Trump clashes with ‘Meet the Press’ interviewer, calls outlet ‘crooked’ before ending segment

ThatRobGuy · Jun 8, 2026

Hans Blaster said:
Months? The post you quoted included a link to a 3 year old analysis I did of the segment that aired on Tucker's FoxNews show. The post and reference is not about Israel or whatever Tucker has been up to during Trump II.

Hmmm... okay, so selective quoting of other peoples' posts is a bad thing. I'll keep that in mind for future engagments.

Hans Blaster said:
I recognized the "Chansley escorted about" propaganda as originating on Tucker/Fox. Tucker has been a demonstrably despicable person for years, but this post was only about his pro-insurrection apologetics.

Okay.

So what makes him "despicable"?

If it's the downplaying of incidents where "revolutionary-minded" individuals caused a bunch of trouble and havoc, then I'd be happy to provide counter examples of people on the left justifying those sorts of things in other situations.

Your move cowboy lol.

FreeinChrist · Jun 8, 2026

Valletta said:
She was flat out lying, part of a continuing hoax, because they were indeed letting in people through another door with not an indication in the world that people were not supposed to enter.

No she wasn't. Trump was. The FBI was not waving people in through the doors, or the door on the other side. When we debated this before, all you could show was an out of context photo and possibly involved a guy who was later disciplined. Can't tell.

We DO have much evidence that they fought police officers and broke windows and vandalized and stole things and threatened members of congress. Do I need to post the videos and images again??

Trump seems to be oblivious to the fact that he was in office on Jan 6th it was his FBI at the time, and that Comey hadn't been the head of the FBI for 3 1/2 years.

Valletta said:
So along with violent people who Trump predicted would show up when there are 100,000 people, and offered the National Guard to help, there were regular citizens who never would have trespassed has they been told by any of law enforcement who was just standing there. They gave the first such people prison time and scared the rest into pleading guilty, a travesty of justice.

There were many who did not participate at the Capitol but the ones who were there to protest were Trump supporters.

IF they were found guilty, it is because there was evidence. The protesters were dumb enough to take pictures of themselves. They were caught on film.

Valletta said:
The hoax, perpetrated by Kristen and her network, it that it didn't happen. They won't show their base the video. There were crooked areas in the election, such as in Detroit. To claim their is no evidence for either is a lie and part of a continuing hoax.

No, the attempt at a hoax was on the part of Trump and his lies that the FBI ushered in the protesters.

Like this?

or this?

Where are the FBI agents in these pictures?

Then you will say it was just a few:

Valletta said:
We have a two-tiered justice system, and the elitists believe they are above the law. We just saw them disrupt a religious service in St. Paul, and the criminals who did it fit the Minnesota statutes to a tee, yet they won't prosecute them because they are Democrat allies. Their assault on our Republic continues.

Yes, we have a two-tiered justice system which is why Trump and other wealthy men who went to Epstein Island and his places in the US are not in jail.

ThatRobGuy · Jun 8, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
On a per capita basis, conservative media and institutions are WAY more antagonistic towards Dem presidents than the opposite. Conservatives just don’t dominate mainstream news or academia. Churches and opinion media are pretty influential societal institutions, too, and they’re constantly going after Dems.

I disagree with that strongly, and I'll tell you why.

Superficial antagonistic behavior is what it is...both sides do it, it's a staple of "two party system partisan politics"

But the "left > right" political antagonistic approaches involve appeal to authority in ways that don't exist in the inverse, where they tap institutions for "backing us up" for lack of a better term.

So when debates about policy, economics, etc... come up, they leverage the fact that most of academia is "on their side", and try to capitalize on "if you went to college, that means your opinion is worth more than that of someone who didn't" sentiments to give credence to their viewpoint.

Hans Blaster · Jun 8, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
Hmmm... okay, so selective quoting of other peoples' posts is a bad thing. I'll keep that in mind for future engagments.

I have and will continue to quote portions of your posts as you have a habit of writing extended rambles filled with irrelevancies. I did not quote less than all of your post here nor did I quote only part of the post I was responding to that you first responded to here.

ThatRobGuy said:
Okay.

So what makes him "despicable"?

If it's the downplaying of incidents where "revolutionary-minded" individuals caused a bunch of trouble and havoc, then I'd be happy to provide counter examples of people on the left justifying those sorts of things in other situations.

Tucker Carlson is not the subject of the thread, nor was he the subject of my post. As I said already, I recognized the propaganda video claiming "Chansley was escorted" as being from Tucker and his producers at Fox"News" from 3 years ago. I posted a link to my analysis of that video that demonstrates that Chansley was not escorted around and the video that claims to "demonstrate" that claim includes lots of deceptive editing (out of order clips, jumps from floor to floor, etc.) and here that link is again:

Why did McCarthy Give Tucker Carlson Exclusive Access to J6 Footage?

If it was a "hearing", they sure did a lot of talking, which was directed toward the American public on primetime TV. Yes, the playing of video of folks who were in Donald's cabinet and even his family members involved a lot of talking which was being aired for the benefit of the viewing...

www.christianforums.com

ThatRobGuy said:
Your move cowboy lol.

If you'd like to demonstrate how I was wrong, go ahead, but I've forgotten more about the movements of individual rioters than you likely ever knew.

Valletta · Jun 8, 2026

Hans Blaster said:
More nonsense that isn't true.

There weren't 100,000 people at the Capitol on Jan 6th.

People were at different locations, not 100,000 specifically at the Capitol building. Trump anticipated a large crowd.

Hans Blaster · Jun 8, 2026

Valletta said:
People were at different locations, not 100,000 specifically at the Capitol building. Trump anticipated a large crowd.

Write better then. You wrote of violence and then mentioned 100,000. The only violence was at the Capitol by the Trump mob, which was about 10-15,000 total people on the Capitol grounds and lawns, and 3-5000 in close, or entering the building.

Even the whole rally + riot wasn't close to 100,000 people.

Servus · Jun 8, 2026

FreeinChrist said:
Where did anyone say in this thread that he had dementia exactly?

You're right, it wasn't said in this thread. Just numerous times in many other threads.

FreeinChrist said:
I don't think he is a dynamic speaker. That is what you said. I don't find his repeating himself without addressing her questions and just saying it louder and louder while the face gets redder and redder, hurling insults at the interviewer and the station, until he throws down the mike and then steps on it as an example of a dynamic speaker

Childish but not a dynamic speaker.

It appeared that the interviewer was repeating questions and getting the same answer. And the interviewer got more aggressive as the interview progressed and talked over and interrupted the President a lot.

iluvatar5150 · Jun 8, 2026

ThatRobGuy said:
I disagree with that strongly, and I'll tell you why.

Superficial antagonistic behavior is what it is...both sides do it, it's a staple of "two party system partisan politics"

But the "left > right" political antagonistic approaches involve appeal to authority in ways that don't exist in the inverse, where they tap institutions for "backing us up" for lack of a better term.

So when debates about policy, economics, etc... come up, they leverage the fact that most of academia is "on their side", and try to capitalize on "if you went to college, that means your opinion is worth more than that of someone who didn't" sentiments to give credence to their viewpoint.

The college thing is way less common than you seem to think it is.

Regardless, the right claims to have God on their side. Find me a bigger appeal to authority than that.

Servus · Jun 8, 2026

Akita Suggagaki said:
that is a pretty pejorative way to talk about dignity and tact.

Not really when it appears that pretty much any form of alpha masculinity is described as toxic.

Bradskii · Jun 8, 2026

Valletta said:
She was flat out lying...

Forget Jan 6. It's been covered incessantly. We all could see what happened. But what you are completely ignoring is that Trump was lying through his teeth in the interview. And his child-like rant was due to the reporter reasonably asking what evidence he had that the California elections were fraudulent.

He has none whatsoever. Nobody has any evidence. Nothing at all. Just like his claims that there was fraudulent activity when he lost the federal election. Over 60 court cases and he lost every single one. Every. Single. One.

He will continue to lie about California and repeat the same baseless accusations because he knows that it's what some of his rusted on supporters want to hear. And as we have seen, there are those who will shamelessly say that whatever he says or does must be right. So he only has to say 'It's corrupt' for it to be corrupt as far as they are concerned. Evidence is not required. Proof isn't needed. Facts to back up what he says are not relevant.

It has ceased to be the reality in which we live. He's contructed his own. And it's not credible that so many have joined him in this alternative universe. They're like the black night in the Python film who loses his arms and legs but refuses to accept what's happening. They's losing more and more of whatever credibility they thought they had every time Trump lies saying 'No, it's true I tell you. It's everyone else who is lying'.

It seems that there are people who are allowed to vote (and to seek high office) that have something that should preclude them from having that right. They can apparently feel no shame.

FreeinChrist · Jun 8, 2026

Servus said:
You're right, it wasn't said in this thread. Just numerous times in many other threads.

It appeared that the interviewer was repeating questions and getting the same answer. And the interviewer got more aggressive as the interview progressed and talked over and interrupted the President a lot.

I don't think she was any more aggressive than with any other politician she interviewed. Trump could not give any evidence. She did press back when he made unfounded claims, but journalists should do that. Trump seems to be expecting to be treated gently.

Servus · Jun 8, 2026

FreeinChrist said:
I don't think she was any more aggressive than with any other politician she interviewed. Trump could not give any evidence. She did press back when he made unfounded claims, but journalists should do that.

I think a journalist doing an interview shouldn't raise their voice to, talk over and interrupt the person being interviewed. What's called pressing back could also be called badgering in my opinion.

FreeinChrist said:
Trump seems to be expecting to be treated gently.

Or perhaps the President of the United States expects to be treated respectfully and that badgering, raising their voice at, and interrupting the President doesn't convey respect.

FreeinChrist · Jun 8, 2026

She was trying to get him to answer some questions and challenged his untruths. That is the role of a journalist and it is what every other president (and other politicians) has handled without getting red-faced and stomping out. He was treated respectfully.
Journalists are so cowed by his penchant for lawsuits that they have been failing to actually do their job and challenge the lies.

Servus · Jun 8, 2026

FreeinChrist said:
She was trying to get him to answer some questions and challenged his untruths. That is the role of a journalist and it is what every other president (and other politicians) has handled without getting red-faced and stomping out. He was treated respectfully.
Journalists are so cowed by his penchant for lawsuits that they have been failing to actually do their job and challenge the lies.

I've never seen any other President interviewed in a manner that appeared to be so impolite, disrespectful, and provocative. Perhaps the prevailing attitude that he's a liar and trying to prove it was the driving force. And it seems to me like the complaint against him is that he didn't just sit there and submissively take it. That instead he got annoyed at being badgered and interrupted to the point where he called it quits. Personally think quite a few respectable people would have gotten red-faced and walked out on an interview being conducted the way that one was.

Servus · Jun 8, 2026

iluvatar5150 said:
The full episode, for those who are interested:

Not only did he do a mic drop, he stepped on it too lol.

Yarddog · Jun 8, 2026

Valletta said:
Trump clashes with 'Meet the Press' interviewer, calls outlet 'crooked' before ending segment

An exchange between President Donald Trump and NBC's Kristin Welker became heated in a "Meet the Press" interview.

www.oann.com

She flat out lied about J6. I saw recordings of the Shaman being escorted around. Trump tells her to watch the tapes and she showed no interest. "Crooked" for her network and for her was an accurate description.

Trump lied about most everything. Not all J6ers were violent but the majority was.

Gene2memE · Tuesday at 12:31 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
So what makes him "despicable"?

His lack of moral fibre? His intellectual cowardice? His lack of integrity? His support for regressive and reactionary figures in US politics?

His support for authoritarian dictators, up to and including white-washing their wars?

The two-facedness of his public support for Trump, while maintaining private disdain?

Similarly, his white-washing of the 2020 insurrection attempt and lying about election fraud. To the point where he repeatedly interviewed Mike Lindell and Sidney Powell.

Repeatedly airing racist/white nationalist/anti-Semitic talking points for the past decade? Similarly, repeatedly platforming/interviewing white nationalists, anti-Semites, racists, transphobes and other bigots since striking out on his own?

The steady drip of anti-Muslim bigotry for the last two decades, including support for the Iran and Afghanistan invasions?

The sheer amount of medical misinformation he spread (and continues to spread) about COVID-19, vaccines, alternative COVID treatments and medical authorities both in the US and internationally.

His opposition to feminism, and assertions that reducing gender discrimination is somehow inherently anti-masculine?

Repeated belittling of LGBTQ+ individuals for their identities and actions?

Valletta · Tuesday at 12:47 AM

Bradskii said:
Forget Jan 6. It's been covered incessantly. We all could see what happened.

Actually the mainstream press has withheld crucial video from the American people. People were motioned toward the Capitol by a guard. People walked in an entrance peacefully where they were many officers but none told them not to enter. Such people ended up with prison sentences, whereas the left-wing mob that entered a church and frightened children in St. Paul were told time and time again by the pastor to leave but they refused. And the local attorney would not even charge them for trespass, not even a $10 fine! This gets to the heart of the matter. Kristen is no neutral journalist, they hate it when Trump calls them out.

Valletta · Tuesday at 12:52 AM

Yarddog said:
Trump lied about most everything. Not all J6ers were violent but the majority was.

That's a false statement. One might think that due to the dishonest media coverage, but if you look at the numbers for yourself, do some research on your own, you will find it is untrue.

Bradskii · Tuesday at 1:49 AM

Valletta said:
Actually the mainstream press has withheld crucial video from the American people. People were motioned toward the Capitol by a guard.

Look! A pigeon!

I'm really not interested in what you think about Jan 6. If you want to believe it was all wine and roses and just some honest God fearin' folk who called in to the Capitol checking to see if anyone needed a hand to certify the election results then that is on you. You'll be judged on that. We all saw what happened live on TV. But you are again ignoring the reason why Trump walked out of that interview. It was because he claimed that the elections in California were rigged and he was challenged on it. He was asked what his evidence was.

Shock! Horror! Someone making a claim about election fraud being asked as to what evidence he had for that claim! And, again, I will point out that no-one has any evidence of that whatsoever. Literally none. A big fat nada. So that means that I know he was lying. It means that the interviewer knew he was lying. But most of all, it means that you knew that Trump was lying. It really looks monstrously idiotic for anyone to suggest otherwise.

What possible reason could you have for not accepting that? Is it because you think that if he keeps repeating a lie therefore it must be true? Does the greater frequency with which he lies make the lies more truthful? How doers this work? Can you explain it to us?

Trump clashes with ‘Meet the Press’ interviewer, calls outlet ‘crooked’ before ending segment

Part of the IT crowd

CF Advisory team

Part of the IT crowd

Reconstruction 3 will come

Well-Known Member

Reconstruction 3 will come

<><

Well-Known Member

<><

Under the Southern Cross I stand...

CF Advisory team

<><

CF Advisory team

<><

<><

Senior Contributor

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Under the Southern Cross I stand...

Similar threads