reason, they will never go on his show. (I was surprised that KAC went on with Matthews until I saw how he fawned all over her--then I understood it perfectly).  She lies effortlessly and often. You really have to be prepared for her--and video clips and twitter quotes would help because she just makes things up and babbles her talking points otherwise.

Of course, not having her on at all is probably best for an interviewer like Rachel.  If you can't expose the lying, it's just free publicity.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, teddysmom said:

KAC would have said something like "well I haven't read Gawker so I don't know what they printed".

The shit about Melania being brilliant had me LOLing.  Brilliant? That word doesn't mean what you think it means. 

I think Melania is brilliant in the same way Putin called Trump brilliant. According to the Russians I know,  Putin's comment was translated incorrectly; the original phrase used meant bright as in intensely colorful. You know what else is intensely colorful? A clown.

Here's a recap of the Rachel/KAC talk.

Maybe Rachel is playing the long game with KAC. She was more subtle than i would have liked, but her cuts showed KAC for the liar she is. Maybe next time Rachel will throw water on her and watch her melt. I can only hope.

Edited by bittersweet4149
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, navelgazer said:

Andrea Mitchell already has the apt moniker of Cryptkeeper, so I thought KAC could be Crypt Keeper's Sister or CKS.  YMMV...

I can only speak for myself, but I will never call Andrea Mitchell that. Seems much more appropriate for Conway to me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Huh, MSNBC online says "Lockup!" would be starting at this hour (8ET/5PT), but they are re-running Rachel's Thursday show instead (starts with Mondale/Reagan race and the "joke" announcement of bombing Russia by Reagan), then THE INTERVIEW.

But what do I care, I would not have been watching "Lockup!" in any case.  Although apparently in MSNBC-Land, nothing says "Merry Christmas/Happy Hannukah" like "Lockup!" 

ETA:  My original message thought this was the start of Wednesday's show -- but I forgot she started the Kellyanne interview with the Regan clip.   I never thought there could be any Rachel program that would make me want to have "Lockup!" on my screen instead, but the KAC interview is it.   

Edited by jjj
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just can't watch Trump spokespeople interviews, especially not with KellyAnne Conway. Not even with Rachel. I totally just avoided it, even though I did stick through the first one.

Share this post


Link to post

I watched it last night - and again tonight. As unpleasant as it is I so appreciate Maddow's 2 interviews with KAC. 

But then I am a believer in keep your friends close and your enemies closer. IMO Rachel can do that pleasantly and factually. KAC looked stumped and made no sense - for that I am grateful.

We can't bury our heads in the sand. YMMV.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Rachel lost me during the primary with her giddy schoolgirl delivery of every single story that was negative about Bernie.  She was in the tank for Hillary all the way.  

The proverbial straw for me was when she aired the fake news about purported violence at the Nevada Democratic convention, taking the word of a single source, Jon Ralston, who wasn't even at the event at the time a chair was lifted in the air and then set down.  

Rachel has never done a Debunktion Junction to correct this act of journalistic malpractice.  And I still can't watch her for very long.  I don't trust her anymore.  

FF to now, my mom and I were at loggerheads about Rachel from when I turned on Rachel until the second KAC Interview.  Mom was steaming.  "She knew [KAC] lied to her the first time and she has her on again?  Fuck you, Rachel."  

Le sigh.

Edited by navelgazer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

What drove me crazy was when KAC kept on about how the "lie" about Melania was still out there so it was OK to continue suing after the guy retracted yet Rachel didn't point out that the LIE that Donald KEEPS saying about that reporter crying etc is STILL out there...why is THAT not a bad thing. Why shouldn't that reporter sue Trump.  Why didn't Rachel say that?  Why?

It bares repeating that KAC is Evil.  I'm reminded of he line from Mean Girls "And Satan has taken human form as Regina George"  only it is true of KAC.  I swear I have no doubt that if she knew Trump raped  a child she'd lie and lie and spin it and somehow blame Hilary Clinton.  My God I have never seen such a concentration of lack of conscience as the Trump administration.  BTW Notice KAC said Trump's lawyers are working to make Trump's actions "legal" but NOT that anybody cares about whether anything is ethical.

BTW Doctors even if they have NOTHING to do with politics are not allowed to ethically invest in medical things that they may have any influence over.  Like if you are an oncologist (cancer doc) you can't invest in stock in pills for cancer because you might influence prices by prescribing one cancer drug preferentially over another.  Yet THAT guy who frickin VOTES  in Congress on medical things he's invested in and directly affects the prices THAT guy can get away with that?  We are so screwed.

Edited by MDKNIGHT · Reason: typo
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

What nobody is saying is how the stories of Melania being a hooker (which were clearly false & based on nothing or lies) really rattled Trump.  Conway said Melania is merely defending herself against slander.  Uh, no.  This is ALL about Trump's thin skin.  

But Conway didn't mention Trump's take on this, did she?  She only said that Melania is "brilliant".  Ugh.  The sad part of this is I suspect that's the last thing Trump thinks of Melania.  Calling her brilliant made me cringe.  It seemed downright hateful to me.  Eh, maybe I just don't have the stomach to watch her or listen to her.  Horrible woman.  Watching Rachel being nice to her made me wanna vomit.

I can't watch Chris Matthews (the interrupter) interview her because I'd retch up every meal I've ever had.  This wasn't much better.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I just don't understand the point of talking to her at all. Giving her a platform to spew her lies. Why? For what purpose?

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

That was brutal to listen to. It seemed endless. I'm not even sure I heard all of it. I just listened to whatever was posted on TRMS web site while I was wrapping presents last night.

Conway is a vile human being. My cortisol level and blood pressure must have gone off the charts while I was listening. Others have already pointed out what was perhaps the most egregious hypocrisy-- defending Melania Trump's lawsuit minutes after defending Trump's attacks on Martha R. Another example is when she brought up the Clinton Foundation in response to Rachel's questions about Trump's many conflicts of interest. I just wanted Rachel to yell "YES, AND YOUR CAMPAIGN ARGUED THAT EVEN UNPROVEN PAY-TO-PLAY WAS DISQUALIFYING FOR CLINTON!!!!!"

Sorry for yelling, but it's so infuriating. Rachel shows a lot of self-control by not jumping over her desk and strangling that woman with her own dead hair. I get why she wants to do it. She wants to ask tougher questions than Conway gets asked by others in the media--and she did--but tough questions don't work on Conway because she (a) will lie to your face, (b) has no sense of shame when it comes to obvious, utter and complete hypocrisy, and (c) will weasel out of the question and twist it back to her talking points. I know all politicians do that, but what really scares me about Conway is that, just like Trump, her word salad nonsense answers are almost impossible to counter because they are total non sequiturs. I feel like most people can see this (at least a plurality of voters), but a huge portion of Americans apparently don't recognize that she is speaking in jibberish. What's the cure for that? I guess Rachel figures she has to keep trying. . . .

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post

Well, it's still better than watching Interrupter Matthews licking Conway's toes.  Not by much tho.  

Ugh, 4 years of looking at this monster woman with that hideous hair.   I can't.  And she's not even the worst of the Orange Devil's minions.  Unfortunately, there are so many others far far worse in his house of horrors.  Brrrrr.

Rachel really thinks Trump would go on her show?  Er, huh?  Was she serious or just kidding?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yay!  Merry Christmas, we got us a lovely, lovely, lovely Christmas gift!  We have our first scandal out of the Orange House of Horrors.  First of many, many, many more to come?  Well, congrats to Jason Miller on being the first Orange minion to fall by the wayside.  

Come back ASAP, Rach!  Can't wait to see you report on the delish details of this goon's well-deserved dowfall.  Now, which one of the Orange Horrors is next?  Oh, Kellyanne, what skeletons have you got rattling around in your past, hun?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size