Huffingtonpost.com:

 

So … how do you really feel, Bill?

The “Real Time” host happens to be longtime friends with Kellyanne Conway, now Donald Trump’s campaign manager, but he didn’t let that friendship sugarcoat his questions for her on Friday’s show.

Maher welcomed Conway by telling her she is “enabling pure evil,” and spent part of the segment calling out false things Trump has said. The comedian joked, “I don’t have time to go through all of his lies, we only have an hour.”

But Conway, a “Real Time” veteran, had plenty of counterarguments ready. She accused Maher of cherrypicking examples, and, after pointing out that Hillary Clinton is falling in the polls, said, “I actually think we’re going to win, Bill. You know it. You feel it. I think you’re getting nervous.”

“Oh, I am getting nervous,” Maher quipped, “but it’s not because Trump is good. It’s because people are stupid.”

Ouch.   Maher is a strange person.  However, I agree with him about “deplorable.”

46 thoughts on “KellyAnn Conway: Enabling pure evil?

  1. Kelly_3406

    The real evil is Hillary. Her handling of Libya, Iraq and Syria enabled the growth of ISIS. Her support of liberal immigration policies and open borders left the door open to ISIS “soldiers” gaining access to the US.

    The terror attacks over the weekend are connected to the failed policies of Hillary and Obama.

    Heaven help us if Hillary is elected and she continues the failed policies of Obama (which she has indicated she plans to do).

    1. Oh mercy. Is is “blame Obama” on steroids. You and I have a very different concept of evil.

      1. Dump Trump

        @MoonHowler

        Yes, it’s absolutely the fault of Hillary Clinton’s “liberal immigration policies” You see after Clinton is elected President, (so she’ll actually have something to do with immigration policy, because Secretary of State doesn’t) She’s going to misuse a classified time machine and go back in time to 1995, when Ahmad Khan Rahami’s father entered the US. She will personally approve his asylum application so that 21 years later, his son can plant these bombs.

        Don’t believe that? Then come up with your own theory on how this is somehow Clinton’s fault, because that’s the best I’ve got.

    2. Robin Hood

      Kelly forgot to type the rest of her name. Spell it with me now: a-n-n-e.

      Same distortions and evasions.

      @Kelly_3406

      1. I think I misspelled it. Oops.

    3. Kelly_3406

      @Kelly_3406

      Let’s take a little jog through history, shall we?

      After Desert Storm, the US opened the door to large numbers of immigrants from places like Somalia, Pakistan, and the Middle East in general. The issue of sleeper cells first came to public view with the initial World Trade Center bombing in 1993. Nothing was done at that time to improve vetting of refugees and immigrants. Then we had the bombings of US embassies in Africa and Khobar Towers. Al Qaeda made direct threats to attack inside the US. Nothing was done to improve the vetting of refugees and immigrants.

      Who was president during the rise of terrorism in the 1990s? It was none other than William Jefferson Clinton. Hillary has claimed involvement with foreign policy as First Lady as an example of her “experience”. There is no evidence that she or anyone else in the Clinton Administration paid any attention to identifying and preventing hostile immigrants/refugees from entering the US.

      After 9/11, the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq, but Bush also did nothing to slow immigration from countries hostile to US values. The intelligence that Iraq had WMDs was flawed, but the initial invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were successful. However, the truly difficult combat did not emerge until the US attempted to pacify these countries and establish functioning governments. This difficulty of establishing a stable government in the Middle East was ignored later by Hillary and Obama.

      Fast forward to 2008. Despite heavy casualties and tough slogs in Iraq and Afghanistan, Al Qaeda had been decimated, Iraq had a functioning government with US troops to keep the peace, and the Middle East was relatively quiet.

      Hillary became Secretary of State in 2009. After failing to complete a Status of Forces agreement, the US pulled out of Iraq. Then, in what became known as Hillary’s War, the US overthrew Qaddafi in Libya, with no realistic plan to establish a stable government. The US also provided weapons and funding to groups in Syria seeking to overthrow Assad, which precipitated a brutal civil war and a refugee crisis.

      These policies resulted in large regions of Iraq, Syria, and Libya becoming ungoverned power vacuums, which history shows encourages the growth of radical terrorist organizations. Voilà. The JV terrorist group known as ISIS emerged and occupied these regions. ISIS became the terrorist varsity all-stars during Hillary’s watch at the State Department.

      ISIS also became the source of inspiration, training, know-how and funding for immigrants and refugees within Europe and the US to launch numerous terror attacks. A large pool of sympathetic-to-jihad immigrants let in the US between the 1990s until present was available and willing to do the bidding of ISIS. The result has been a large number of brutal terror attacks, with no end in sight.

      Hillary and her supporters claim that her policies and beliefs played no role in the current terrorist threat in America. The facts say otherwise. Despite evidence that 10-20% of immigrants coming from the Middle East hold extremist views and tolerate terrorist activities, she calls anyone a racist who would suggest curbing the flow of people who may be extremists. The pullout from Iraq and the overthrow of Qaddafi proved to be pivotal strategic mistakes in the fight against terrorism. Hillary was involved, and at least partially responsible, for these fateful decisions, as Secretary of State. More importantly, presidential candidate Hillary has yet to propose any realistic plan to correct these fundamental flaws in US policy that have allowed the threat of terrorism in the US to evolve and grow.

      QED.

      1. Not QED. You live in a fantasy world. Oddly enough, the world is changing.

        So who is worse? Saddam or Qaddafi?

  2. Pat.Herve

    The American people are largely stupid and lazy. Yes, sounds harsh – but our people do not follow the news of the world, use common sense or focus on education. We would rather have our kids follow pokemon around instead of applying themselves to anything constructive.

    That flows right into Trump’s exploration of ignorance. Even with this suspect in the Chelsea bombing – Trump is bellyaching that he will get a lawyer, fair trial and treatment for the bullet wound.

    1. It’s amazing how many people want to throw the rope over the courthouse rafters and hang the accused on the spot. The notion of adequate medical care and a fair trial are quickly discarded by some folks once their minds are made up. Forget that this country was founded on those principles.

      1. Mom

        @MoonHowler

        It’s not that we have forgotten those principles, some of just prefer the expedited Judge Roy Bean method of justice, its more fiscally responsible.

      2. Steve Thomas

        @MoonHowler

        I’m all for due process, if the attack happens on US soil, the targets civilian in nature, and the apprehension made by law enforcement. Quite another matter when this all happens overseas, and the targets Military or US State Dept. in nature.

        What no one seems to want to admit is the connections (real or perceived) between accelerated resettlement of refugees from terrorist hotbeds, and the increase in acts of terror directly linked to radical Islam.

        If anything is feeding Trump’s popularity in this area, it is because the current administration, and so many “leaders” on the democrat side, not to mention the MSM are quick to try to link any act of violence to “right-wing veteran pro-NRA Tea party types”, but will twist themselves into knots trying to dismiss any links to radical Islam.

        And when the facts come out, Obama, Hillary, Diblasio, et. al. just looks silly and weak. It happened again this weekend.

        Two bombs go off in NJ/NY and first it was “No apparent links to terrorism”. Then it was “no apparent links to radical islamic terrorism”, then finally, “no apparent links to Foreign radical Islamic Terrorism”.

        So each time something like this happens, they run through the check-list:

        -Can we tie this to the NRA/Tea Party/Christians so we can push for gun-control? No? Darn.

        -Was there a Confederate flag involved? No? Darn it.

        -Was there a Police officer shooting a black teen who was “turning his life around”? Nope? Damn.

        -It looks like the suspect was a Muslim. Okay. Was he born here? Can we push the “lone wolf” narrative?

        But it comes out like this:

        “Let’s not jump to conclusions. We have no reason to believe that this has any connection to….alright…alright…it was a radicalized muslim who immigrated here and was granted US citizenship…but just because we have all these attacks by radicalized muslims, doesn’t mean we should stop bringing as many as we can into the country.

        And you wonder why Trump is surging in the polls?

      3. Robin Hood

        A tracking poll of likely voters just came out today and Hillary is surging.

        Let Trump be Trump and the rest just happens as people stop and think.

        @Steve Thomas

      4. Steve Thomas

        @Robin Hood

        You and I must be looking at different polls. Hillary’s numbers have collapsed since her “deplorables” comment, and of course her near face-plant on 9/11

        Also, you might want to check Sabato’s crystal ball…Hillary has lost mucho ground in the electoral college.

      5. Robin Hood

        NBC-Survey Monkey just came out this week. Polls vary according to public opinion as it shifts.

        @Steve Thomas

      6. I must not listen to the same news you do.
        I have to respect not calling out terrorism before it has been proven that it is.
        Otherwise we have a “little boy who cried wolf” situation. I don’t mind waiting a few hours….

      7. Steve Thomas

        @MoonHowler

        Moon,

        Are you daft? Street criminals don’t plant pipebombs along the route of a 5K. That’d be a pretty ineffective way of conducting a purse-snatching. Terrorists do. Now one could be justified in holding off on the Muslim connection, until one is eventually made..but a pipe-bomb and a pressure-cooker bomb placed in high-traffic areas, intended to inflict civilian casualties…THAT’S THE VERY DEFINITION OF TERRORISM. To claim otherwise is pure idiocy.

        When in a single weekend we have a knife-wielding man yelling “Dirk Dirk Aloha Snackbar…are you a Muslim?” before stabbing the victim, the public has had ENOUGH.

        This is why Trump is surging amongst logically-thinking Americans. When Americans are being hurt and killed, we don’t need anymore lectures about not jumping to conclusions. When the current administration has proved that it is so PC-hamstrung that it can’t protect the public, people are done listening.

        When in the same breath Hillary speaks about restricting the Second Amendment, while chastising “deplorable” Trump supporters for opposing the mass importation of people from terrorist incubators, She is demonstrating a lack of fitness to serve as commander in chief.

      8. Am I daft? I don’t think so. Are you confusing daft with religious prejudice?

        I can’t help it that Americans are living in such fear that they are swayed by some blow-hard telling them he can fix something he clearly can’t.

        I find those Americans pathetic. Keep thinking your guy Trump is going to win. He won’t.

  3. Robin Hood

    One more thing I’d like to add is that I’ve been away from the TV, so I haven’t had the pleasure of seeing Kellyanne trying to explain the $258,000 Trump’s Foundation charitably gave to pay a legal bill for poor, indigent Donald. Maybe they’ll delegate it to a spokesperson willing to take one for the team. Maybe someone who hasn’t missed a paycheck.

    1. Eric the Half a Troll

      @Robin Hood

      Along those lines, this New Yorker article does a fairly good job of exposing all of Trump’s charitable … um… shall we say…. issues:

      http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-and-the-truth-his-charitable-giving

  4. Steve Thomas

    I may have missed it, since I don’t watch any Broadcast or cable news, but I have yet to hear or read of anyone drawing comparisons between HRC’s “basket of deplorables” remark and Romney’s 47% remark. Many have argued that it was press coverage of this remark that cost Romney the election.

    Think about that for a moment. Romney correctly or incorrectly stated that 47% of the electorate would never vote for him, because they paid no income taxes. He wad savaged in the press for “dividing the voters along economic lines. He was painted as an elitist, and there was a noticeable decline in support from his post 1st – debate high, from which he never recovered.

    We’re seeing a similar trend with HRC, which only exacerbates her problems with scandals and health concerns. Will the trend continue? Will she be able to get through the first debate without a coughing fit or a dizzy spell? Will she walk back her deplorables comment or double-down? How will she answer questions regarding her emails and the questionable relationship between State and the Clinton foundation?

    1. Robin Hood

      Well Kellyanne went on Erin Burnett’s show on CNN and did what you like to do.

      First she split hairs about verb tense. Then she veered off into attacking the Clintons’ foundation with the same old stuff.

      The Big Lie technique demands that you repeat the same stuff over and over until people begin to believe it. Like some of the long posts we see here.

      @Steve Thomas

      1. Steve Thomas

        @Robin Hood

        “The Big Lie technique demands that you repeat the same stuff over and over until people begin to believe it. Like some of the long posts we see here.”

        If you disagree with my comments, that is your right. However, if you believe them lies, then put forth the proof. Go ahead…argue that Hillary didn’t violate the law with her email server, or that she didn’t improperly handle classified material. GO ahead an argue that she hasn’t had some real health issues, like blood-clots on her brain, falls causing severe injury, and that on 9/11 she didn’t buckle quicker than an Anthony Wiener sexting denial. Go ahead and prove me wrong.

        You all don’t know the meaning of “deplorable”, but when faced with the truth, can only resort to name-calling.

        I’ve written it before here: I think we’re screwed regardless of who gets elected. The only satisfaction I’ll get from a Trump victory, beyond knowing that my 2A rights are a bit more secure, is the sheer entertainment of watching the Left become utterly unhinged. That will be a show.

      2. Robin Hood

        Why would I want to waste precious time wading into a repetitive word salad of partisan propaganda? It’s like arguing with a drunk. You won’t change any minds and it will just get uglier.

        Don’t say I called you a drunk either. It’s an analogy.

        Researchers tell us not to trust those who explain themselves in excess.
        So I notice that the Trump sympathizers have the longest posts here and judge that it is no coincidence.

        @Steve Thomas

      3. Steve Thomas

        @Robin Hood

        And we should trust those, like you, who refuse to accept reality? I do believe that is referred to as delusional. You can ignore reality, but you can’t ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.

      4. Robin Hood

        This blog is for civil debate by grown ups and you are disqualifying yourself with these comments. You don’t know me at all and you have no business getting personal.

        Bush 41 is voting for Hillary too.

        @Steve Thomas

      5. Kelly_3406

        @Robin Hood

        My last post is very long, so I am guessing that Robin Hood is referring to me. As far as I know, my points have not been presented anywhere else, so they are not a simple repetition of talking points. My post is long because I tried to provide specific evidence about Hillary’s failures in National Security.

        The bottom line is that Robin Hood and Dump Trump breezily dismissed my points as distortions. If they truly believe that’s the case, then they should say why and present their specific arguments. Until they do so, they come across as simple partisans that debate based on emotion rather than on facts.

      6. Dump Trump

        @Kelly_3406

        I didn’t say squat about your long post. I breezily dismissed your statement “Her support of liberal immigration policies and open borders left the door open to ISIS “soldiers” gaining access to the US.” because it’s wrong. Completely and utterly wrong.

        It’s wrong on multiple levels. Clinton’s position on immigration did not “leave the door open” because she has never been in a position to do anything about immigration. This may come as a shock to you, but immigration policy is not set by the First Lady. Nor a single Senator from New York. Or even Secretary of State. Clinton couldn’t have “left the door open” because she’s never been in charge of “the door”.

        Secondly, name a single “ISIS soldier” that has gained access through our current immigration policies. Not someone who immigrated and later became radicalized. Not someone whose kid became radicalized. Not puffed up bragging from ISIS. You say ISIS soldiers have gained access to America. Name one actual instance of it happening or shut up.

        You seem to be taking your debating tactics from Trump these days, just make up a fact and repeat it. So I’m going to respond the way people should respond to Trump: Back up your claim with actual proof or be ignored.

      7. Kelly_3406

        @Dump Trump

        Ask and ye shall receive.

        Here is your proof that Hillary’s State Department admitted refugees who were arrested for terror-related activities:

        http://www.nbcnews.com/card/clinton-did-admit-refugees-who-were-later-charged-terror-crimes-n652266

        I disagree that Hillary was never responsible for immigration/refugee policy. As Secretary of State, she set policy for the vetting policy. The State Department plays a key role in role in determining who gains admittance to the US.

      8. Eric the Half a Troll

        @Kelly_3406
        Neither of those two mean were “Isis soldiers” when they entered the US. Instead they reached out to Isis after naturalization. No connection to Isis could have been vetted by any SOS. Not the proof you were looking for.

      9. Kelly_3406

        Eric the Half a Troll wrote:
        @Kelly_3406
        Neither of those two mean were “Isis soldiers” when they entered the US. Instead they reached out to Isis after naturalization.

        According to the linked news item from CNN, one of the two men came to the US as a Syrian refugee in 2012 and announced in 2012 over social media that he planned to go to Syria to fight and join a terrorist organization. There may or may not have been pre-existing link. The proof may not be a smoking gun, but it is close enough for me.

        Whether a person is already a member of ISIS when he enters the US is immaterial. The key is whether the person is hostile to Western values of freedom of speech, equality of women, religious liberty, and fair treatment of minority groups including gays. A survey in the Middle East shows that >10-20% of people who are hostile to these Western values are also sympathetic and/or willing to support extremist organizations.

        That suggests that there are 10,000s of people in the US who might be open to recruitment by ISIS. We should stop letting people in the US who are hostile to Western values, because it is virtually guaranteed that current/future ISIS recruits are embedded within the group of refugees.

        http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/us/terror-charges-refugees/

      10. Eric the Half a Troll

        @Kelly_3406

        And if you acknowledge that no SOS can predict an immigrant’s future action (as in this case), the only solution that meets your standard is the Trump solution of 100% ban on Muslims. Of course that won’t solve the problem of Isis inspired violence as NONE of those cases originated with recent immigrants from ANY country. They were all naturalized and/or raised in America.

      11. Maybe he plans to throw all the ones here out, in his own mind, at least–regardless of how many years or generations they have been here.

      12. Robin Hood

        Some of us value our time and have other things to do than go point by point with incoherency. I thought that immigration was under the Department of Homeland Security.

        @Kelly_3406

      13. Kelly_3406

        @Robin Hood

        The Department of State plays a large role in setting up and carrying out the vetting process.

      14. Robin Hood

        We can’t confuse you with facts if your mind is already made up.

        @Kelly_3406

    2. Perhaps because there is no comparison. Economic elitism simply cannot be compared to loathing of bigotry and ignorance.

    3. Scout

      @Steve Thomas

      I’ve seen quite a few comparisons in the media with the Romney 47% remark, Steve. You did miss it. That’s why Hillary retracted her statement as quickly as she did. She recognized the similarity. Of course, no decent citizen disagrees with Hillary that xenophobia, racism, etc are “deplorable” and “irredeemable”. The problem is that she implied that she or anyone else really knows what proportion of Trump supporters are motivated by such unacceptable, anti-American motives.

  5. Steve Thomas

    I never thought I would ever agree with Piers Morgan about anything. Never. Ever. Anything. But here we have a piece where I believe he is 100% spot-on in his analysis:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3798213/PIERS-MORGAN-doesn-t-matter-names-mainstream-media-call-Trump-says-exactly-Americans-think-especially-comes-Islamic-terror.html

    1. Robin Hood

      I remember him from the Celebrity Apprentice just like that other guy.

      @Steve Thomas

  6. DB

    Has anyone noticed that the people who committed these internal terrorist acts are not fresh off the boat? San Bernardino, Orlando, NJ/NYC. Born and came young or born and raised in the USA. Same goes for the white guys who commit mass murder as well, born and raised here. Is it really an issue of immigration or assimilation when white men are mass killers too?

    1. Robin Hood

      You just cut through the right wing smokescreen. Good for you!

      @DB

    2. Excellent point, DB.

      It is also noteworthy that those who commit mass murder as a sweeping generalization are men. Home grown men.

    3. Kelly_3406

      @DB

      That is a spurious argument. Just because there are already killers in the US does not mean that we should not strive to keep foreign terrorists from entering the US.

      Plus, ISIS may not even seek to get shooters/bombers into the US, because they are likely to have a very short life span. Perhaps it is more valuable to them to bring in ISIS recruiters/planners/trainers, who represent a much larger threat in my view. Such people could be smart enough to plan and carry out a series of attacks by recruiting new “homegrown” terrorists as the previous recruits are killed or captured.

      The article that I linked to above describing two refugees that were arrested for providing “material” support to ISIS is in some ways more worrisome than if they were the actual trigger pullers.

  7. punchak

    Kellyanne is just the kind of woman Trump needs.
    She´s unbelievably cool and covers whatever she feels
    with her dazzling smile. She has no problem telling her
    kids about Trump´s behavior.
    Should the worst happen, I bet she´ll be press secretary.

Comments are closed.