Harris 60 Minutes Interview

Trickster.. while I agree with what you wrote that was the very stance the democrats took on Willie.. it wasn’t his policies that mattered.. and to be fair the republicans took the opposite stance on Willie back then.
It’s tribalism for the vast majority. My guy is the guy because he is my guy. We can justify and spin all day long but it always comes back to MY GUY.
I hate politicians. They are all lying sleazy scumsbags . All of them (national level).

 

That stupid woman wiped the floor with your orange Jesus on the debate stage. IQ isn't something I'd want to highlight in this campaign when your guy wanted to put bleach inside the body to fight Covid and throw nukes into a hurricane to stop them.

 

Trump easily eon the debate and he never suggested putting bleach in your body to treat COVID. How many of these hoaxes did you believe?

 

from meadiate.com

Trump Absurdly Threatens 60 Minutes Over Kamala Harris Interview: ‘Must Be Investigated Starting Today!

 

I guess I ought to know who Willie was and what your point is, but I confess I don't. I'm not being sarcastic BTW.

 

Bill Clinton. His nickname in while in office in Arkansas was Slick Willie.

PAPER TRAILS: Origins of Bill Clinton nickname 'Slick Willie' a bit slippery | Arkansas Democrat Gazette

 

Agree Trump looks weak here. He should've went on 60 minutes for sure. But, 60 minutes was wrong about the laptop issue in 2020 for sure. Still can't believe we are stuck with these 2 idiots.

 

Promise?

 

Bill Clinton - during the Monica Lewinsky and Gennifer Flowers days

 

Why is trumph afraid to debate her again?

 

‘We do not control CBS's production decisions’

Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign is distancing itself from CBS airing two different answers to the same question in its "60 Minutes" interview with the Democratic nominee.

CBS is facing calls to release an unedited copy of the Harris interview after the network aired a lengthy response the vice president gave to a "60 Minutes" correspondent about Israel to promote its lengthy sit-down. Harris’ meandering answer that first aired on the Sunday show "Face the Nation" didn’t make the version that aired on a special Monday edition of "60 Minutes." A shorter, more focused answer to the same question was shown instead.

The Harris campaign insists it had nothing to do with the edit. It's common for networks to edit answers in news packages for time. The fact that two entirely different responses to the same question aired on consecutive days caused some confusion, although it could have been two portions of the one long response to Whitaker's question.

Harris campaign distances itself from ’60 Minutes’ edit: ‘We do not control CBS's production decisions’
-------------

And the beat goes on... let's see if CBS coughs up the transcript. Don't let this be another Bush Air National Guard service incident, CBS....

 

Shocked. Shocked I am - the “mainstream” media working overtime to assist Democrats?

Dan Rathernot started the BS 20 years ago - it’s only gotten worse. Does Trump tell lies? Absolutely- and Right wingers love him because they’re tired of ONLY one side telling lies…. and winning elections because of those lies, i.e. Harry Reid claiming Romney not paying taxes. Trump is a symptom- he’s not the problem.

 

It doesn't matter at this point. The Republican support for Harris is growing.

Harris/Walz 2024

 

Mainstream media covers for Trump EVERY SINGLE DAY. At this point there is even a name for it, “sanewashing”
They edit his rally speeches so they don’t sound as nuts as they are. Peter Baker from the NYT admits they do it. He terms it trying to get the “gist” of what he’s trying say to make it sound somewhat coherent.

 

Why? Is he a child? Why does MSM “sanewash” his comments? Do we, as consumers of info, need our MSM adults to sanitize his speech?

First, we’re told he’s a moron, lunatic and not believe him. Now, we’re being told that the MSM cleans up his speech. Really? Pick a freaking lane -
And, please referencing a NYT reporter is not necessarily a beneficial source for your point.