General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat is wrong with Chris Cuomo. He is giving such a hostile interview to Mary Trump as though
he is questioning her credibility in my view
Rachel is such a good interviewer
This Cuomo interview is quite disappointing to
Cha
(297,935 posts)doing the interview on cnn.
How's Mary L doing? Is it on a screen? TY
still_one
(92,492 posts)Many of the important issues of the book
still_one
(92,492 posts)so many things about trump in the book not covered not covered in my view
His pathological lying, lack of empathy, compassion, etc.
Perhaps he was playing devils advocate, but when Cuomo commented that Donald trump is not a dumb person, I had to wonder where Cuomo was coming from. Trump is a con man, sociopath, failed businessman, and not a nice person
Because not much of the books content was covered, I wonder if Cuomo read the book
By contrast, Rachael made direct quotes from the book, and references to specific pages
It is my take, and obviously most people dont agree with me here
Cha
(297,935 posts)wasn't a dumb person".. why say that? How touching to stand up for trump THAT WAY. lol So he just plays one on TV? GMAFB!
idziak4ever1234
(1,257 posts)still_one
(92,492 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,131 posts)on patriots, democrats, etc., so they dont get accused of bias.
Our country is broken in every possible way and has been for a long time.
still_one
(92,492 posts)madaboutharry
(40,245 posts)Interviews lose credibility if the interviewer appears biased. This is a good interview because she is answering his questions with conviction and honesty.
I think she looks very confident. She is at her own home and seems much more comfortable than last night.
still_one
(92,492 posts)choie
(4,111 posts)I didn't see the very beginning, but I think he's doing a good job and doesn't seem to be putting her on the defensive.
Bev54
(10,088 posts)and for once he is letting her talk, which is unlike him
miyazaki
(2,256 posts)still_one
(92,492 posts)unlike Rachel's interview
To me it is like a tabloid interview
Awsi Dooger
(14,565 posts)Per norm, Cuomo didn't rely on the book. He asked probing big picture questions that encouraged Mary to think and expand, regarding pecking order within the family and how things were viewed at various stages. It was markedly more interesting than last night.
I understood the family dynamic tonight, far superior than it has ever been presented before. Rachel offered none of that. Cuomo also got Mary to open up and specify regarding why she is doing this now as opposed to 2016. Mary took the extra time today to nod the New York Times piece on Trump's financial shenanigans as impetus for her decision. Rachel again got none of that.
Rachel predictably moved from one section of the book to another. That was the entirety of her repertoire. Typical standard fare.
HotTeaBag
(1,206 posts)but yeah your assessment is pretty right on - 'overmatched rookie' is a touch harsh, but Rachael is kind of a one trick pony sometimes and interviews aren't her strongest asset.
It's become kind of a joke in our house whenever she starts her interviews with 'did I get anything wrong about how I laid things out, did I miss, or mischaracterize anything', which is always met with "no, you explained things perfectly" - as if she is constantly wanting to hear how awesome she is (well, her researchers and writers anyhow).
I actually fell asleep during Rachael's conversation with Mary Trump - Cuomo is by far a better interviewer - mostly because (IMHO) he is there to actually ask questions and not just to provide a platform for the interviewee.
Cuomo gets himself into some pretty hostile territory at times with regard to the guests he has on, and it's a place where Rachael isn't really willing to go, she tends to stick with very non-confrontational, preaching to the choir-type interviewees.
Towlie
(5,332 posts)HotTeaBag
(1,206 posts)Meaning the first segment of a show. Most shows on cable news have an A, B, C and sometimes a short D interspersed with commercials with a sliver of time left at the tail end.
Rachael uses hers for her monologues, while Brian uses his for first panel and Lawrence uses his as a combination of the two generally speaking.
Towlie
(5,332 posts)HotTeaBag
(1,206 posts)It's not a particularly common term - google seems to need the word 'television' somewhere in the search box.
DonaldsRump
(7,715 posts)still_one
(92,492 posts)is why I am disappointed.
Mary Trump is handling quite fine
UTUSN
(70,779 posts)non-condescending, and both have backgrounds of high profile families.
She is reacting as an equal, not to any perception of "hostility."
*********This is one of my beefs with the fantasy version of "equality" - Treating one another of us in the big Coalition of component members does NOT mean condescending, patronizing, pandering. Equality means RESPECT, not babying.
still_one
(92,492 posts)Much about the substance of the book
It seems less an interview about the book from my impression
UTUSN
(70,779 posts)Not that he is a lawyer. He acted like EQUALS.
And I don't know what they were talking about for 45 minutes if not her observations of SHITLER, which are what "the substance of the book" is about.
I've watch the STEPHANOPOULOS and MADDOW interviews, and there's not much more to cover than what all three of them have done.
If the supposed "hostility" means that he didn't FAWN as much as Rachel did, that must be the difference, with the rest of all the interviews being the same "substance of the book."
still_one
(92,492 posts)who had not read the book, or know much about this, I don't think it would leave much of an impression
I definitely understand your point about a conversation of equals
UTUSN
(70,779 posts)still_one
(92,492 posts)tavernier
(12,412 posts)I think its a great interview, Chris doing a good job. Does she remind anybody else of Drew Barrymore?
still_one
(92,492 posts)I posted the OP to get various impressions
Thanks
OAITW r.2.0
(24,737 posts)OP's proposition on the interview has not been affirmed. Sorry still_one
still_one
(92,492 posts)OAITW r.2.0
(24,737 posts)I've had my share of OP's shot down here....somehow, I survived to post again!
tulipsandroses
(5,131 posts)Everyone is different. I think he asks questions that the opposition would ask. You want to know those things even in friendly territory
still_one
(92,492 posts)Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)to reveal too much of what the book contains. If she spills all the contents in TV interviews, what incentive is there for someone to go out and buy the book? The idea is to whet the appetite of the viewer so they'll buy the book.
Some of what she's saying in this Cuomo interview sounds very introspective, as though she's speaking of things that may not be in the book, perhaps some extra info.
I'm not finding Cuomo to be combative; just has his serious journalist face on. He's letting Mary speak at will, without interruption on his part. When he's in a challenging mode, he becomes very interruptive. See interviews with KellyAnne Conway as an example.
calguy
(5,345 posts)Different than Rachael for sure, but I don't think it's hostile in any way.
still_one
(92,492 posts)for gosh sakes. It seems he also assumes people have read the book, and didnt seem to cover a lot of the most damning parts of the book, especially the tax avoidance and just how dysfunctional the entire family is
Her Aunts avoidance of taxes, and stepping down her judgeship, along with his unfitness described in the book for office
I think it presumes a lot of people read the book. Those who didnt would view this interview much differently I believe
Rachel doesnt assume that, and why I think it is much more insightful. His family all knew he was a fraud, and I didnt get that out of the Cuomo interview
Just my opinion, and maybe my use of hostile was too strong
calguy
(5,345 posts)10 people can see the same interview and have 10 different and honest conclusions. We just didn't see it in the same way. No big deal. Neither of us is right or wrong. We are both right for sharing our honest opinion.
I do agree with you that Rachael was better. I never watch CNN. Only watched it tonight because she was on.
Thanks for sharing your opinion.
still_one
(92,492 posts)specific excerpts from the book
No doubt it is a question of style and preference
ooky
(8,933 posts)What I have become accustomed to when watching him do interviews. I don't think I have ever seen him be unfair though.
still_one
(92,492 posts)and other failed endeavors, I cannot agree with that assessment
Cuomo perhaps was playing devils advocate, but he seemed more sympathetic toward trump than he should have been
No he wasnt unfair, but missed the mark in my view
ooky
(8,933 posts)Especially not that Trump is intelligent. I think Trump is downright stupid.
Cuomo does the devil's advocate thing a lot - to a fault in my opinion. I'm hoping I can still DVR the interview tonight.
ooky
(8,933 posts)He was his normal self, totally. I thought she did very well and came across very credible, even more so than she did during Rachel's interview, as Cuomo's questions opened her up more. I thought this was the better of the two interviews.
still_one
(92,492 posts)with the interview with Rachel was they discussed the book. In my view Cuomo barely touched upon the incidents and characterizations in the book
I thought from that perspective it was really lacking
ooky
(8,933 posts)Also, for sure she looked fresher during the Cuomo interview. Two different interviews and different perspectives. But both perspectives very bad for Trump. I hope she keeps doing interviews right up to election day. I will buy this book (unlike the Bolton book I have no interest in).
ecstatic
(32,781 posts)I don't think he read the book. I don't hold that against him though. He already said he was feeling depressed and not his former self since recovering from covid-19.
still_one
(92,492 posts)blitzen
(4,572 posts)and gives the person he's interviewing a chance to respond/set the record straight. When he does this, it is very clear that he is not advocating that opposing position.
still_one
(92,492 posts)and when he made the comment that trump was not a dumb person, I dont know where that came from
Someone suggested perhaps he didnt read the book, and that might be the reason why I thought the interview was lacking
blitzen
(4,572 posts)He was getting at the fact that Trump knows masks should be worn but his utter lack of ethics allows him to say otherwise. And Mary Trump agreed. I remember Cuomo saying that with Trump the problem is ethics and morality, not necessarily lack of knowledge. Not that he is saying that Trump is informed or educated--rather that Trump knows better but doesn't give a shit and will say whatever suits his purposes. Anyway, that's how I recall it.
still_one
(92,492 posts)especially when i compare it to how Rachel took it apart with direct references to the book
blitzen
(4,572 posts)But on balance I think he's a force for the good.
still_one
(92,492 posts)kentuck
(111,111 posts)imo.
still_one
(92,492 posts)incidents and characterization made in the book
It appeared to me that Cuomo either didnt read the book, or read it superficially
helpisontheway
(5,008 posts)I think it was because Mary seemed much more comfortable and believable. Im sure she felt more comfortable in her own home. Yeah, I would have preferred it if he covered a little more details. However, overall his interview was better.