What the Government Shutdown Means for You! Which Federal Government Services Will Be Affected? Read More

Reply
Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

403 Views
Message 51 of 112

@Centristsin2010—Tapper and the viewing public were verbally assaulted as Miller tried to subject all to his ridiculous statements, very aggressively yelling across the table in a CLEAR effort to hijack the interview.

 

Sent to be a mouthpiece for his idiot boss, he accomplished making it clear that he was a liar, he was CLEARLY unstable and out of touch with reality, and that he had been told what to say by trump.

 

Miller’s was a clear message, he and his boss are lying nut jobs. 

Those who defend them and claim Tapper assailed them, the same.

 —Classless, clueless, conspiring fools.

 

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!

Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

435 Views
Message 52 of 112

rk9152 wrote:

 

Yes, when attacked, the President fights back. He wasn't attacked. As Obama said, "You don't take a knife to a gunfight".

 

Obama also said, "When they go low; we go high."  Too much class for the jerk in the White House.

 


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

430 Views
Message 53 of 112

rk9152 wrote:

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/jake-tapper-cuts-off-stephen-miller-after-strange-inter...

 

You may notice that things started to go off the rail when Tapper got snide about being sure the President was watching and approved. Nope!  That's when Miller jumped the rails.  Maybe Miller should have looked up the term "interview"....like trump Cult Members here, the English dictionary appears to be a foreign object. An interview in this case is where one person asks a question and the other answers the question.  Miller didn't answer any of the questions he was asked....he was clearly there to attack the book and praise his master.  He did it again towards the end and then kicked Miller out. Yep, as Miller continually attempted to fillibuster the interview. Miller was trying to point out the President's accomplishments and Tapper didn't ask ONCE, what trumps accomplishments were.  Thanks for proving my point.  and Tapper wanted Miller's "expert" opinion of the topic of mental health.  Another rk lie.....Tapper never asked for Millers "expert" opinion on anything.  Someday, I hope the trump cult members realize they don't have to lie to make their point.  Until then, they'll continue to subject others to FAKE NEWS.

 

Now, I know that there is an obsession on the hate filled left with the President's hindquarters, but let's be honest, Miller is a representative of the President. Naturally he would speak favorably about him.  Now, I know there is an obsession on the hate filled far-right to cover trumps butt, but when your asked to participate in a televised interview, your not being asked to attack the interviewer, the tv network and a book; your were invited to answer questions.  But it's the usual straw crap we see from the usual strawmen.....

 

 


Come on, he was not invited for a fact finding interview and he did not show up to do one. I understand the meaning of the word and I understand that anyone thinking that was what that was supposed to be is extremely naive (or....what is that term.....oh yeah...."intellectually dishonesty").


 


you are correct. anytime a conservative opens their mouth it isnt going to be factual or agree with the type of forum. He sould have been on Fox.

 


Two questions:

1) Does that mean you agree with or disagree with my theory that both sides got what they planned and wanted?

2) What has Fox to do with this?


Two answers:

 

1) Disagree as your theory isn't supported with any facts, but ONLY the biased observation of a trump supporter.  Obviously, you ignored the FACT, Tapper was attempting to get facts from Miller and Miller wasn't going to have any of that.

 

2) Because Fox sucks-up to anyone/everyone in trumps administration.

 

Thanks for asking.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

429 Views
Message 54 of 112

rk9152 wrote:

Cirice wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


Tapper was there to attack the President, Miller was there to defend the President - show-biz under the guise of "news".

 

Do you understand the "snowflake" comment?


No, Tapper was there to conduct an interview with Miller about the Michael Wolff book. Miller was  there under the guise of being interviewed about the book, but his real intent was to attack CNN and pump up trump.

 

And yes, I understand the "snowflake" comment. Trump is a thinned-skinned egomaniac who can't accept any amount of criticism. He will attack anyone, at any time, for the even smallest perceived slight. Nevermind that he is almost always the instigator.

 

Now, which rights, exactly, was he standing up for?


I guess we will have to agree to disagree. it is my view that Miller knew Tapper would be attacking the President and Tapper knew that Miller would be defending him.

 

Yes, when attacked, the President fights back. As Obama said, "You don't take a knife to a gunfight".

 

"Snowflake" is a term referring to kids being raised to think they can never lose and are protected from any disappointment (no rewards for excellence since it might make someone else feel bad for example). When  things don't go their way (like an election) they weep and wail and then howl at the moon.


You mean like so many on the Right "weeped , wailed" and then "howled at the moon" when Obama won both of his elections? Now they "weep, wail and howl at the moon" about Mueller investigating their heir trump.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

447 Views
Message 55 of 112

Cirice wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


Tapper was there to attack the President, Miller was there to defend the President - show-biz under the guise of "news".

 

Do you understand the "snowflake" comment?


No, Tapper was there to conduct an interview with Miller about the Michael Wolff book. Miller was  there under the guise of being interviewed about the book, but his real intent was to attack CNN and pump up trump.

 

And yes, I understand the "snowflake" comment. Trump is a thinned-skinned egomaniac who can't accept any amount of criticism. He will attack anyone, at any time, for the even smallest perceived slight. Nevermind that he is almost always the instigator.

 

Now, which rights, exactly, was he standing up for?


I guess we will have to agree to disagree. it is my view that Miller knew Tapper would be attacking the President and Tapper knew that Miller would be defending him.

 

Yes, when attacked, the President fights back. As Obama said, "You don't take a knife to a gunfight".

 

"Snowflake" is a term referring to kids being raised to think they can never lose and are protected from any disappointment (no rewards for excellence since it might make someone else feel bad for example). When  things don't go their way (like an election) they weep and wail and then howl at the moon.

Report Inappropriate Content
Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

499 Views
Message 56 of 112

@Cirice—SPOT ON!

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!

Report Inappropriate Content
Highlighted
Frequent Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

420 Views
Message 57 of 112

rk9152 wrote:


Tapper was there to attack the President, Miller was there to defend the President - show-biz under the guise of "news".

 

Do you understand the "snowflake" comment?


No, Tapper was there to conduct an interview with Miller about the Michael Wolff book. Miller was  there under the guise of being interviewed about the book, but his real intent was to attack CNN and pump up trump.

 

And yes, I understand the "snowflake" comment. Trump is a thinned-skinned egomaniac who can't accept any amount of criticism. He will attack anyone, at any time, for the even smallest perceived slight. Nevermind that he is almost always the instigator.

 

Now, which rights, exactly, was he standing up for?


Assume nothing. Question everything. And start thinking.
Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

422 Views
Message 58 of 112

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

I understand the meaning of the word ....it would be a first....

 Once again, rk "lies" 

 

If at some point you have a desire to discuss the issue without the snide personal silliness, let me know - I'll be here.


ok, right to the topic. Tapper publicly castrated Miller and the Trump agenda. anyone who didnt see that is a fool. Do you disagree with my first sentence? 


I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on who is a fool and whether or not the result was exactly as expected from both sides.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

400 Views
Message 59 of 112

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/01/jake-tapper-cuts-off-stephen-miller-after-strange-inter...

 

You may notice that things started to go off the rail when Tapper got snide about being sure the President was watching and approved. Nope!  That's when Miller jumped the rails.  Maybe Miller should have looked up the term "interview"....like trump Cult Members here, the English dictionary appears to be a foreign object. An interview in this case is where one person asks a question and the other answers the question.  Miller didn't answer any of the questions he was asked....he was clearly there to attack the book and praise his master.  He did it again towards the end and then kicked Miller out. Yep, as Miller continually attempted to fillibuster the interview. Miller was trying to point out the President's accomplishments and Tapper didn't ask ONCE, what trumps accomplishments were.  Thanks for proving my point.  and Tapper wanted Miller's "expert" opinion of the topic of mental health.  Another rk lie.....Tapper never asked for Millers "expert" opinion on anything.  Someday, I hope the trump cult members realize they don't have to lie to make their point.  Until then, they'll continue to subject others to FAKE NEWS.

 

Now, I know that there is an obsession on the hate filled left with the President's hindquarters, but let's be honest, Miller is a representative of the President. Naturally he would speak favorably about him.  Now, I know there is an obsession on the hate filled far-right to cover trumps butt, but when your asked to participate in a televised interview, your not being asked to attack the interviewer, the tv network and a book; your were invited to answer questions.  But it's the usual straw crap we see from the usual strawmen.....

 

 


Come on, he was not invited for a fact finding interview and he did not show up to do one. I understand the meaning of the word and I understand that anyone thinking that was what that was supposed to be is extremely naive (or....what is that term.....oh yeah...."intellectually dishonesty").


 


you are correct. anytime a conservative opens their mouth it isnt going to be factual or agree with the type of forum. He sould have been on Fox.

 


Two questions:

1) Does that mean you agree with or disagree with my theory that both sides got what they planned and wanted?

2) What has Fox to do with this?

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: TAPPER CUTS OFF INTERVIEW WITH MILLER; THAT ISN'T THE ONLY THING HE CUT OFF

406 Views
Message 60 of 112

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

phyllisc6781 wrote:

RK-Things went awry when Miller refused to answer the question, and got rude with Tapper, who did step back—and did so more than once.

 

Miller than charged ahead like a raging bull, repeating the same lies over and over, some of which trump later used verbatim, trying to take over the interview, ignoring Tapper’s efforts to get him to stay on track and answer the questions asked, which is what good journalists and interviewers do. 

 

It became very clear, very quickly, that Miller wasn't there to be intetviewed, but to deliver a message, something that doesn’t work in real credible news interviews., who are not there to forward ANYONE’S AGENDA.

 

It was at that point Tapper ended Miller adolescent, nonsensical display.

 

Alternative realities only work in trumpland—not in here. ClearIy it was Miller who went off the rail, impressing no one and further letting it be known that there is pervasive dysfunction within this WH.

 

Gee, I miss having a real president! 


I agree - Miller was not there to be "intetviewed". Tapper was looking for a fight, Miller obliged him and CNN sold more Preparation h and on-line dating. It's all show biz and the President is very good at that and the media loves it.

 

The mistake is trying to claim that the interview was supposed to by an open and fair exchange of facts and ideas.


the publis knows its not going to be an open and fair debate as soon as a right winger shows up. Thats the truth, in fact, its well demonstrated on this board.

 


yu may be right. if the only publis that shows up is Wobblies, i imagine the discussion will be friendly.

 

don't you just hate diversity of opinion?


Wobs are apolitical peace activists and organizers. dont you hate it when you have no idea of what you are talking about?

 


You're right - I didn't know that Wobblies were peaceniks. So, if not them, who would you restrict meetings to so as to insure everyone agrees?

Report Inappropriate Content