Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
Connie Chung Gets an A+
Christopher RuddyConnie Chung gets an A+ in my book for an interview well done.
Friday, Aug. 24, 2001
Some Condit critics may have wanted to see Chung in full battle gear armed with bazooka-style questions for her target.
But that could have backfired, giving Condit sympathy.
Instead, Chung played it just right, remaining cool but unrelenting in her questions.
Because we as Americans believe in the presumption of innocence, Chung could not have appeared to be accusing Condit of murder. That would have seemed unfair.
But we Americans also believe in the presumption of honesty – that a sitting U.S. congressman needs to candidly reveal the truth in a public matter.
This is absolutely demanded in a case that involves the disappearance of a young woman who was his lover in a clandestine relationship.
Chung's questioning and approach proved to any thinking person that Congressman Condit was not an honest man.
Condit didn't want to reveal he had a sexual relationship with Chandra Levy, even though that has been established. His failure to be forthright on this made Bill Clinton look like an honest man.
As an out, Condit made it seem that the Levy family had personally asked him not to answer Chung's questions about the relationship.
As we discovered during the interview, Condit admitted to Chung that the Levys themselves had not made the request, but on a recent appearance on TV said they did not want him to reveal "details" of the relationship. Admitting the relationship and revealing intimate "details" are two separate matters. What a sneak.
Then Condit boldfacedly claimed he had fully cooperated with the police and "answered every question."
We know from the D.C. police's own statement that Condit did not reveal the fact of his relationship with Levy until his third interview. The police themselves, as Chung stated more than once, claimed he had impeded their investigation.
Condit tried to keep some credibility by engaging in an MLH, initials used for a Nixon administration tactic called "Modified Limited Hangout."
MLH means guilty party admits some wrongdoing. Condit's MLH was his claim that "I have not been a peferct husband during my 34 years of marriage" – while denying any specific wrongdoing and relationship outside his marriage!
Thus, he categorically denied to Chung any intimate relationship with an airline stewardess, after first claiming he had not asked his lawyers to send the stewardess a statement to sign saying she had never had a relationship with Condit.
If the congressman did not have a relationship with this woman, what then was the nature of all of his contacts with her? Was she simply a bridge partner?
Nor did I buy his claim that she was making up the allegations for financial gain. How has she gained financially from all of this?
Because Chandra's body has not turned up, one cannot question Congressman Condit about a hypothetical murder.
But one can legitimately question him about his honesty during a police investigation involving a missing person.
I was braced for a Dan Rather-style interview with leading questions asking the congressman how it felt to be falsely accused, and just how awful everyone from the police to the press had been to him.
Chung did a superb job and should be commended. I think CBS should have given her the anchor job.
I hate to agree with Chris Ruddy, but I do. She was cool but relentless.
Not that I'm a Connie Chung fan - I still despise her for the way she manipulated Newt's mom.
I didn't watch it so I don't know but I think Condit had Chandra murdered just like I think bill clinton had Vince Foster and Jerry Parks murdered to protect his political career.
One thing is for certain. Connie Chung is a hell of a lot more pleasant to look at than Dan Rather.
"So Gary, what does your wife really think of Chandra -- I won't tell."
Condit leans over, whispers, "She says she's a bitch!"
You wanna' bet Mrs. Povich was up all night, waiting for her ratings to come in? ;-)
Relentless on "did you have an affair w/Chandra"? WE KNOW HE DID!!So, what's the point? How about..."why did you drive to VIRGINIA, to discard the watchbox"? How about..."what kind of man waits 9 weeks before answering any questions"? Chung, choked, BIGTIME. And, then she says.."well, I think we're outta time".COME ON!!! Make him rip the microphone off, say that that's the end of the interview. Don't do it FOR HIM!!
"Not that I'm a Connie Chung fan - I still despise her for the way she manipulated Newt's mom."
Connie did what ever she had to do with Newts' mom. All is fair in questioning.
The blame has to go to the editors of the video. They make the decision of what to leave in and what to leave out. They must have recieved all kinds of mail and phone calls on that one. A wrong decision. They then needed a scapegoat, Connie was the obvious one. She had to go. She was the fall Gal.
"So Gary, what does your wife really think of Chandra -- I won't tell."
Condit leans over, whispers, "She says she's a bitch!"
Yep ... all Perry Mason moments.
I was flabbergasted at the way she bombarded him with questions, one right after the other...he kept saying "Let me finish." I think he was using the old ramble on and on, and don't really say anything routine....He came off as a beady-eyed weasle, definately hiding something.....
Connie Chung is a very good 'reader', she could easily 'star' on the best of the fast moving scripts of everyday 'soap-opera' RELATIONSHIPS.
This may very well become more 'serial' trash well done, but nevertheless, 'trash'.
IMHO
Ruddy is worthless.
He came off as a beady-eyed weasle,
To me, he came across as programmed by his handlers. How many times did he say "I've been married 34 years" (or whatever)? Some say it was pointless for Chung to dog him on the question about whether or not he had an affair; I think his refusal to even acknowledge the obvious truth unmasked him as the "beady-eyed weasle" he most certainly is.
Connie Chung gets an A+H in my book.
Ruddy is worthless.
Agreed, but sometimes even a blind squirrel stumbles upon an acorn.
This morning while getting ready for work, we were watching one of our local channel news broadcasts. One reporter had interviewed college students (at my alma mater), asking them what they thought of the Chung interview. Only one of them (a guy) said he even felt any sympathy for Condidit. All the others, especially the girls said they thought he acted like he had something to hide, was obviously not telling the truth, was evasive and knew more than he was admitting, etc. They did not seem impressed with his answers to Chung's questions.
Connie did what ever she had to do with Newts' mom. All is fair in questioning. The blame has to go to the editors of the video. They make the decision of what to leave in and what to leave out.
Horseshit. The interviewer has ultimate control over what stays and what comes out and she would of had to approve the final version.
Plus you aren't taking into account that she defended leaving that "He thinks she's a bitch" line in during the ensuing controversy it caused.
Connie Chung gets an A+ in my book for an interview well done.
He's got to be kidding. It was the most stupid and painful hour I have seen on television -- and that is saying a great deal. I should have switched it off the 45th time she said "so, did you sleep with her???" This was an interview? Give me a break. She may have wanted to look "tough", but she just ended up looking stupid. And Condid? He looked the same, like a creep. So why did I bother watching?
Our local TV station has a little clip they run right before they do a Condit update. It's a slo-mo of Condit turning his head toward the camera, with that maniacal grin on his face. I swear, the guy looks like one of Satan's minions!
I wouldn't give her an A+. But she did uphold her journalistic integrity pretty well.
B+ in my book.
She didn't really work the angles on the tough questions. It was hard line, but straightforward. I think she could have come at him from different sides, and she should have been prepared with any recent statements from the Levy's. Her inability to directly refute his statement about the 'direct request' from the Levy's let him repeat his mantra without a significant challenge. Everyone knew it was BS, but she could have made him dance more.
Next point: did anyone else notice how his hands came up and fingers tensed almost in Connie's face when he got flustered ... you could feel the rage. He showed me that at the very least he is capable of violence.
BlueNgold
Cal?
Scumbag Condit thinks after that pitiful performance that the whole USA will be demanding that he be left alone and re-elected by a hugh majority. That is what you call being Crazy.
I agree with your assessment. Not an A+, but pretty steady work, which was far more than I expected. I wish she had pressed more on the flat denial of the affair with AMS, and the odd response that his lawyers sent her the false statement to sign without his knowledge.
Connie: "So, your lawyers were sending out false statements to women at random?"
"Connie Chung gets an A+…"
Ruddy has committed a cardinal sin.
There is only one person entitled to an A+ on this forum and ol' Bert has copyrighted that feature.
The interviewer has ultimate control over what stays and what comes out and she would of had to approve the final version.
Usually true, but not in this case. As a provision of the agreement to do the interview, Condit insisted that the interview be shown in its entirety--no editing cuts allowed.
I'm not sure what Connie gets an A+ for. She didn't make Condit look bad. He took care of that all by himself.
She spent well over half of the interview on variations of "Did you have an affair with Chandra Levy." It was obvious he was not going to answer the question, and would use the same scripted response. Once she had established he was evading the question, the point was made. Her time was limited, by agreement, and she wasted a lot of it.
She didn't throw softballs, but she was given opportunities to nail him (best example being the watch case fiasco) and she didn't. He looked bad, but she had him caught in an obvious lie and let it go too easily.
She let him basically get away with a modified accusation that the Levy family was lying, on more than one occasion.
Basically, she went in with too much focus on getting him to admit the affair, and wasted most of her time trying to get an answer that wasn't going to be said.
I give her credit for not going easy on him, but I can't say she hit a home run.
I thought overall Connie did a good job. She probably wasted at least five minutes asking and re-asking the "did you have sex with that woman" question multiple ways, and that was wasted time.
Condit came off as shifty-eyed, evasive, dispassionate, and very cold. His answers to some of the questions were so preposterous that even I was surprised. He really thinks his consituents are morons and will believe everyone else (The Levy's, the aunt,Anne Marie Smith, the chick who gave him the watch, the police, etc.) is a liar--and he's the only honest person in the bunch.
But he's not talking about the Condit interview, he's talking about Newt's mom.
Haha! Maniacal is right! One of our stations runs a clip too, and Condidit's expression reminds me of an apocalyptic TV movie I watched with my daughter some years ago. The evil character (who was really the devil) was speaking at a podium, and said "Please allow me to introduce myself", an obvious take-off on the Stone's song "Sympathy for the Devil". I swear the expression on his face was just like Condidit's.
Yep, he behaved like a bloody idiot alright-the kind of idiot he believes the rest of us are. Otherwise, he certainly wouldn't be telling us to believe that Anne Marie Smith lied about their affair, and his attemted coercion.
I thought it was a pointless interview. She didn't do her homework and have questions prepared about the issues chewed over on talk TV, like him being involved with the Hells Angels, calling Anne Marie Smith from Luray cavern, etc. Even where she asked him about telling Chandra not to carry ID, she should have had a follow up question but no, she went back to "Did you have an affair, why won't you say you had an affair. . ."
I expected a love-fest between Gary Condit and Connie Chung and instead I got a pretty decent idea of what Condit is about. Chung's relentless questioning regarding his affair with Chandra Levy and Condit's evasiveness on that and other questions, i.e. The watch box that he went to Virginia to dispose of but claimed he was 'just cleaning out my desk'. That, his refusal to acknowledge his already admitted affair with Chandra Levy, his flat-out denial of an affair with the Smith woman and his total lack of remorse and failure to really apologize for anything made his lack of honesty and total lack of integrity crystal clear, to me. I don't believe I was alone in my assessment.
Condit was being judged last Thursday night and I think the jury of Americans will find him guilty. Guilty of evasive tactics, lack of candor, outright lying and a total absence of any feeling for the Levy's pain or even attempting to project the appearance of contrition. A pathetic performance.
Call it Bill Clinton lite, but of course, Condit is no Clinton, either in importance to the Democrat party or in power held. He'll soon find out how expendable he is to the Democrat party.
I'm no fan of Connie Chung but all in all, for a liberal media shill, she did fairly well, although we can sit back, second guesss and nit-pick all day. So what? The important point for me is that Gary Condit was exposed to the general, apolitical public as the slime he is.
The fact that on the O'Reilly Factor immediately following the interview, all the Democrat operatives were dissing Condit and abandoning him left and right, mincing no words in the process. It was amazing. I think Condit is toast, as he should be, and the Connie Chung interview helped turn on the toaster.
Even with a few reservations, I give Chung a B+.
Connie's main fault line was not her ability, style, or even her toughness...
Connie was NOT at all well prepared. She had no quotes to call him on the carpet from the Levy's, the aunt, from law enforcement, or even from Ann Marie. She let him get away with the age old 'I don't respond to accusations from unnamed sources who weren't even there.' (By the by: if they are unnamed, how does he know they weren't there?)
If Connie had gone into the inteview with a well prepared list of REBUTTAL questions for denials to tough direct questions then she could really have done some digging. With nothing more than direct material she got him flustered, I think he would have cracked wide open under more pressure.
There weren't going to be an 'Matlock' confessions, but she could have exposed his duplicity, arrogance, and rage ... and probably assured his political demise had she been truly 'ready' for this interview. He was on the verge and she didn't have the info she needed to go in for the kill.
"...this made Bill Clinton look like an honest man."
Absolutely impossible statement! Only point in this piece that I do not agree with.
I was flabbergasted at the way she bombarded him with questions, one right after the other...he kept saying "Let me finish." I think he was using the old ramble on and on, and don't really say anything routine....He came off as a beady-eyed weasle, definately hiding something.....
Me, too! And he had things he was going to say, no matter what she asked him!
Did you notice that, from offstage, Abbe Lowell rang the bell when the 30 minutes was up and they didn't get ONE more question!
I was referring to Connie Chung's interview with Newt's mom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |