This week, apparently just days after they received the material, House Democrats released a trove of new evidence from personal Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s associate Lev Parnas, which majorly further implicated the president himself in a scheme to bribe Ukraine. The material even included a statement from Giuliani insisting that he was acting with the “knowledge and consent” of the president when seeking concessions from Ukraine. When longtime Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway faced questioning over the new evidence during an appearance on Fox News this Thursday, she flailed. She repeatedly dramatically refused to answer a simple yes-or-no question about the president’s response to the allegations.
Host Bill Hemmer straightforwardly asked for “the White House’s position on his allegations,” and Conway launched into a diatribe trying to haphazardly impugn Parnas’s credibility — although her broadsides against those accusing the president conveniently ignore the fact that their allegations are largely supported by concrete evidence. It’s right there.
Still, Conway railed:
‘Remember, people who go on TV are never under oath. This is someone who didn’t come forward of his own volition. He was arrested and indicted on some pretty serious charges… There is a pattern here; the media and the Democrats love to imbue credibility on whomever, whatever, and whatever is trying to take down Donald John Trump, and that has to stop.’
Yes, we know that you’re petrified about the possibility of basic media coverage of your team’s activities and prefer to imagine that the coverage is evidence of some kind of secret nefarious conspiracy. (It’s not.) Also — yes, it’s true that Parnas was indicted for a campaign finance law violation scheme — but, he also has evidence to support many of his claims. So what about the response from the president to the allegations?
‘But are you saying flat-out, a hundred percent, what he alleges is not true? Yes or no?’
‘When he says, the president knew all of my moves — objection! You cannot say what somebody else knew or thought. You can’t do that. So that was a TV show, not a court of law… I think you should go by what the president himself has said.’
Uh, what? She subtly threw in another one of the Trump team’s wild bonkers assertions.
First, there was Conway’s own defense of “alternative facts,” then, there was Giuliani appearing on television and insisting — in his words — that “truth isn’t truth,” and now, there’s Conway insisting that nobody can say what another person knows.
After the above, she trailed off into a rant about supposed (but in reality nonexistent) plots to steal the 2016 election, and Hemmer chimed in:
‘Is he lying or not?’
After some more crosstalk, co-host Sandra Smith chimed in:
‘It’s a yes or no question. Trump knew exactly what’s going on, said Lev Parnas. And we’re asking, is that statement true or false?’
Conway did not directly answer the question, as if she signed away her right to give a straight answer when she joined the Trump team. She railed:
‘Trump knew what was going on how? Where did he get consent of the president?.. There was no call for an investigation of the Bidens. People were talking about the Bidens and they were!’
Asked *repeatedly* whether Lev Parnas was lying about Trump knowing "exactly" what was going on, Kellyanne Conway doesn't give a straight answer
Hemmer: Are you saying flat out, 100%, what he alleges is not true? Yes or no?
Conway: He's not under oath … objection, hearsay! pic.twitter.com/JFCjBPnCEV
— Lis Power (@LisPower1) January 16, 2020