White House counselor Kellyanne Conway is defending Rudy Giuliani’s Ukraine trip by confoundingly boasting of his performance during the Mueller probe.
“Well Rudy is one of the President’s personal attorneys, and I think that was particularly true during the Mueller investigation since that was an executive branch Department of Justice investigation — that is long gone,”
Though there’s a likely two parter to this, ‘OLC, babayyy’.
Kelly is confusing Putin and guilliani. Putin has the upper hand, he drops things into guilliani’s hand, guilliani runs with it. It goes from master, to link, to subject, Aka trump…
That said, kind of hard to confuse them. One is smart and ruthless, the other two (trump and guilliani) are self centered and addled patsies…
Mueller is the reason the Mueller investigation failed to do what it should have done. The prim and proper Mueller with his pinky elevated while he sorted through the Trump manure pile was the wrong guy. He was “narrowly focused” enough to ensure he didn’t see shit. He had the best cover story a guy can get. Sober, impartial and dedicated. That’s some good shtick if you’re going to pull a stunt like he did. And a stunt it was.
Conway said, “So I don’t know what Rudy is doing in the Ukraine …"
On Saturday, Trump told reporters that Giuliani will deliver a “report” to Congress and Attorney General Bill Barr about his latest findings in Ukraine.
So, if Rudy is working as a quasi-State Department representative, quasi-DOJ investigator, quasi-investigator for Congress who is going to deliver a definitive report on behalf of the Trump administration … shouldn’t the White House and its TeeVee presidential aide and spokeswitch know WTF he’s doing in Ukraine?
sheesh, you know she had to have the questions before hand. It would take some serious practice to come up that rambling line of crap and make it sound legitimate to the cult full of delusional, “skip word” . still early for such language. lol
Well when you throw the rules of grammar out the door…and this coming from someone who has a few problems with grammar and spelling.
It would be interesting to compare how she is speaking now with how she was speaking before the 2016 election.
Somehow we’ll have to update ETTD to reflect how sentence fragments came to rule the air waves.
And is there any reason to report on what Ms. Conway has to say about anything? For myself, I think not. IMHO, the author of alternative facts does not deserve to be quoted on anything except perhaps her resignation and retreat into anonymity.
“I see the Democrats are now trying to dog earpieces of that and put it in their articles of impeachment in the secret sauce,” Conway said."
… she then continued: " The blood libel of the Democrats will go down in the history books as the circus of the food trough in a Homerian battle of chocolate chips of perfidy in the cookies of Justice. Because that dog wont put a lipstick on pig in a poke of a Hail Mary Pass.
Next question?"
It’s almost like she tore up a Mad Libs; the tape random pieces together; and then used magnetic poetry pieces to fill in the nouns, verbs, and adjectives.
The people that have to transcribe speech into text are really not paid enough when dealing with Trump and Conway.
He’s a Republican. If a Republican isn’t overtly corrupt, he certainly won’t be energetic in proving another Republican is corrupt.
Look at I.G. Horwitz for an even more blatant example.