- Joined
- Apr 15, 2009
- Messages
- 46,999
- Thread Author
- #1
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2023
- Messages
- 36,305
Watch: Kellyanne Conway Crashes And Burns While Defending Donald Trump Jr.
In a recent clip from *Good Morning America*, Kellyanne Conway faced a barrage of questioning regarding Donald Trump Jr.'s controversial meeting with a Russian lawyer during the 2016 presidential campaign. The meeting aimed to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton, which has raised serious questions about potential collusion.
### Key Highlights from the Discussion
During the interview with George Stephanopoulos, Conway struggled to maintain her narrative, having previously denied any contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian nationals. This contradiction became glaringly evident when Stephanopoulos highlighted how Trump's aides—including Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort—allowed misleading public statements to persist for months.
1. **Admission of Meetings**: Conway articulated that the Trump campaign was aware about the meeting discussions, albeit asserting that nothing of meaningful benefit was derived from it. "We have many different meetings in a campaign some of them are unhelpful and not particularly meaningful," she claimed.
2. **The Tension of "Collusion"**: After Stephanopoulos prompted her with questions about collusion, Conway maintained that while Trump Jr. sought information, the absence of useful data negated the argument for collusion. She likened it to an attempted bank robbery that falls flat due to a lack of money.
3. **Defense or Denial?**: As Conway attempted to pivot the conversation, it was clear that she was on the back foot, struggling with the implications of her defenses. She insisted that intent is key in discussions about collusion, suggesting that since the information didn't materialize, any potential wrongdoing dissipated as well.
4. **Public Backlash and Media Scrutiny**: The awkward yet revealing exchange has sparked widespread discussion online about the effectiveness of Conway's defenses and the administration's overall narrative regarding its connections to Russia. Critics have concluded that her strategy of using "alternative facts" may not hold water in the face of overwhelming evidence.
### Community Discussion
The video's reception has been mixed, with some viewers supporting Conway’s stance, while others see it as a classic case of denial in the face of truth. In light of current events and ongoing investigations into campaign ethics, discussions around these interactions continue to be crucial.
### Conclusion
Kellyanne Conway’s performance in this interview exemplifies the challenges faced by those trying to defend contentious actions from the Trump campaign. The tension between intent and outcome, alongside public perception, remains a hot topic for debate.
What are your thoughts on Conway’s defense? Do you believe intent should play a role when discussing the concept of collusion? Let us know in the comments below, and feel free to share any related experiences or insights!
In a recent clip from *Good Morning America*, Kellyanne Conway faced a barrage of questioning regarding Donald Trump Jr.'s controversial meeting with a Russian lawyer during the 2016 presidential campaign. The meeting aimed to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton, which has raised serious questions about potential collusion.
### Key Highlights from the Discussion
During the interview with George Stephanopoulos, Conway struggled to maintain her narrative, having previously denied any contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian nationals. This contradiction became glaringly evident when Stephanopoulos highlighted how Trump's aides—including Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort—allowed misleading public statements to persist for months.
1. **Admission of Meetings**: Conway articulated that the Trump campaign was aware about the meeting discussions, albeit asserting that nothing of meaningful benefit was derived from it. "We have many different meetings in a campaign some of them are unhelpful and not particularly meaningful," she claimed.
2. **The Tension of "Collusion"**: After Stephanopoulos prompted her with questions about collusion, Conway maintained that while Trump Jr. sought information, the absence of useful data negated the argument for collusion. She likened it to an attempted bank robbery that falls flat due to a lack of money.
3. **Defense or Denial?**: As Conway attempted to pivot the conversation, it was clear that she was on the back foot, struggling with the implications of her defenses. She insisted that intent is key in discussions about collusion, suggesting that since the information didn't materialize, any potential wrongdoing dissipated as well.
4. **Public Backlash and Media Scrutiny**: The awkward yet revealing exchange has sparked widespread discussion online about the effectiveness of Conway's defenses and the administration's overall narrative regarding its connections to Russia. Critics have concluded that her strategy of using "alternative facts" may not hold water in the face of overwhelming evidence.
### Community Discussion
The video's reception has been mixed, with some viewers supporting Conway’s stance, while others see it as a classic case of denial in the face of truth. In light of current events and ongoing investigations into campaign ethics, discussions around these interactions continue to be crucial.
### Conclusion
Kellyanne Conway’s performance in this interview exemplifies the challenges faced by those trying to defend contentious actions from the Trump campaign. The tension between intent and outcome, alongside public perception, remains a hot topic for debate.
What are your thoughts on Conway’s defense? Do you believe intent should play a role when discussing the concept of collusion? Let us know in the comments below, and feel free to share any related experiences or insights!
