The Donald vs. 60 Minutes

I’m not gonna tell you what he said because if you were really interested you’d watch the video and if you’re not interested I’d be wasting my time. I will say that he didn’t say anything particularly new or shocking, nor did he look like a genius nor an idiot.

Trump was Trump. Those who like him will like the interview. Those who hate him will watch the interview so they can wallow in their hatred.

What was most notable about the interview was the tone of the interviewer. Scott Pelley was much tougher than Megyn Kelly. No member of the lamestream media would dare to question Barack Obama in such a confrontational manner. But I’m not defending Trump or complaining on his behalf – I wish the media would treat all candidates like that, especially Hillary Clinton.

Getting raked over the coals is good for politicians.


About Myiq2xu™

"If you hit an artery, somebody can bleed out in two minutes."
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to The Donald vs. 60 Minutes

  1. Venus says:

    I liked how Palley kept defending the status quo — “you can’t do that we have a North American free trade agreement!” and Trump responded with “agreements end.”

    These morons in the MSM really think that laws, agreements, etc can’t change yet they think they are the progressive ones.

    • Myiq2xu says:

      No member of the media ever told Barack Obama he couldn’t do what he was promising.

      • Somebody says:

        That’s true and they still won’t tell Obama he can’t rule with a pen and a phone for instance.
        I found what Trump said about NAFTA quite newsworthy and I think his statements may come back to bite him. While I understand that we’ve gotten the short end of the stick with NAFTA to claim that going into the oval office you plan to renegotiate and failing that out and out violate a treaty is pretty ballsy.

      • lyn says:

        The media wiped Obama’s ass, and they still do. I think Trump did well in this interview. Let’s see if 60 Minutes does the same with all the other candidates.

  2. Myiq2xu says:

    According to The Google there haven’t been many reactions to the interview posted yet. I think that is a little unusual. You know they watched it.

  3. votermom says:

    60 Minutes now has to interview the leading Dem candidate in a similar manner. Although they should probably wait a bit until Hillary drops out.

  4. Myiq2xu says:


    Scott Pelley: Who are you going to raise taxes on?

    Donald Trump: If you look at actually raise, some very wealthy are going to be raised. Some people that are getting unfair deductions are going to be raised. But overall it’s going to be a tremendous incentive to grow the economy and we’re going to take in the same or more money. And I think we’re going to have something that’s going to be spectacular.

    Scott Pelley: But Republicans don’t raise taxes.

    Donald Trump: Well, we’re not raising taxes.

    Scott Pelley: What kind of Republican are you?

    Donald Trump: I mean the only, well, I’m a pretty good Republican. But, I will tell you this, I do have some differences. I don’t want to have certain people on Wall Street getting away with paying no tax.

    Scott Pelley: You say you’re gonna lower taxes on the middle class, what are we talking about?

    Donald Trump: Well, we’re talking about numbers that will be announced over the next two days. And they’ll be significant for the middle class.

    Scott Pelley: Do you know what the numbers are?

    Donald Trump: I know ’em right now.

    Scott Pelley: Well, why don’t you tell me? This is 60 Minutes. It’s time to tell the folks at home the details of what you intend to do.

    Donald Trump: I know. I know. I will say this, there will be a large segment of our country that will have a zero rate, a zero rate. And that’s something I haven’t told anybody.

    Scott Pelley: You’re talking about–

    Donald Trump: We’re talking about people in the low-income brackets that are supposed to be paying taxes, many of them don’t anyway.

    Scott Pelley: You’re talking about making part of the population exempt from income tax?

    Donald Trump: That is correct.

    Scott Pelley: You’re talking about cutting corporate income taxes?

    Donald Trump: That is correct.

    Scott Pelley: But there’s a $19 trillion federal debt.

    Donald Trump: That’s right. We’re gonna grow the economy so much–

    Scott Pelley: You can’t afford to do those things–

    Donald Trump: –no, no, but if the economy grows the way it should grow, if I bring jobs back from China, from Japan, from Mexico, from so many countries, everybody’s taking our jobs.

    Scott Pelley: How do you get ’em back?

    Donald Trump: You get ’em back–

    Scott Pelley: Those $20 an hour jobs that this country was built on.

    Donald Trump: Right. Exactly. You get ’em back by taking them away from other countries. I mean, if you look at China, we have–

    Scott Pelley: How does the president do that?

    Donald Trump: Well, the president does it by not allowing places like China to devaluate, you know, they devalue their currency, Scott, to such an extent that it’s impossible for our companies to compete every time they do that, they suck the blood right out of our country.

    Scott Pelley: You’re not running for president of China.

    Donald Trump: No, I’m running–

    Scott Pelley: You’re not going to be able to prevent the devaluation of the currency.

    Donald Trump: Oh absolutely. Sure you are, sure you are. Look, they don’t respect our president. They don’t respect our country. They will respect me. They won’t be doing it. But here’s what we have to do. If they don’t come to the table, they’re going to have a tax when they put their products into this country. And they’re going to behave.

    Scott Pelley: So you would tax their–

    Donald Trump: I would–

    Scott Pelley: –products coming into the United States. You’re talking about a trade war.

    Donald Trump: I don’t want to say tax anything. I’m talking about a fair war. I’m talking about also, I have the smartest people on Wall Street lined up already. They’re going to represent us on Japan, on Mexico. Mexico, by the way, is taking our jobs. I love the Mexican people. They’re great people. But the leadership is too smart for our country. Ford Motor Company, moving a $2.5 billion plant to Mexico. Mexico–

    Scott Pelley: But there’s nothing you can do about that as president.

    Donald Trump: Sure there is.

    Scott Pelley: How do you keep them from exporting American jobs to Mexico?

    That was just a snip.

  5. votermom says:

  6. Dora says:

    I missed this one.

    ‘This Interview is Over’ ­ Carson Staffer Pulls Plug on CNN’s Tapper

  7. mothy67 says:

    Reading The Art of the Deal. Forget who wrote it.
    He sure hasn’t changed. The more they try to knock him out the harder he’ll fight. Fun light reading.

    • votermom says:

      I really appreciate how all three non-politician candidates are each stating a truth that is making the left and the media explode.
      Trump – illegal immigration is killing us
      Carly – PP cutting up live babies for parts
      Carson – Islam is incompatible with the Constitution

    • lyn says:

      The Lefties are sure in denial about the PP baby chop shop.

  8. foxyladi14 says:

    POP!!! There goes another head exploding. 😆

  9. DeniseVB says:

    Transcript/Video of the Charlie Rose – Putin interview.

    Hmmm, CNN covering Trump’s presser, Fox is not.

    • Dora says:

      Fox Business News carried it. The panel there are full of praise. They think Trump is brilliant. Varney called the press conference ‘absolutely Reaganesque’. Good reaction. And guess what? They aren’t talking about Obama’s speech at the UN anymore. Hee Hee.

    • lizzy says:

      Some of the questions Charlie Rose asked were cringe worthy-along the lines of Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Things were from an American perspective without respect for the fact that Putin was the leader of Russia.

  10. foxyladi14 says:

    And Dat’s Du Truth. 😆

  11. gram krakka says:

    Sounds good, but bringing back manufacturing jobs to the USA will be a challenge for Trump or any other pol. Many factors have contributed to the loss of manufacturing jobs in the USA including higher labor costs (union contracted wages + benefits + job security), environmental regulations and lack of robust growth in developed markets. Unless these and other factors are addressed, manufacturing jobs are not likely to return in great numbers.

    My daughter is concerned that the loss of manufacturing facilities in the US is a national security issue. She credits being able to quickly convert existing production lines to make war materials with winning WWII in only four years.

    Extreme environmentalists and the top Dem donors, aside from the unions, have pushed their party to kill off manufacturing in this country except for so called clean energy, solar and wind power. EPA water effluent discharge regs have resulted in older manufacturing facilities, mostly located in major cities, not being able to modernize and expand operations.

    Federal government agencies’ interpretation and implementation of laws enacted by congress have given the executive branch unprecedented power our founders never intended. We really don’t have three coequal branches. For the last 20-30 years the voting public blames and punishes the Repubs far more than the Dems when Congress exercises the power of the purse and shuts down the government. We really need to win the White House and retain majorities in both houses of Congress in 2016.

    As an R&D employee (now retired) of the world’s largest consumer products company I occasionally worked on projects in many company manufacturing sites ranging Boston, Staten Island, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Chicago, Kansas City, Long Beach, Mexico City and several additional contract manufacturing sites. Of those mentioned, only Kansas City and Cincinnati remain open albeit with greatly reduced operations.

    Got to run, my beloved grandson is upchucking again. This is the fifth day Since Labor Day weekend he has been sick. We have taken him off of all dairy to see if that helps. Not looking good.

    • 49erDweet says:

      In the first eight months after Pearl Harbor the aircraft industry in the Los Angeles basin put up over 20 huge new manufacturing, testing, storage, etc., facilities. During a new national emergency none of the touchy-feely-silly-costly-restrictive environmental laws we now have will remain, and with today’s technology gains we could replicate that building surge again in four months. Our restrictive siting laws are the biggest reason firms fled to friendlier overseas locations. Higher labor costs can be factored in, but when your voting neighbor’s all “have the vapors” when they see your large buildings, and the local government doesn’t support you, it’s time to move.

    • One of the sanest comments I have read in ages. Hope grandson gets well.

    • leslie says:

      I’m holding your grandson in my thoughts. I hope his health begins to improve.

  12. Dora says:

    Carl Icahn Endorses Trump for President

    Billionaire investor Carl Icahn endorsed Donald Trump for president in an interview with Neil Cavuto on FOX Business Network’s Cavuto: Coast to Coast.

  13. helenk3 says:

    The Chatanooga Five
    this story was not covered by the msm and it should have been

    • piper says:

      Wouldn’t surprise if Chris is indulging big time again or years of drinking have left permanent brain damage.

    • OMG! I was listening to him and Brian Williams, and other than not understanding (and I am smart) half of what BO was talking about in his pleading, whining voice, it is only logical these two dweebs were almost in Nirvana over hi.
      Did you LISTEN to Obama?

      OMG! Putin crushed his balls before he ever got to the lectern.

  14. helenk3 says:

    Water found on Mars.
    Water makes beer and whiskey and wine. that should increase the willingness to immigrate

  15. helenk3 says:

    one picture says 1000 words look at the faces

  16. helenk3 says:

    per FOX–Facebook is down

  17. helenk3 says:

    Mc Carthy announces he is in the running for speaker

  18. Dora says:

    He’s going out with a bang. 😦

    Boehner Unchained

    No longer constrained by coup fears, the outgoing speaker could wreak havoc on conservatives

    • Underwhelmed says:

      That’s good. Let everyone see him and his ilk for what they are. See what he does, see who supports him, see who to kick to the kerb at the first chance.

      • 1539days says:

        Reminiscent of Arlen Specter. The GOP made sure Pat Toomey lost the primary against Specter in 2004. He went on to betray the Republican Party. The next time, Toomey won the election.

  19. Myiq2xu says:

    This is for Dandy Tiger:

  20. helenk3 says:

    has anyone else noticed that every day there is an article about some school in America trying to shove islam down the kids throats?
    Why are they pushing for kids to accept a child molester? There is something going on in our schools and it is not good

  21. Dora says:

    Donald Trump’s “hurricane of words”

    Some of the best moments from the 60 Minutes interview in which Scott Pelley challenges the GOP frontrunner, including unaired clips

  22. blowme0bama says:

    Chasing unicorns with OUR $$ and ignoring the laws that protect us from just such treacheries as this:


    In preparation for this agreement, to be signed at a United Nations summit meeting in 2015 in Paris, the negotiators are meeting with diplomats from other countries to broker a deal to commit some of the world’s largest economies to enact laws to reduce their carbon pollution. But under the Constitution, a president may enter into a legally binding treaty only if it is approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate.

    To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal that would “name and shame” countries into cutting their emissions. The deal is likely to face strong objections from Republicans on Capitol Hill and from poor countries around the world, but negotiators say it may be the only realistic path.


  23. alice223 says:

    I can’t agree more that every politician needs tough interviews. Whenever the creative class wonders Why Those People Are So Angry, they need only ask themselves when their side of the aisle ever got an interview like that. That’s not a defense of Trump or the Republican field. It’s a defense of something other than a shriveled, gated, and corrupt political system.

    Klown said yesterday that he has a bad feeling about all this. I do, as well.

  24. smile says:

    Just watched some snippets of the interview on 60 minutes. What a Debbie downer is that Scott Pelley. Wow! Imagine if he was your parent or teacher or boss, every time you have an idea, he would says “you can’t, how will you, you can’t, not possible, not realistic, ….”. And Donald, he comes across really well, patient, considerate, not ruffled at all. And I am not in the Trump camp either. Just observing mostly. I ended up liking Trump. I loved observing the body postures. Trump, leaning forward, eager like a nice person. Pelley, legs crossed, resting his back and his arm, and chin on his arm, trying to pose in a power posture. It seemed lop-sided. Usually, the interviewer is the one eager to get the answers out, not sitting all high and mighty.

  25. Venus says:

    Very interesting story from Sharyl Attkisson about Pelley that proves he *never* would have allowed the kind of aggressive questioning of teh Precious as he did in the Trump interview:

    As in any news organization, there were editorial and story challenges. But over time, I was able to successfully navigate the challenges, for seventeen years.

    There was a sudden and insurmountable change however when the Scott Pelley era began. Many of us inside CBS would speak to the irony that a broadcast network eager to develop a reputation for investigative reporting was in fact moving further from both.

    Pelley and his executive producer Shevlin showered compliments on my work. I got the seal of approval from the lawyers. It was set to air, but then it never did. Pelley just wanted to put his own style on my work and spin it his way. Prior anchors like Dan Rather, Bob Scheiffer and Katie Couric had big picture ideas, but they never attempted to rewrite my script, but Pelley did.

    He subjected my script to endless changes and revisions. He softened the facts and made the story convoluted and hard to follow. The revision process never ended. Was he scared of going after powerful enemies? He did not say. All I know is the report which had been so effusively complimented by him never aired. They rarely said the story would not air. They just let it sit around and loved it until it began to stink like old fish.

    A number of us sharing the same observations and experiences engaged in countless conversations speculating as to why the Pelley-Shevelin regime was so hostile to original and investigative reporting.

    The universe of what they desired narrowed to a paper thin slice that was inversely proportional to the expanding universe of what was censored or deemed undesirable—including an overtly visceral reaction to any stories which they perceived as negative toward the Obama administration.

    The Pelley Administration was the death knell of original investigative journalism at CBS.

    Sharyl Attkisson, Investigative Reporter

    (see Stonewalled, pp 355-7)

    • DandyTIger says:

      Amazing, and sadly not surprising. I know these people are progs and want their progs to win, but at some point you’d think they’d care that their entire profession is shit.

  26. NewOrleans says:

    Man, I just watched Ann Romney on Hannity. So much grace, intelligence, decency.

    She would’ve been an exceptional First Lady.

  27. helenk3 says:

    Report: Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-SC), reportedly willing to serve as acting House Majority Leader if Republicans deadlock – @ChadPergram
    See original on

  28. leslie says:

    This morning as I was preparing for my day, I was “listening” to an interview with the coach of the Bears. What I heard was apropos – challenging questions, speculations of changes to the team or coaching staff. . . It was a yuuuge contrast to the types of interviews the very same sports “reporter” held with Lovie Smith – an earlier Bears head coach who was also unsuccessful in bringing the Chicago team to brighter days and better stats. With Lovie Smith, the reporter used hushed tones and sounded as though he were in a church and (perhaps) making his confession.
    One would’ve thought the sun rose and set with that coach. I had never heard that reverential tone used with coaches of professional sports teams – and certainly not one with a losing record. Honestly, it used to irritate me. Not because I care about the Bears – but because it seemed so “PC”. Can’t possibly take a tone that says – “I’m dissatisfied with your work” – not with that coach. And now, the team record is no better – no worse. Yet the tenor of the post-game and day after interviews is vastly different. Suddenly this coach is being held responsible. Suddenly the questions, although respectful, sound impatient. They sound more demanding – demanding change and answers. I can’t even tell you who the Bears coach is now, but he couldn’t have been Obama’s son. OTOH, Mr Smith could’ve been Obama’s son/brother/brother-in-law. It also made me think of the way Scott Pelley interviewed bronco vs. the way he spoke to the Donald. (all this before I even turned on the computer today.)

Comments are closed.