What is wrong with Chris Cuomo. He is giving such a hostile interview to Mary Trump as though

[still_one]

he is questioning her credibility in my view

Rachel is such a good interviewer

This Cuomo interview is quite disappointing to

[Cha]

1. Well that's Too Bad! i was just asking on another thread.. who was

doing the interview on cnn.

How's Mary L doing? Is it on a screen? TY

[still_one]

4. She is doing fine, but in my view Cuomo seems so superficial avoiding

Many of the important issues of the book

[Cha]

13. Thanks..

[still_one]

33. Obviously most disagree with my assessment in this thread Cha, and that is fine, but there were

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 devil’s 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 book’s 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 don’t agree with me here

[Cha]

36. That wasn't very smart of Cuomo to say.. that "trump

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]

2. You mean Chris "did you know my brother is Governor" Cuomo?

[still_one]

9. He treats his brother interviews even worse

[Eliot Rosewater]

3. Not watching, but please remember, legitimate journalists MUST be two thousand times harder

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]

6. He seems to be avoiding the important issues of the book.

[madaboutharry]

5. I think it is the way a good journalist would interview a person.

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]

21. She is doing fine, but i think he is missing some of the important aspects of the book

[choie]

7. I disagree

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]

12. I agree he is doing great

and for once he is letting her talk, which is unlike him

[miyazaki]

8. Wtf? Bullshit. Way more insightful.

[still_one]

14. We disagree. I don't see him discussing much of the substance of the book

unlike Rachel's interview

To me it is like a tabloid interview

[Awsi Dooger]

46. Cuomo made Rachel seem like an overmatched rookie

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]

53. Pretty much love Rachael overall (her A blocks are the best in the business)

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]

55. What are "A blocks"?

[HotTeaBag]

56. Television term.

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]

57. Thanks, Google doesn't seem to know that.

[HotTeaBag]

58. Sure thing.

It's not a particularly common term - google seems to need the word 'television' somewhere in the search box.

[DonaldsRump]

10. AFAIK, Chris Cuomo is an EXCELLENT journalist n/t

[still_one]

16. I don't see him discussing much about the content of the book, and that

is why I am disappointed.

Mary Trump is handling quite fine

[UTUSN]

11. I don't see the hostility. He's a lawyer, she's a licensed professional - he's being peerish,

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]

19. His being an attorney has nothing to do with it in my view. I don't see him talking

Much about the substance of the book

It seems less an interview about the book from my impression

[UTUSN]

23. Not to be hostile to you, but my point is that both of them of professionals in their own fields

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]

26. Rachael didn't fawn over Ms Trump, and no you are not being hostile, but for a viewer

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]

31. Glad we wrapped things up nicely! I've liked your posts lots!

[still_one]

32. I enjoy your thought provoking posts also.

[tavernier]

15. I disagree.

I think it’s a great interview, Chris doing a good job. Does she remind anybody else of Drew Barrymore?

[still_one]

17. I don't see him discussing much about the substance of the book, but everything but

I posted the OP to get various impressions

Thanks

[OAITW r.2.0]

18. Did not watch, but judging the peer review in this thread, I'd say the

OP's proposition on the interview has not been affirmed. Sorry still_one

[still_one]

20. No need to say sorry, i posted it because i wanted to hear other's views

[OAITW r.2.0]

25. I totally concur!

I've had my share of OP's shot down here....somehow, I survived to post again!

[tulipsandroses]

22. I wasn't watching, but Chris tends to go hard at times. Remember he's a lawyer. I like his style

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]

24. I know. I thought they would cover more context in the book,

[Totally Tunsie]

48. From Mary Trump's standpoint, it doesn't pay for her

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]

27. I'm watching it and I'm not seeing it like that

Different than Rachael for sure, but I don't think it's hostile in any way.

[still_one]

29. He started off questioning her why should we believe you? She grew up with him around

for gosh sakes. It seems he also assumes people have read the book, and didn’t 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 Aunt’s 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 didn’t would view this interview much differently I believe


Rachel doesn’t assume that, and why I think it is much more insightful. His family all knew he was a fraud, and I didn’t get that out of the Cuomo interview

Just my opinion, and maybe my use of hostile was too strong

[calguy]

39. Naw. Your use of the word hostile was not too strong

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]

41. Good points and thanks. Rachel is so through in her analysis, having questions referencing

specific excerpts from the book

No doubt it is a question of style and preference

[ooky]

28. Not watching, but it is his style.

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]

30. In that interview Cuomo indicated that he believed trump was intelligent. After his failed busines,

and other failed endeavors, I cannot agree with that assessment

Cuomo perhaps was playing devil’s advocate, but he seemed more sympathetic toward trump than he should have been

No he wasn’t “unfair”, but missed the mark in my view

[ooky]

47. I often don't agree with him.

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]

49. Ok, so I just watched it.

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]

50. She absolutely did well. I suspect she was tired during Rachel's interview, but what I appreciated

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]

54. Agree that Rachel went right to the book.

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]

34. In my opinion, he didn't prepare properly.

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]

35. Excellent point, and I should have tuned on that. Thanks

[blitzen]

37. That's his method. It's a good one. He often poses oppositional questions...

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]

38. That may be, but from my impression he hardly covered the content of the book,

and when he made the comment that trump was not a dumb person, I don’t know where that came from

Someone suggested perhaps he didn’t read the book, and that might be the reason why I thought the interview was lacking

[blitzen]

40. The dumb person remark was meant to expose Trump as immoral...

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]

42. It missed the mark in my view because his sociopathic personality was hardly covered directly,

especially when i compare it to how Rachel took it apart with direct references to the book

[blitzen]

43. Cuomo may be an acquired taste. Sometimes he does piss me off...

But on balance I think he's a force for the good.

[still_one]

45. I agree

[kentuck]

44. About time!

imo.

[still_one]

51. In my view it would have been nice if Cuomo actually discussed the content of the book, and the

incidents and characterization made in the book

It appeared to me that Cuomo either didn’t read the book, or read it superficially

[helpisontheway]

52. Love Rachel but I preferred Chris Cuomo's interview

I think it was because Mary seemed much more comfortable and believable. I’m 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.