"“The meeting was at my request and Mr. Trump was gracious enough to agree to it,” Kelly said on her show. “We met for about an hour, just the two of us, and had a chance to clear the air.
“Mr. Trump and I discussed the possibility of an interview, and I hope we will have news to announce on that soon.”"
108 comments:
I hope Megyn learned her lesson and will agree to treat Trump like the pro-democrat hack media treat Hillary. NO TOUGH Questions!
Big mistake on the Donald's part if he agrees to an interview.
FOX ratings must be down.
The same could be said of the Civil War.
Trooper York said...
Big mistake on the Donald's part if he agrees to an interview.
Apparently he didn't. Miss Megyn and Katie Pavlich were bitching last night about Lewandwski being exonerated.
PS Give it up, April. And where's that apology?
It's a trap!
It is a trap. A honey pot. You know she is going to continue to bash him just the way she does on her show every night.
He needs to offer to go on Greta and O'Reilly and Hannity and continue to ignore her. He gains nothing by going on her show except getting her ratings. Why should he do that?
Lewandoski. Let's see. I never said, and you are free to find where I did, that I think he should be prosecuted.
What I did say is that Trump's political instincts are terrible.
All he and Lewandowski needed to do was pull that women aside and say - "You were getting too close and we are sorry for the mix-up, but you cannot get that close. Sorry we grabbed your arm like that."
(or so)
The key is that the entire ISSUE could have been handled with professionalism and all handled behind the scenes so that the story was a non-story. Instead here we are still talking about it. The story should have never come to light.
Instead it blew up into a media frenzy that made Donny and Co look like silly amateurs.
AprilApple said...
Lewandoski. Let's see. I never said, and you are free to find where I did, that I think he should be prosecuted.
Do the words "Trumpist thug" ring any bells.
I also seem to recall how happy you were when you heard from bag she'd filed charges.
Like your boy, Daddy Cruz, you toss the Constitution when it's convenient.
Where's that apology?
And are goin' to the CO Republican protest tomorrow?
He is a Trumpist thug.
You fail to acknowledge the truth about his political acumen.
*Typical brainwashed Trump supporter.
Is arm grabbing, lying and acting like a political weirdo in the constitution?
Cool!
I'll be there. With my "Make America Blue Again" T-shirt.
Go Trump!
The thing is that like Megyn Kelly this woman has an agenda. Also a history. She has several instances in the past where she put out accusations in the past and then had them recanted or found to be a big bag of bullshit. She claimed sexual harassment on a couple of occasions and then backed off when she had to provide proof.
Also her mother is a Guatemalan immigrant who runs a not-for-profit that encourages illegal immigration. So do you think it is remotely possible that she has an agenda?
Just like Megyn Kelly complaining that Trump is a big old meany and that the menfolk should protect I think we should protect the delicate flowers in the press corp and ensure that young ladies only be allowed to ask questions when everyone is sitting down properly and raising their hands like they do in Sister Mary Elephants class. Women should not be allowed in the press scrum and should not follow the candidate to avoid the terrible business of them being treated like they were trying to get on the F Train during rush hour. You have my full support in that endeavor.
AprilApple said...
He is a Trumpist thug.
No, dear, he was exonerated.
Is arm grabbing, lying and acting like a political weirdo in the constitution?
He didn't do that, either. You seem to forget we have courts in this country.
Time to apologize for trying to convict a man unjustly, just like your boy, Daddy Cruz, should
Lessee now, what did he call it? Oh, yeah, the battery charge was a “consequence” of the “abusive culture” of Trump’s campaign.
Hey, April, whatever happened to the Constitution, to the rule of law?
Guess that stuff doesn't matter if you're "anointed" to have dominion over all us peons, even the ones from the "minor Ivies".
When was the last time anyone discussed what the candidates will do in office - you know the whole reason we are doing all this? You get the impression it's all just for entertainment. We have been suckered into letting the Democrats win with the worst candidate in history by offering up a worse one.
Hillary will do the exact opposite of everything we want, and after stretching the Democrats crap out for 16 straight years, it will likely be beyond repair forever. More illegals, more taxes, more terrorism, more government, and less freedom, less prosperity, less fairness. That's what all this will get us. The Republicans had the moral, logical, and historical high ground, and we piddled it away with anger in place of strategy or reason.
I'd like to see Megyn Kelly interview Paul Ryan. He'd really give her eyelashes a workout.
@bags, so isn't it about time that Kelly focused her laser-sharp deposition skills on Hillary Clinton?
Did you see the hostage video of Heidi Cruz last night with Anderson Cooper. Boy I really feel sorry for her. I hope they have somebody following her around.
Maybe Cruz should hire Corey Lewandowski to be her chief of staff. At least we know he would grab her before she walks out into traffic.
I hope Donald went into that meeting with a chair and a whip against THE BLONDE BEAST!
We talk about what the candidates will do all the time bags. You just don't like what Trump wants to do.
He wants to build a wall and stop illegal immigration.
He wants to stop trade deals that screw the American people and isn't afraid of a trade war to protect American interests.
He wants to stop Muslim immigration until checks and balances are put in to make sure we are not importing terrorists.
All things the establishment of both parties hate with a passion. They don't talk about it because the people are behind it. So they talk about the process and personalities.
Chickelit
@bags, so isn't it about time that Kelly focused her laser-sharp deposition skills on Hillary Clinton?
That is a good point. Will Hillary allow herself to be interviewed by Megyn? I really doubt it.
I could see a great porno coming out of the Donald-Megyn meet up. Taming. Stroking. Clawing. Licking.
bagoh20 said...
When was the last time anyone discussed what the candidates will do in office - you know the whole reason we are doing all this?
They've told us. You're free to pick and choose whomever you want according to your biases.
Take April, she'll be voting Hillary, as we knew she would.
Trooper York said...
Did you see the hostage video of Heidi Cruz last night with Anderson Cooper. Boy I really feel sorry for her. I hope they have somebody following her around
Saw some stills. Any time she thinks it isn't a close-up, she don't look happy.
PS Smartest thing the trump campaign did was hand over the video posthaste.
Dumbest thing the anti-Trump crowd did was try to make political hay out of it.
GOP Chair, Steve House, is getting death threats from Trumps supporters.
Lovely.
Drudge approves.
Ed- I will never vote for Hillary.
You argue like a 5 year old who was just told to go to his room.
Stop acting ridiculous, stop obsessing, stop fixating on me, and stop your head-ache inducing bumper sticker one-sentence-at-a-time logic, and grow up.
"@bags, so isn't it about time that Kelly focused her laser-sharp deposition skills on Hillary Clinton?"
Of course, but she already has such high negatives that she couldn't beat anyone else other than the two Republicans remaining. The easiest election win ever was thrown away when we insisted on the most extreme candidates out of pure emotion. I didn't support Cruz until it was down to him or Trump. I prefer him anyway, but a lot of it was electability at that point. Trump's negatives are not due to anything other than Trump himself. It's not the media, or the other candidates making him unelectable. A majority simply won't vote for him ever. We will blame others for President Hillary, but it was ours to throw away.
President Hillary is the worst possible outcome - absolutely disastrous, and I don't know what can turn that around. The whole media could be in the tank for Trump and it wouldn't matter. Rather, we know that exactly the opposite will happen, and we always knew it.
BTW Why weren't Daddy and April telling us that Pittsburgh riot by the BlackLives crowd last night a “consequence” of the “abusive culture” of Trump’s campaign.
Maybe Daddy's learned to keep his big mouth shut?
Kinda doubt it.
Wonder if he's gonna shoot his mouth off when the stacked deck in WY comes in for him Saturday. Nah, he has to get in his crowing now. The next 2 weeks are going to be real depressing.
AprilApple said...
Ed- I will never vote for Hillary.
I'll be there. With my "Make America Blue Again" T-shirt, you said.
IOW, stop calling me on my lies, misrepresentations, hatred, and general intolerance.
GOP Chair, Steve House, is getting death threats from Trumps supporters.
Drudge approves.
And where, exactly, does he say this? You lie and misrepresent like all the other Cruzzers.
If your case against Trump and for Cruz was that good, you wouldn't need to.
AprilApple said...
You argue like a 5 year old who was just told to go to his room.
Stop acting ridiculous, stop obsessing, stop fixating on me, and stop your head-ache inducing bumper sticker one-sentence-at-a-time logic, and grow up.
IOW, stop calling me on my lies, misrepresentations, hatred, and general intolerance.
Sorry about that, guys.
Oh yeah - My T-shirt will say "TRUMP - Making America Blue Again."
Ed- did you watch the video at the link? NOPE.
Law enforcement in CO are taking the threats seriously.
From the link you refuse to read or watch: (oh and it's a Trump approved Drudge link!)
"I would be hiding all family members…Just check out social media."
Additional emails and text messages to House threaten to release all of his personal information and use rather profane and derogatory language.
Reality TV.
You said Drudge approves, dear.
You make an unwarranted assumption. Actually, by posting it, I'd say Drudge does not approve, as most of the rest of us don't. That piece does make some Trump supporters look as fanatical as Cruzzers, after all.
As always.
You want to apologize now or do it when you apologize to Mr Trump and Mr Lewandowski?
Unlike ed, I need to get to work.
sorry you guys are stuck with him.
Drudge links the story and changes the headline to read "In hiding" instead of what the link really is about "Death Threats."
Drudge knows his Trump readers don't actually click and read.
Wow you're thick.
Troop, those are bumper stickers, not policy, and though they are very popular amoung the Right, in the Trump package they are electoral cyanide with the nation at large. If they weren't, Trump would be hugely favored rather than losing by double digits to a corrupt unlikeable dolt. There are discussions of those things out there, showing what's wrong with them, but in the end Trump supporters always end up at "I don't care. I'm mad as hell." Unfortunately, that's also the response to the argument that he will ensure a President Hillary too. Denial, anger, bluster. It's charging toward a well armed enemy line screaming and waving your weapon. It make us feel awesome, but when the smoke clears...
AprilApple said...
So ed - is it illegal for me to hate Trump? Is that in the constitution? LOL - idiot.
More baseless accusations. You should really see somebody about that paranoia.
Drudge links the story and changes the headline to read "In hiding" instead of what the link really is about "Death Threats."
Drudge knows his Trump readers don't actually click and read.
Funny, I clicked on it.
Another unwarranted assumption. And more name-calling. Cruzzers are so formulaic.
And she really is getting to sound like Ritmo. Bad sign.
bagoh20 said...
Troop, those are bumper stickers, not policy, and though they are very popular amoung the Right, in the Trump package they are electoral cyanide with the nation at large.
???????
I can see you've never been outside a Borders or Starbucks and seen some VW plastered with so many Lefty slogans you can't even see what color it is.
Trump would be hugely favored rather than losing by double digits to a corrupt unlikeable dolt
Last I looked, he was down by 2. In NY, his favorables are triple hers.
Get rid of April's poll and smell the kreplach.
Better yet, quit trying to convince yourself Daddy Cruz would ever be a viable candidate.
Or is this a plug for Gary Johnson?
GOP Chair, Steve House, is getting death threats from Trumps supporters.
Lovely.
Drudge approves.
I don't get this. There is no commentary on Drudge. It is a page of links to other news stories and news sources. How can you intuit that Drudge approves of any of the stories or disapproves. I think it is just a portal to link to information and we can decide.
We keep going over the same ground bags.
Those positions are very viable in the general. Trump will pick up a lot of the working class vote. And he can pick up a significant part of the black vote. Much higher than Romney or Cruz. All he has to do is put it in stark populist terms. He can tell the black community that they are getting screwed by the illegal immigrants that the Democrats and Chamber of Commerce Republicans want in to depress wages. He can just make a commercial outside of a Home Depot and say "These people are stealing jobs you should have. I want to send them back. Are you with me or are you going to listen to Hillary?"
The same issue will resonate on trade. Most regular Americans are not free traders. Most normal Americans don't worry about offending the Chinese. They will sign on to changing the playing field so it benefits America.
Most Americans are also not politically correct about Muslim terrorists. The problem with Republican politicians like Cruz is that they are too mealy mouthed about calling out the Muslims. Trump is not afraid. He was the one to call for waterboarding and doing what we need to do to beat ISIS. Cruz just road his coattails after he saw the reaction.
You also underestimate Hillary's negatives. Right now even accepting the worst polls Trumps negatives are at 70% and Hillary's are at 58%. So Trump just has to move 12% to be even. Not insurmountable by any stretch.
Personally I don't think Hillary will be the nominee. I think the Democrats are the one who will have the brokered convention and we will end up with Elizabeth Warren as the nominee. Sanders people will happily sign on to that and Hillary feminazi's would be satisfied. Add on Deval Patrick and you have their dream team.
Excuse me, did I just now read a journalist inserting herself into Trump's campaign? Again?
No, it couldn't be that again.
Not again.
No, Dear. This is about Trump's campaign wreaking havoc upon the Republican party so richly deserved. Journalists report what they see about that, and not about themselves. Kelly forfeits credibility just as the Breitbart gal who was shoved to the ground brutally and malevolently head stomped by Trump himself, his Frankenstein boots, and his gigantic elephant campaign manager with the tattoo of Genghis Kahn. Two female journalists who insert themselves at the point of critical activity and draw off the subject at hand and onto themselves. Attention onto themselves. Themselves. Self-serving selves. *breaks into song and fabulous fashion* "Look at me, look at me, look at me, look at me, look at me-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e."
We did! We did look at you. We drew your lovely countenance. Now piss off. It's not about you. Both incidents are journalistic bullshit.
"Shut up. You're an old white dude."
"I know! And it's been a real privilege. I feel myself growing within that fortunate state. Good luck using Trump padding up your résumés, Girls. Say, I notice you packing, may I ask, where are you going? I'm still interested in following your transitioning by your signaling through haircuts and costuming."
Just report. Not collude. Not collude and vaguely report on collusion.
Status: rejected, vaguely interesting.
But not interesting enough to buy her book, "How To Make It In Journalism as a Woman."
Nor any other FOX News journalist books anymore for that matter, not after the Gutfeld book. Nope. That silly thing ruined it for all. Chris Wallace: "How to Make it in Journalism by Having a Father Who Worked at FOX" or Peter Doocy's, "How to Make it in Journalism by Having a Father Who Works at FOX" or Gretchen Carlson's, "How to Succeed in Journalism by becoming Miss America."
What a remarkable collection of imaginary books!
Trooper's 10:23 is interesting. I'll have to read up on Megyn.
Chick, what do you mean Ryan would give her lashes a workout? Is he famous for having eyelashes, or...?
Debbie I might not have been clear. I was referring to Michelle Fields as the woman with the really sketchy history. Not Megyn Kelly.
She is just a nasty bitch. She has pretty girl syndrome.
I think he means she flutters a lot when she's turned on.
Trooper York said...
You also underestimate Hillary's negatives. Right now even accepting the worst polls Trumps negatives are at 70% and Hillary's are at 58%. So Trump just has to move 12% to be even. Not insurmountable by any stretch.
There have been pieces on the Hill about how concerned the Demos are about her negatives. And people really haven't been inundated by her.
Yet.
What kicked all of this off, Megyn asking the sexism question at the first Fox debate, would have been avoided if a male journalist would have asked the question. Preferably Hugh Hewitt, if he was there that night. This was ALL about identity politics.
Oops, thanks for the correction.
What kicked all of this off, Megyn asking the sexism question at the first Fox debate, would have been avoided if a male journalist would have asked the question.
I don't think it was the question about perceived sexism on the part of Trump. That is a legitimate issue.
The problem I have with it was Megyn's snotty adversarial gotcha attitude when asking the question and her smarmy "ain't I so cute" smile while doing it. Prefacing it with basically an attack on Trump and making it a leading question.
It isn't the question it is the phrasing of the question AND more importantly the intent behind asking it in such a way. Her position was to be a moderator in a debate, not to be a PART of the debate and attack selected candidates, Trump in particular. Completely UN-professional.
Ever since, I have refused to watch her show or any show that she is on.
I think Megyn asked the question okay, in a professional way, and it was def a legitimate question. But it being asked by a female took the focus off the question and onto her. Which was doubtless the the intent of Fox and Megyn.
It was not so much the question as her smug entitled attitude. When Trump tried to joke and say it was only Rosie O'Donnell she said "No that's not true" and proceeded to stack the deck and feed Democratic talking points in the form of a question. Then when Trump balked and decided to not give her ratings by being on her show she cried and demanded that her colleagues support her. That's professional? Did Edward W Murrow demand that Eric Sevareid fight his battles for him.
Megyn Kelly is Ted Baxter with tits.
If a male journalist asked that question exactly the same, none of that anger would be directed at him. Simple as that.
That might be true. If a male journalist had been grabbed by the campaign manager there never would have been a problem.
So maybe female journalists are the problem.
The reason why male journalists would not have a problem would be because they would not demand special treatment. Trump had a dispute with Chris Wallace for quite a while and they just did an interview for the first time in a long time. But Wallace did not cry like a pussy baby. He was just persistent and did his job and eventually got the interview. Without special treatment.
To my memory, he tried to dodge the question and she wouldn't let him.
Trooper:
"Then when Trump balked and decided to not give her ratings by being on her show she cried and demanded that her colleagues support her."
I missed that...she asked her colleagues to boycott him on their shows, or something?
No. He didn't dodge the question. Or no more so than anyone else dodged that night. That was basically a "When did you stop beating your wife" question. Her snarky snotty demeanor at the debate and on her show for the past few months show what she is all about. You don't have to buy into what the press is selling.
Trump is making a big mistake if he throws her a bone and goes on her show. She has an agenda. He does not have to buy into it. Let her interview Hillary. Oh wait. Nobody talks about how she refuses to go on FOX. Why isn't she on the Megyn Fox show? Is she waging a war on women?
Or is it only Trump who has to take the rap?
When interviewed Megyn Kelly has said several times that she wished that Bill O'Reilly would have defended her in much stronger terms when he interviewed Trump. She wanted O'Reilly to fight her battles for her.
As any strong independent professional women would.
Just O'Reilly?
Answering with a joke is dodging the question.
I'll go re-watch the vid, but I'm pretty sure she had her earnest game face on during that exchange. Except she got a little pissed that his joke made the audience laugh, and stepped on her 'moment.'
LOL leave Tweetie out of this.
Yes, it was weak to say she wished O'R would have defended her. Weak!
She has been quoted in several interviews that O'Reilly and Greta had Trump on their shows and were not "supportive" enough in her view. Which I guess means they had to press Trump to go and kiss her ass.
Of course she was mad. The debate was about her not the candidates. She was there to torpedo Trump so she could be a hero at the cocktail parties. So Michael Moore and Al Sharpton would be happy to kiss her ass. Haven't you been paying attention?
Trooper York said...
She is just a nasty bitch. She has pretty girl syndrome.
She has nice boobies though. But she isn't that pretty. I dated someone that kinda looked like her, she was nuts too.
Who initiated the meet between the two and why? Was it to simply get an interview since Trump stopped doing debates? Are her ratings falling? Was Micheal Moore unavailable?
"Mr. Trump, one of the things people love about you is you speak your mind and you don't use a politician's filter. However, that is not without its downsides, in particular, when it comes to women. You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' 'slobs' and 'disgusting animals.' ...
"Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks. You once told a contestant on 'Celebrity Apprentice' it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees."
"Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"
That was the question that started all this drama.
In my view, this is a totally appropriate question, one that was going to be raised by the opposition in the primary and most definitely, ad nauseum, in the general election. The question is raised respectfully and even provided Trump with a jumping off point for an answer (the filterless aspect that people love about him). It was an early debate so a lot of people were watching so it provided a great forum for Trump to get a good answer out there to a large audience. I cannot believe this question started this ridiculous boring feud that continues to this date.
Keep in mind, also, Fox is now run by Rupert's Lefty sons and the seem to have taken personal control of the enterprise, so Miss Megyn was doing a Joachim Peiper and just following orders.
You think that was a respectful question? Not a loaded "when did you stop beating your wife question?"
This was an attempt to make it about Kelly and her defense of women. Buying into the Democratic nonsense. You say that the Democrats were going to bring it up? Well let them. Is it the medias job to do the Democrats job for them.
Look I get it that Kelly had it in for Trump. There are literally thousands of substantive questions that she could have asked that potentially could have made Trump look dumb and uniformed. Like the Nuclear Triad question. But that was not the intent. The intent was to reinforce a Democratic meme and to make the questioner be the story. Not to inform the public.
A little something for someone absent.
Prosecutor says NO bruising on Michelle Fields.
So it was all a put-up job.
Where's the damned apology?
"Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?"
Didn't Donald attack her when she tried this tack and say some pointed remarks about Hillary being a serial rapist enabler and accomplice? His attack there was later after the original debate, but he still kicked out her legs in one shot.
I thought this might not be an issue when it came to light Hillary pays women some ridiculous almost 30% less than she pays men on her staff.
Hillary is a straight up buggy whip driver in the war on women. I think that will be pounded and expounded upon in the next six months.
No, no, no. It wasn't a "when did you stop beating your wife" question.
There's no hidden presumption; just a presentation of facts, stuff Trump said and did OTR, followed by the question about whether this is presidential and how he would react to the inevitable charge from Clinton.
Very fair debate question.
It was couched respectfully, in the context of a positive thing about Trump.
The intent of the question is express in the question.
It's your response that is loaded with presumption, viz., When did Megyn Kelly start having it in for Trump?
This was a gift. Trump could not have NOT known that this would be a problem, his past comments on the record, on tv for all to see and hear. The boring old #WaronWomen isn't going anywhere because lefties never give up and there's two snivelly old lefty ladies running on the Dem side. This was a golden opportunity, not to retract and grovel to Offended Ladies but to present a different way of looking at those comments, not as "woman hate" but as typical give and take between equals, or at least typical give and take between women and men in 21st century America TV and that PC has much less significance in a world where women are on equal footing with men. The fight between Rosie and Donald was between equals. She called him lots of awful stuff and he was right to point that out.
Frankly, the whole idea is stupid. What difference does it make how he views or thinks about women? What is this, the thought police. Does he need a prescribed way to think about women that will pass the smell test for people on the left and/or Megyn Kelly? It's how he treats them that matters and considering his prior relationships and the women he employs should be the definitive answer about Trump and women. Make of that what you will, but this idea that how you think about this or that and if it doesn't fit some kind of mold and therefore you are dq'ed because of it is nonsense.
Except it's not just lefties and feminists who find such statements embarrassing and vulgar. The idea is to win over new voters, not just hold onto the voters who already think calling people sluts and whores and pigs is totally presidential, no problem. The idea is not to "fit some kind of mold" but to demonstrate that he doesn't fit the lefty "woman hater" mold. Not discriminating against employees is the law and it's no surprise when an employee is enthusiastic about their boss, whether they really like him or they just like their job.
My point being that this was yet another lost opportunity and not only that but he doubled down and made an enemy where one didn't necessarily exist.
Meth, you have to remember, Hillary played Hera to Willie's Zeus for 40 years, unleashing all manner of attacks on the women while enabling Willie.
The One True Ted doesn't discriminate between hot young escorts, Latina, Asian, and WASPish campaign workers (we still have to find out about the teacher) even though it drives his wife into rush hour expressway traffic and the looney bin.
But The Donald, who appreciates an intelligent, accomplished woman so much that he is as well regarded by his ex-wives as his wife, must be grilled within an inch of his life because, clearly, he makes War On Women.
Amartel said...
My point being that this was yet another lost opportunity and not only that but he doubled down and made an enemy where one didn't necessarily exist.
Get real. She had orders to get him and he told her to take a flying leap.
Miss Megyn is doing what the Murdoch brothers are telling her to do.
Kinda like the Einsatzgruppen.
Now she needs some big ratings because her show has stopped being popular and a sit-down with The Donald might help.
Megyn Kelly was an enemy from the get go and has proved it every day on her show. Her featuring and championing the bogus claims of Michelle Fields is a case in point. Her total lack of skepticism with a serial fabricator shows what she is all about.
Megyn Kelly only asked for the meeting with Trump because his refusal to appear on her show is obviously hurting her. Otherwise why would she want to give a platform to a he man woman hater.
Megyn Kelly has been exposed as have the morons at NRO and the American Spectator as being the same elitists as you find in the liberal side of the mainstream media. Megyn wanted to ask a smart ass question that would get her kudos on the Charlie Rose Show. She accomplished her goal. She is the hero of Michael Moore and Al Sharpton. Good luck with that.
She can't move to CBS fast enough.
If someone is stupid enough to vote on what Donald Trump said while he was fighting with Rosie O'Donnell instead of immigration or trade policy then you will never get their vote anyway.
Trooper York said...
Megyn Kelly only asked for the meeting with Trump because his refusal to appear on her show is obviously hurting her.
She's only doing about half as well as O'Really and I think she was initially eyed as his eventual replacement.
She can't move to CBS fast enough.
She'll be the next Katie Couric. Since Katie showed us all what's where the sun don't shine, one can only speculate what Miss Megyn will show us.
State Attorney press conference with full video (at 10:30) of the brutal assault on Fields.
Short version - Fields went into "protective bubble," put her hand on Trump's arm, Trump pulled his arm away, then Lewandowski pulled Fields away.
SA seems to be saying that the "bitch had it coming."
If you watch the whole thing note the reporters trying their damnest to dig out something negative towards Trump.
Definitely don't let the facts, what Megyn Kelly actually said, get in the way of outrage. That would be wrong.
A smart candidate would have put this fire out a long time ago. the fact that it's STILL part of the discussion is pathetic. It's all over the media and will be used to hurt Trump no matter who's side you are on. Trump loves picking unnecessary fights and wallowing in the mud. All of it only helps his old pal Hillary.
I really don't care if Fields is a bitch! who deserves to DIE! Don't. CARE.
I want to beat Hillary in the fall. Do you really think this crap is helping?
I'll repeat what Bagoh said above. (Not that it will accomplish anything)
"When was the last time anyone discussed what the candidates will do in office - you know the whole reason we are doing all this? You get the impression it's all just for entertainment. We have been suckered into letting the Democrats win with the worst candidate in history by offering up a worse one.
Good news in this Surber piece. One of the Bush machine's favorite operators, Karl Rove, seems to want to help The Donald. Dare we surmise even the Bushes are getting tired of the Anointed One?
AprilApple said...
A smart candidate would have put this fire out a long time ago.
A smart candidate wouldn't spend so much time grazing on campaign workers and escorts that his wife decides to take a walk in rush hour expressway traffic.
The only way this kept going was lies from people screaming, "Trumpist thug".
Guy was exonerated. You lost.
Helping Hillary will be a little harder now.
Apologize.
All of it only helps his old pal Hillary.
His favorables with women in NY are triple hers. Care to tell us how that helps her?
"Do you really think this crap is helping?"
Not sure what you're referring to but it's been anti-Trump people pushing the Fields issue. Talk to them.
ed- GET. A. LIFE.
Rabel -
Trump is the adult. (oh right, not) He could have put the fire out a long time ago.
She filed a police report. How could he put the fire out until it was resolved?
On March 19, Mr. Lewandowski was captured on video grabbing a protester by the shirt collar at a Trump rally in Arizona and yanking him backward — normally the work of security guards, not a top political adviser.
Rabel - Instead of fixing it (as Glenn said "With a drink and an apology", they pounced on her calling her a liar. They had the opportunity to fix this prior to her going to the police. Instead, we are still talking about it.
The blame game gets old.
That was just speculation by Reynolds. I've seen no evidence that it would have been effective.
AprilApple said...
Instead, we are still talking about it.
Because the Cruzzers need an axe to grind against Trump. No matter how phony.
The blame game gets old.
Then stop, you've been proven wrong.
"Mr. Lewandowski was captured on video grabbing a protester by the shirt collar"
I've seen the video and that's not correct.
Well, whatever the case may be, Trump seems to attract this kind of negative attention on a near daily basis. It breeds fatigue.
ed- A Life, get one.
She is a liar. A serial liar. A fabricator who tried to push allegations against Allen West to further her career. Your advise is to give in to this backmail. Typical GOPe advice. The reason why the Republicans can never do anything.
Here is a prior attempt to blackmail someone to get ahead in her profession. This is the person you want to support?
She refused to comment or substantiate this story and pulled it back because she could not win
and cash. Greta has advised her to drop the current bullshit story because other people are using her to hurt Trump. Fields said she wouldn't take advice from a Trump shill.
She seems like a sweetheart.
AprilApple said...
Well, whatever the case may be, Trump seems to attract this kind of negative attention on a near daily basis.
He does? Most of the attention he's attracted in the last week has been form people saying his fight against the delegate poachers has shown us how many people try to steal our franchise.
It breeds fatigue.
You certainly do.
Here's the attention Trump has attracted the past few days. Megyn Kelly came to him with her tail between her legs to try to get him to come on her show. The bogus case ginned up by Michelle Fields and the Washington Post guy got laughed out of court. The Colorado GOP chairman is running for cover and trying to not get hammered about what happened in the rigged delegate selection process. The forces of darkness are gathering to protest Trump and totally ignoring Cruz who they don't think is a threat. Trump freaks them out because they recognize he could win.
So Trump is having a pretty good day all in all.
Trooper York said...
The Colorado GOP chairman is running for cover and trying to not get hammered about what happened in the rigged delegate selection process
And I think Rinse's job is hanging by a thread. Can't say I'm surprised. This whole thing has gotten out of control.
Literally.
FWIW I think those hokey rules were cooked up to make sure Jeb! could get the nod if he was 40 or 50 delegates short (poach a couple here, steal another there, nobody would notice). I doubt they were intended to take up the slack for somebody 800 delegates short.
How were the Cruzzers so well able to take advantage of these rule changes (and they had to have their plans in place months ago to line up their people and get them in all the right committee slots)?
Roe is one of the big inside wheels in MO. I doubt those "rules" were ever supposed to be seen by anybody but the inside party bosses, so Roe was in the right place and he told Daddy Cruz. Frankly, I think this was the Anointed One's Plan A from the start. All of the One True Conservative stuff was a Hail Mary and maybe the rubes would buy it, but they were counting on the delegate stealing because they knew people would never warm to a pill like Cruz.
Good comment, anyway, Troop.
You nailed it.
Trooper York said...
She is a liar. A serial liar. A fabricator who tried to push allegations against Allen West to further her career. Your advise is to give in to this backmail. Typical GOPe advice. The reason why the Republicans can never do anything.
Here is a prior attempt to blackmail someone to get ahead in her profession. This is the person you want to support?
She refused to comment or substantiate this story and pulled it back because she could not win
and cash. Greta has advised her to drop the current bullshit story because other people are using her to hurt Trump. Fields said she wouldn't take advice from a Trump shill.
She seems like a sweetheart.
Meanwhile, elsewhere, Ed Shapiro is shining his suit of armor with Maguire's and Armor All for those softer, hard to reach places known as his balls. That guy basically white knighted himself out of a career. What a douche. And she's a nutcase in love with her pretentiousness.
Thought he was gonna get some and that isn't going to happen now.
Ed, Preibus is a do nothing. Literally. Haven't heard word one from him on the CO rules changes and voter subversion because he approves it.
Exactly, but when he goes, there's gonna be a lot of people going with him.
When April gets back, maybe she can tell us why the One True Ted's dropped 11 points in one week. That Surber piece I linked above has me wondering if the Bush family is pulling the rug out from under Daddy Cruz.
He sure doesn't learn.
The idiot from the Major Ivy seems to be setting up another voterless election.
I understand you rightfully hate the media, but getting the media to kiss his (or any politician's) ass is probably not a good thing, either.
More states selecting delegates without an election - Montana New Mexico, and South Dakota.
What do these people on the prairie have against their own citizens?
PS If you;re having trouble commenting, the I'm not a robot thingy seems to be acting up.
Click on it and you should be OK.
Will Honey Boo Boo be on the show as well?
edutcher said...More states selecting delegates without an election - Montana New Mexico, and South Dakota.
They appear to be doing this solely to block Trump.
Q: Are the Dems doing the same in the same states?
It will be interesting to see how the voters vote knowing what the delegates have decided for them in advance.
Another question: When will the real push by the RNC for the installation of JEB start happening?
Oh noes, looks like The One True Ted is collapsing across the board in the polls.
chickelit said...
More states selecting delegates without an election - Montana New Mexico, and South Dakota.
They appear to be doing this solely to block Trump.
They are, and it would appear that all those Cruz people didn't materialize a couple of weeks ago.
That superior ground game had to ID people sympathetic to them and get them on the right committees. Logic would suggest this would involve more than 2 months to achieve. So can we make the assumption this was the Cruz strategy all along? YMMV.
Q: Are the Dems doing the same in the same states?
They don't have to. What's screwing Bernie is the superdelegates* who are supposed to be independent, but are very wooable. Hillary has wooed them, but they're getting antsy. even don't like her.
It will be interesting to see how the voters vote knowing what the delegates have decided for them in advance.
If they get a chance. Many will have to wait for November. Be interesting what happens, dependent on who the nominee is.
Another question: When will the real push by the RNC for the installation of JEB start happening?
Jeb! is a dead duck. He acquired 4 whole delegates in the promaries. He goes home with Columba.
And it looks like the RNC may be giving up on a Whig nominee. Ryan was the best they had (I know...) and he went over like a lead balloon. They don't seem to be looking for anybody else.
If Karl Rove is quietly telling the big donors it's time to make the best of it and back Trump, he's obviously seen Daddy's collapsing numbers and knows it's because of the delegate shenanigans. Time to save the party and, especially, its control of Congress.
Trump appears to have a better shot than anyone else right now.
If you hear anybody other than a Trump organization member tell Cruz to pack it in for the good of the party, it's over.
* One big drawback to the superdelegates is they're mostly old hacks. They first made the scene in '84 and gave us Walter Mondale. You know how it ended.
Rove put out a scathing column on Trump today. I don't think he's ready to promote him.
This is all happening behind the arras, apparently.
What he says publicly and what goes on in the smoke-filled room can be 2 different things.
Granted, it's a Politico article, but one has to ask why put it out. If it was phony, the insiders would know.
Consider
But privately, the super PAC conceived by Rove is suggesting to its donors that it can help Trump win the White House and save Republican senators whose reelection bids could be jeopardized by having Trump at the top of the ticket.
The apparent warming of the American Crossroads super PAC and its sister groups to Trump has become evident in its recent communications with donors, including a Tuesday afternoon “investor conference call,” according to multiple sources familiar with the outreach.
The phone call — which featured Rove, Crossroads officials and a pollster — laid out swing state polling and electoral map analysis done by the group showing circumstances in which Trump could beat Clinton, the Democratic presidential front-runner, in a general election, according to three sources briefed on the call.
YMMV
Ed, I heard the same horse shit with Romney and look what happened there. Obama was able to get more voters to the polls and he had a way better ground game. I suspect Clinton does too vs. what Trump doesn't appear to have set up yet unless he's doing it on the sly.
Thought-provoking, Ed, thanks.
Methadras said...
Ed, I heard the same horse shit with Romney and look what happened there. Obama was able to get more voters to the polls and he had a way better ground game.
No, he had the vote fraud machine going. He had people voting in several states, machines flipping votes, padded voter registration rolls, and, best, of all, a lot fewer states where there were voter ID laws.
What Cruz is doing is taking advantage of a lot of rule changes only the insiders would know and his campaign manager is one of those insiders (as I say, I think this was his plan A from the start). But, Trump has won more states and gotten more votes, so he's doing something right. Cruz has to cheat and pull dirty tricks to win.
Barry played on black pride, but Hillary doesn't have that sort of thing - the Feminist Sisterhood is a pipe dream, as we've seen Trump and Bernie blow it to Hell. She really doesn't even have nostalgia for the 90s.
If Hillary can get more people to the polls in the states that count, it's a rocky record. Bernie's taken states and minority voters from her time and again.
Be cynical, be pessimistic, if you want. Trump isn't afraid to fight back if he's cheated and it looks like he knows how to turn it to his advantage.
If you want to give up before the fight starts, that's your business, but, so far, it looks like Trump has been beating all the "experts" and hasn't stopped yet.
Post a Comment