On January 5, 2016, MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews interviewed Hillary Clinton in an Iowa fire station during the Democratic primary season. Network footage obtained by the Cut shows Matthews, during the interview setup, making a couple of “jokes” about Clinton. He asks, “Can I have some of the queen’s waters? Precious waters?” And then, as he waits for the water, he adds, “Where’s that Bill Cosby pill I brought with me?” Matthews then laughs, delighted with the line, for an extended moment, as the staffers around him react with disbelief, clearly uncomfortable. (Cosby has been accused of sexual impropriety by dozens of women, some of whom allege that they were drugged and raped by the comedian.)
Read more and see video >>>>
RESIST, INSIST, PERSIST, ENLIST.” - HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSNBC. Show all posts
Monday, July 20, 2020
Joy Reid Debuts with all barrels loaded
Joy Reid brought the big guns on for her debut prime time episode.
Thursday, May 2, 2019
Hillary Clinton with Rachel Maddow
To cap off a tumultuous day wherein AG Barr stonewalled many incisive questions from Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Hillary Clinton paid a visit to Rachel Maddow. Here are a few snippets.
ICYMI you can find the full episode here >>>>
Here is a synopsis from CNN. (Nice sign that the free media is inter-cooperative.)
Clinton: Barr's argument for the President being able to fire investigators is 'the road to tyranny'
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during an event at Barnard College, January 7, 2019 in New York City.
Wednesday, September 19, 2018
Hillary Clinton: "We have to get back to regular order."
In one of his final appearances on the Senate floor, Senator John McCain urged his colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get back to regular order. Hillary Clinton echoed that imperative on The Rachel Maddow Show last night. Appearing on the anniversary of the release of her book, What Happened, and upon the release of the paperback edition with a new afterword (also published in The Atlantic), Hillary addressed, among other topics, the Kavanaugh confirmation logjam, the Special Counsel probe, the Manafort deal, and the ongoing Russian influence not only in our elections but in our very interactions.
Rachel began the interview quoting from the piece that ran in The Atlantic, and asked Hillary why she is afraid of losing our country. Hillary responded saying that putting aside ideological concerns we have to defend our democracy. Degrading the rule of law, de-legitimizing elections, attacking truth and reason, undermining our unity ... is a crisis. She said the authoritarian tendencies, left unchecked could result in the erosion of our institutions to an extent that we have never imagined here. We are not there yet, she contends, but that is because there is an election. "We need a new Congress, and we need a new Republican party."
With a new Congress, Hillary thinks we need an agenda broader than one of impeachment. She listed policy changes already made, and said those need to be addressed. If people do not go out and vote, she thinks we will see more dismantling of institutions.
She believes that she was clearly a part of the puzzle where Russian interference was concerned in 2016, but she thinks they are playing a longer game of undermining democracy here and globally. She said, "Foreign money, foreign interference in our elections, I don't care if it's from the right, the left, the center, up, down; I don't care where it's from. It's wrong. It's illegal,and the American people deserve to know. If it happened so we can try to prevent it." ¹
Rachel replayed a clip from a year ago where Hillary said we have to depend on those around Trump to be our first line of defense against him doing something that might have serious repercussions. The Times op-ed of September 5 and Bob Woodward's Fear appear to show that remark to have been predictive.
Her prediction now is that after the election Trump will wholesale fire people. She said he is close to being uncontrollable. She is hoping people will see that we need checks and balances and will vote accordingly. While she has not heard any specifics of invocation of the 25th Amendment, she thinks there are private discussions in the White House, and that people are worried.
It was a broad, extensive interview and thought-provoking. Hillary has warned us in the past. Once again she is sounding the alarms. Yes, we must get out the vote. But we must do more. We need to hold the government accountable. First, we must hold the line. Then, we must repair the damage. That demands advocacy. It is going to take more than a village. It is going to take the whole country.
See the full interview here >>>>
¹Please bear this comment in mind and take it very seriously to heart if you are one of those who defends a "Hillary supporter" whom you suspect or know not to be American but who insists upon not only impersonating an American but also insists upon telling Americans how to think and how to vote. Proxies, trolls, sock puppets, and bots take every side. There is a purpose to this alleged support. Do not be duped.
Rachel began the interview quoting from the piece that ran in The Atlantic, and asked Hillary why she is afraid of losing our country. Hillary responded saying that putting aside ideological concerns we have to defend our democracy. Degrading the rule of law, de-legitimizing elections, attacking truth and reason, undermining our unity ... is a crisis. She said the authoritarian tendencies, left unchecked could result in the erosion of our institutions to an extent that we have never imagined here. We are not there yet, she contends, but that is because there is an election. "We need a new Congress, and we need a new Republican party."
With a new Congress, Hillary thinks we need an agenda broader than one of impeachment. She listed policy changes already made, and said those need to be addressed. If people do not go out and vote, she thinks we will see more dismantling of institutions.
She believes that she was clearly a part of the puzzle where Russian interference was concerned in 2016, but she thinks they are playing a longer game of undermining democracy here and globally. She said, "Foreign money, foreign interference in our elections, I don't care if it's from the right, the left, the center, up, down; I don't care where it's from. It's wrong. It's illegal,and the American people deserve to know. If it happened so we can try to prevent it." ¹
Rachel replayed a clip from a year ago where Hillary said we have to depend on those around Trump to be our first line of defense against him doing something that might have serious repercussions. The Times op-ed of September 5 and Bob Woodward's Fear appear to show that remark to have been predictive.
Her prediction now is that after the election Trump will wholesale fire people. She said he is close to being uncontrollable. She is hoping people will see that we need checks and balances and will vote accordingly. While she has not heard any specifics of invocation of the 25th Amendment, she thinks there are private discussions in the White House, and that people are worried.
It was a broad, extensive interview and thought-provoking. Hillary has warned us in the past. Once again she is sounding the alarms. Yes, we must get out the vote. But we must do more. We need to hold the government accountable. First, we must hold the line. Then, we must repair the damage. That demands advocacy. It is going to take more than a village. It is going to take the whole country.
See the full interview here >>>>
¹Please bear this comment in mind and take it very seriously to heart if you are one of those who defends a "Hillary supporter" whom you suspect or know not to be American but who insists upon not only impersonating an American but also insists upon telling Americans how to think and how to vote. Proxies, trolls, sock puppets, and bots take every side. There is a purpose to this alleged support. Do not be duped.
Saturday, January 13, 2018
It's Time for Chris Matthews to GO!
When will time be up for Chris Matthews? How does he keep his head when so many others have rolled? MSNBC cut Tamron Hall and Joan Walsh loose, but keep him. What could possibly be the justification in light of this?
Phone: 1-212-664-4444 EMAIL: letters@msnbc.com Tweet @MSNBC
When will his outrageous behavior and comments warrant retribution in the eyes of the big wigs over there?
Phone: 1-212-664-4444 EMAIL: letters@msnbc.com Tweet @MSNBC
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Rachel Maddow's One-on-One with Hillary Clinton
I don't know why I am always blown away by how much information Hillary Clinton can pack into a few minutes, but I am. Hillary was on for 55 minutes. She had spoken uninterrupted and said so much at the beginning that I thought she had used up half the show. Then I looked at the clock. She had been speaking for only 14 minutes.
Rachel noted, at the end, that Hillary made some very strong comments regarding Facebook, Fake Americans, and the influence they held over our election. This is, as Rachel notes, a national security issue. I keep saying, it does not really matter which side a Fake American pretends to be on. A Fake American "Hillary supporter" is just as capable of impugning Hillary and/or other Democrats and Americans in general with untrue or alarmist statements as a Fake American on the right.
During the 2015-2016 election cycle, I applied a bit less scrutiny than normal in accepting Facebook friends. My intention was an expansion of an audience for Hillary's words, plans, and voter base and to drum up donations. I succeeded in doubling the number of Facebook friends tied to Hillary from the post-2008 number.
In the aftermath, I discovered that I had indeed accepted friend requests from some questionable entities who were less than forthcoming vis-à-vis their nationality/citizenship and location. My bad! I intend to be more assiduous in vetting friends in the future and to do my small part in depriving duplicitous and noxious trolls a platform on my news feeds for their fictional news. If there is a single divergence between these folks and the woman they claim to love and hold as a role model, it is on the role of honesty and transparency in trust.
During the campaign, there were detractors who questioned Hillary's honesty. She is among the most painfully honest people in the public eye. So it is ironic that these impostors resist transparency. That can only raise questions about their trustworthiness.
That said, I think we all can appreciate the honest foreign nationals who admire Hillary and provide truthful coverage of her initiatives.
This community here contributed impressively in many ways to Hillary's campaign: phone banking, pounding the pavement and knocking on doors, registering voters, providing primary day information, and making donations.
Hillary has made it clear that she will not appear on another ballot, but she is not leaving the arena. We will all be here to boost her efforts going forward.
Here is the full interview in case you missed it. Probably tomorrow Rachel will have the complete one-on-one posted at her website. It will play again at midnight EDT.
<iframe src='http://player.theplatform.com/p/7wvmTC/MSNBCEmbeddedOffSite?guid=n_maddow_a1state_170914' height='500' width='635' scrolling='no' border='no' ></iframe>
Rachel noted, at the end, that Hillary made some very strong comments regarding Facebook, Fake Americans, and the influence they held over our election. This is, as Rachel notes, a national security issue. I keep saying, it does not really matter which side a Fake American pretends to be on. A Fake American "Hillary supporter" is just as capable of impugning Hillary and/or other Democrats and Americans in general with untrue or alarmist statements as a Fake American on the right.
During the 2015-2016 election cycle, I applied a bit less scrutiny than normal in accepting Facebook friends. My intention was an expansion of an audience for Hillary's words, plans, and voter base and to drum up donations. I succeeded in doubling the number of Facebook friends tied to Hillary from the post-2008 number.
In the aftermath, I discovered that I had indeed accepted friend requests from some questionable entities who were less than forthcoming vis-à-vis their nationality/citizenship and location. My bad! I intend to be more assiduous in vetting friends in the future and to do my small part in depriving duplicitous and noxious trolls a platform on my news feeds for their fictional news. If there is a single divergence between these folks and the woman they claim to love and hold as a role model, it is on the role of honesty and transparency in trust.
During the campaign, there were detractors who questioned Hillary's honesty. She is among the most painfully honest people in the public eye. So it is ironic that these impostors resist transparency. That can only raise questions about their trustworthiness.
That said, I think we all can appreciate the honest foreign nationals who admire Hillary and provide truthful coverage of her initiatives.
This community here contributed impressively in many ways to Hillary's campaign: phone banking, pounding the pavement and knocking on doors, registering voters, providing primary day information, and making donations.
Hillary has made it clear that she will not appear on another ballot, but she is not leaving the arena. We will all be here to boost her efforts going forward.
Here is the full interview in case you missed it. Probably tomorrow Rachel will have the complete one-on-one posted at her website. It will play again at midnight EDT.
<iframe src='http://player.theplatform.com/p/7wvmTC/MSNBCEmbeddedOffSite?guid=n_maddow_a1state_170914' height='500' width='635' scrolling='no' border='no' ></iframe>
Thursday, September 8, 2016
Trouble with the Curve
Many pundits are giving Donald Trump extra points by grading him "on
the curve." All grades should be based on the same rubric or standard.
Let's review when and when not a curve should be implemented. If you
give a test and the highest grade is 70, your test was either too hard
or did not properly address the material. One option is simply to throw
out that test and the scores. Another is to curve the scores by
boosting the top score near to 100. All the lower scores get boosted
equally. In a case like this you might just add 30 points to every
score.
When there is just one single score that is near the top, that score rules the curve. The person who achieves that top score is the one who "wrecks the curve." Now, you may add points to everyone's score, but you cannot add much. You cannot add more than that top score would require to be perfect.
The fact that Hillary Clinton comes into a forum or debate better experienced and better prepared than Donald Trump does not imply the necessity to implement a curve. If Hillary hits an A- let's say, a 95 that grade does not translate to "curving" Trump's grade much higher than what he achieved. He gets graded according to the same rubric/standard where A is the top. You can curve the grades and boost Hillary's grade to 100. If Trump made 70 he can be boosted to 75. It is still a C. It does not mean that for showing up and making remarks he gets an A- because we are "grading him on a curve,"and he is so less experienced and prepared than she. We are grading both on a rubric. We are using a standard.
Now, if we are talking about differentiating grading (i.e. the standard) because one participant is advantaged over another, that is another matter entirely. But do we want to differentiate evaluations for the potential leader of the free world? There is a lot that is unfair going on here. Donald Trump is not the one being treated unfairly. He has been provided a wide berth and a lot of cushion.
So before the debates start, gathering lessons from this badly managed forum, let's not get all wobbly on how we "grade on the curve." We use it as needed when the entire test has somehow failed. We do not use it when one participant has excelled. We do not use it when one person has wrecked the curve. One person. Like this one.
When there is just one single score that is near the top, that score rules the curve. The person who achieves that top score is the one who "wrecks the curve." Now, you may add points to everyone's score, but you cannot add much. You cannot add more than that top score would require to be perfect.
The fact that Hillary Clinton comes into a forum or debate better experienced and better prepared than Donald Trump does not imply the necessity to implement a curve. If Hillary hits an A- let's say, a 95 that grade does not translate to "curving" Trump's grade much higher than what he achieved. He gets graded according to the same rubric/standard where A is the top. You can curve the grades and boost Hillary's grade to 100. If Trump made 70 he can be boosted to 75. It is still a C. It does not mean that for showing up and making remarks he gets an A- because we are "grading him on a curve,"and he is so less experienced and prepared than she. We are grading both on a rubric. We are using a standard.
Now, if we are talking about differentiating grading (i.e. the standard) because one participant is advantaged over another, that is another matter entirely. But do we want to differentiate evaluations for the potential leader of the free world? There is a lot that is unfair going on here. Donald Trump is not the one being treated unfairly. He has been provided a wide berth and a lot of cushion.
So before the debates start, gathering lessons from this badly managed forum, let's not get all wobbly on how we "grade on the curve." We use it as needed when the entire test has somehow failed. We do not use it when one participant has excelled. We do not use it when one person has wrecked the curve. One person. Like this one.
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Hillary Clinton at the MSNBC/NBC Commander-in-Chief Forum
Hillary was the first candidate to appear at the MSNBC/NBC Commander-in-Chief Forum tonight. Matt Lauer began with a question about what Hillary saw as the most
important characteristic for Commander-in-Chief. Hillary replied:
steadiness.
Then Lauer launched into the emails. Hillary re-explained for the nth time the classification markings. Then came the Iraq war vote. Hillary explained that succinctly and went on to speak about her record on her broader work on legislation for the military. Said she views force as a last resort.
Re: Iran nuclear deal "if Iran cheats." Hillary pulled that deal back into context and provided a rationale for putting together the coalition and imposing the sanctions.
#NBCNewsForum
Trump came on and spoke at length about Hillary and President Obama when he was told not to. He also informed all and sundry that Iraq has oil! He said people do not know that. Really? Most kids entering 5th grade this week know that as they also knew before his "big reveal" in Detroit that Abe Lincoln was a Republican. What is wrong with him? He seems uneducated even at a basic level. That or he thinks we are. So supercilious. So arrogant. So infuriating!
He was allowed to bash Hillary and President Obama throughout and even compared President Obama unfavorably to Vladimir Putin and accepted Putin's compliment about him.
Lauer was exceptionally contentious with Hillary and repeatedly interrupted her especially when she referred to Trump. He was very lenient with Trump's attacks on Hillary. He made no effort to control that and allowed Trump to misquote her. Hillary never said the plan to privatize the VA was Trump's plan. She said there is a plan, not that it was his plan, but is supported by him. We all know Trump doesn't have any plans! And why was he allowed to hear everything Hillary said???? What???
In the post-forum analysis, very smart people do not know what Trump means by "take the oil." What do you mean "What does he mean?????" ISIS knows what he means!
And there is this!
My final two cents: Matt Lauer was a terrible choice for moderator, and he performed pretty much as I knew he would. I would have been happier with Lester Holt or Joy Reid. OK three cents: I blame the Republican Party for Donald Trump. Not that Cruz or Rubio would have been better, but there were sane traditionalists there, Jeb, Kasich, Lindsey. You gave us this guy to contend with and even you all don't want him!
Here is an annotated transcript from WaPo.
Hillary's campaign would like you to see this:
Our next Commander-in-Chief needs to have the steadiness, strength, and judgment to make life and death decisions.
Then Lauer launched into the emails. Hillary re-explained for the nth time the classification markings. Then came the Iraq war vote. Hillary explained that succinctly and went on to speak about her record on her broader work on legislation for the military. Said she views force as a last resort.
Hillary has spent decades fighting for veterans, members of the military, and their families. http://hrc.io/2cujR5V #NBCNewsForum
Re: Iran nuclear deal "if Iran cheats." Hillary pulled that deal back into context and provided a rationale for putting together the coalition and imposing the sanctions.
"I will not let the VA be privatized." —Hillary http://hrc.io/2cujZm2 #NBCNewsForum
We need to do everything we can to remove barriers to the health care our veterans need—whether physical or mental. #NBCNewsForum
Unlike her opponent, Hillary's plan to defeat ISIS is not a secret. Not every wound can be seen. Our veterans deserve the best mental health services we can give. #NBCNewsForum pic.twitter.com/vHoPy09BvC— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) September 8, 2016
It should be noted that Hillary popped up out of her seat, stood, and walked while addressing questions several times. Trump remained enthroned throughout. So much for the question of who has stamina and who does not.In 2002, Donald Trump said he supported invading Iraq https://t.co/B3071OFSQy https://t.co/On1ZfL88eC— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed) February 19, 2016
Trump came on and spoke at length about Hillary and President Obama when he was told not to. He also informed all and sundry that Iraq has oil! He said people do not know that. Really? Most kids entering 5th grade this week know that as they also knew before his "big reveal" in Detroit that Abe Lincoln was a Republican. What is wrong with him? He seems uneducated even at a basic level. That or he thinks we are. So supercilious. So arrogant. So infuriating!
He was allowed to bash Hillary and President Obama throughout and even compared President Obama unfavorably to Vladimir Putin and accepted Putin's compliment about him.
Lauer was exceptionally contentious with Hillary and repeatedly interrupted her especially when she referred to Trump. He was very lenient with Trump's attacks on Hillary. He made no effort to control that and allowed Trump to misquote her. Hillary never said the plan to privatize the VA was Trump's plan. She said there is a plan, not that it was his plan, but is supported by him. We all know Trump doesn't have any plans! And why was he allowed to hear everything Hillary said???? What???
In the post-forum analysis, very smart people do not know what Trump means by "take the oil." What do you mean "What does he mean?????" ISIS knows what he means!
And there is this!
Trump cites resignation of Mexican official as proof his Mexico visit was successful
Donald Trump pointed to the resignation earlier Wednesday of a high-ranking Mexican official as proof that his trip to Mexico last week was a success.“If you look at what happened, look at the aftermath today, the people who arranged the trip in Mexico have been forced out of government,” Trump said in a commander-in-chief forum hosted by NBC News in New York. “That’s how well we did, and that’s how well we’re going to do have to do.”
Read more >>>>
My final two cents: Matt Lauer was a terrible choice for moderator, and he performed pretty much as I knew he would. I would have been happier with Lester Holt or Joy Reid. OK three cents: I blame the Republican Party for Donald Trump. Not that Cruz or Rubio would have been better, but there were sane traditionalists there, Jeb, Kasich, Lindsey. You gave us this guy to contend with and even you all don't want him!
Here is an annotated transcript from WaPo.
The first Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump showdown of 2016, annotated
By Aaron Blake, Amber Phillips and Callum Borche
Hillary's campaign would like you to see this:
Is Donald Trump ready to be our next Commander-in-Chief?
Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un will be rooting for him tonight.
Hillary Clinton at the MSNBC/NBC Commander-in-Chief Forum
Hillary was the first candidate to appear at the MSNBC/NBC Commander-in-Chief Forum tonight. Matt Lauer began with a question about what Hillary saw as the most
important characteristic for Commander-in-Chief. Hillary replied:
steadiness.
Then Lauer launched into the emails. Hillary re-explained for the nth time the classification markings. Then came the Iraq war vote. Hillary explained that succinctly and went on to speak about her record on her broader work on legislation for the military. Said she views force as a last resort.
Re: Iran nuclear deal "if Iran cheats." Hillary pulled that deal back into context and provided a rationale for putting together the coalition and imposing the sanctions.
#NBCNewsForum
Trump came on and spoke at length about Hillary and President Obama when he was told not to. He also informed all and sundry that Iraq has oil! He said people do not know that. Really? Most kids entering 5th grade this week know that as they also knew before his "big reveal" in Detroit that Abe Lincoln was a Republican. What is wrong with him? He seems uneducated even at a basic level. That or he thinks we are.
He was allowed to bash Hillary and President Obama throughout and even compared President Obama unfavorably to Vladimir Putin and accepted Putin's compliment about him.
Lauer was exceptionally contentious with Hillary and repeatedly interrupted her especially when she referred to Trump. He was very lenient with Trump's attacks on Hillary. He made no effort to control that and allowed Trump to misquote her. Hillary never said the plan to privatize the VA was Trump's plan. She said there is a plan, not that it was his plan, but is supported by him. We all know Trump doesn't have any plans! And why was he allowed to hear everything Hillary said???? What???
In the post-forum analysis, very smart people do not know what Trump means by "take the oil." What do you mean "What does he mean?????" ISIS knows what he means!
And there is this!
My final two cents: Matt Lauer was a terrible choice for moderator, and he performed pretty much as I knew he would. I would have been happier with Lester Holt or Joy Reid.
Here is an annotated transcript from WaPo.
Hillary's campaign would like you to see this:
Our next Commander-in-Chief needs to have the steadiness, strength, and judgment to make life and death decisions.
Then Lauer launched into the emails. Hillary re-explained for the nth time the classification markings. Then came the Iraq war vote. Hillary explained that succinctly and went on to speak about her record on her broader work on legislation for the military. Said she views force as a last resort.
Hillary has spent decades fighting for veterans, members of the military, and their families. http://hrc.io/2cujR5V #NBCNewsForum
Re: Iran nuclear deal "if Iran cheats." Hillary pulled that deal back into context and provided a rationale for putting together the coalition and imposing the sanctions.
"I will not let the VA be privatized." —Hillary http://hrc.io/2cujZm2 #NBCNewsForum
We need to do everything we can to remove barriers to the health care our veterans need—whether physical or mental. #NBCNewsForum
Unlike her opponent, Hillary's plan to defeat ISIS is not a secret. Not every wound can be seen. Our veterans deserve the best mental health services we can give. #NBCNewsForum pic.twitter.com/vHoPy09BvC— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) September 8, 2016
It should be noted that Hillary popped up out of her seat, stood, and walked while addressing questions several times. As far as I saw, Trump remained enthroned throughout. So much for the question of who has stamina and who does not.In 2002, Donald Trump said he supported invading Iraq https://t.co/B3071OFSQy https://t.co/On1ZfL88eC— BuzzFeed (@BuzzFeed) February 19, 2016
Trump came on and spoke at length about Hillary and President Obama when he was told not to. He also informed all and sundry that Iraq has oil! He said people do not know that. Really? Most kids entering 5th grade this week know that as they also knew before his "big reveal" in Detroit that Abe Lincoln was a Republican. What is wrong with him? He seems uneducated even at a basic level. That or he thinks we are.
He was allowed to bash Hillary and President Obama throughout and even compared President Obama unfavorably to Vladimir Putin and accepted Putin's compliment about him.
Lauer was exceptionally contentious with Hillary and repeatedly interrupted her especially when she referred to Trump. He was very lenient with Trump's attacks on Hillary. He made no effort to control that and allowed Trump to misquote her. Hillary never said the plan to privatize the VA was Trump's plan. She said there is a plan, not that it was his plan, but is supported by him. We all know Trump doesn't have any plans! And why was he allowed to hear everything Hillary said???? What???
In the post-forum analysis, very smart people do not know what Trump means by "take the oil." What do you mean "What does he mean?????" ISIS knows what he means!
And there is this!
Trump cites resignation of Mexican official as proof his Mexico visit was successful
Donald Trump pointed to the resignation earlier Wednesday of a high-ranking Mexican official as proof that his trip to Mexico last week was a success.“If you look at what happened, look at the aftermath today, the people who arranged the trip in Mexico have been forced out of government,” Trump said in a commander-in-chief forum hosted by NBC News in New York. “That’s how well we did, and that’s how well we’re going to do have to do.”
Read more >>>>
My final two cents: Matt Lauer was a terrible choice for moderator, and he performed pretty much as I knew he would. I would have been happier with Lester Holt or Joy Reid.
Here is an annotated transcript from WaPo.
The first Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump showdown of 2016, annotated
By Aaron Blake, Amber Phillips and Callum Borche
Hillary's campaign would like you to see this:
Is Donald Trump ready to be our next Commander-in-Chief?
Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un will be rooting for him tonight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)