Discussion for article #240110
Andrea Mitchell will ask about emails and Benghazi and Hillary’s favorite recipe for chocolate chip cookies.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton will sit down with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell for an interview Friday in New York…
…during which Mitchell will stutter and stammer as she asks asinine questions that clearly show she hasn’t bothered to do any homework on the subject. Mitchell will then finish with a question about football season.
Something tells me the boy reporters are gonna get pissy because she’s giving an interview to a girl reporter and not one of them.
It’s always nice when Mrs Alan Greenspan weighs in on an issue.
Hillary Clinton is in an impossibe situation because every time a Clinton answers questions, the media always finds some incredibly immaterial inconsistency that will cause them to question their veracity.
In contrast, a Bush can lie about something fairly important, like a WAR, and the media will never call them a liar.
something fairly important, like a WAR
War–fairly important?
I’d hate to see what rises to the level of critically important.
Emails will be top of the agenda, to which HRC will again patiently explain it all over again. I don’t blame her for seeming to be guarded in interviews, they’re low ball gotchas most of the time. Mitchell won’t rise above that either.
Hillary is an old hand at this and she is sitting down for her first one-on-one interview now that the silly season is over. Serious interviews, frank discussion, transparent explanations and powerful agendas. Can this country accept her? Or would it prefer some doofus explaining the problem he has with Mexicans?
Clinton should be on Meet the Press and all the other Sunday talk shows about once a month from now on in if she expects to win. Bernie has been on 5 or 6 over the summer months, and those clips are out there for all to see.
Hillary needs to step up her game and do more TV if she expects to win. and she also has to look comfortable, not combattive with the press, like Obama does with his interviews, thoughtful, confrontative, rational, reasonable, likeable. So far, Hillary since 2008 has not looked like that.
Careful Hillary. Mrs. Greenspan will try and do a hatchet job on you.
What, she couldn’t find a serious journalist? This kind of stinks if for no other reason that I’m sure you socializes with Mr. and Mrs. Greenspan a bit back in the day.
Let’s remember about MTP. They invite their guests. The fact that they have not invited Clinton to appear says a lot about them. And we know they have not invited her because if they had and she had turned them down, Chuck Todd would be foaming at the mouth about it. More than usual. Meanwhile, look back at the record number of times McCain has been on MTP since he lost to Obama. No one comes close to his appearances. Which also says a lot about the producers who proceeded to gleefully invite him back time and time again.
Well Hillary, it wouldn’t be my choice, but chacon a son gout.
Mitchell has been practicing her “deeply concerned” look in the mirror all week.
You wouldn’t say that if you’d seen any of Mitchell’s recent “reporting” on Clinton; when it comes to scurrilous, breathlessly fact-free Hillary hatchet jobs, she’s by far the worst you’ll find outside of Fox. If they did ever socialize, then Mrs. Greenspan has been working overtime to prove her “objectivity.”
And in her reporting on herself, she will express her deep dissatisfaction with the very troubling answers she receives.