April Ryan received the brunt of his interest when she started to ask him about the leaks in the White House, Sally Yates testifying before Congress, and Condoleezza Rice's upcoming visit with the President. To his credit, he began by holding the line. She asked him how the White House was going to "revamp" its image in the face of all of the controversy and he responded that they were going to continue to bring people together, across the aisle, etc. etc.
When she started on the next question about Condoleezza Rice, he thought it was so interesting that he cut her off mid-sentence to say that he thought it was interesting that she would follow up her first question with that one implying that she was trying to sow discord or something in the White House with all her negativity. We will never really know because she did not really get to answer the question. So great was his interest that he continually cut her off and told her not to shake her head at him as he tried to answer the question, that she really did not get to ask.
I took a moment to Google what this could possibly be about because I had forgotten about the whole thing. It seems that President Trump apparently called her a "bitch" in front of a crowd a while ago and implied that she was inept at her job as Secretary of State. During the campaign Secretary Rice did not pull any punches about not supporting him and when asked to comment, said he should "Just stop" and drop out of the race. Yet here we are. April Ryan wanted to know (and I have to admit I am a little curious myself) how this meeting might go after such bad blood between the two. It is a legitimate question.
Spicer has developed a little bit of a tell when it comes to speaking from the podium. First he enters and reads very quickly, like a third grader delivering a book report, from prepared remarks about how great things are going in the White House and how anything that contradicts it is wrong (Fake news is on the decline because it has lost its momentum). He peppers his remarks with comments about how this story or that is wrong and then we are off to the races with questions.
Lately he has upped his game though. He has started beginning his replies with "I think it's interesting that..." and talking about what the press is doing wrong and the Democrats are doing wrong. He has taken the offensive (even more so than before).
Today he thought it was interesting that the press was reporting on the content of the leaks rather than whether or not they were legal a position that he had no problem with during the campaign and wiki-leaks was coming out with stolen emails on a daily basis.
I have to tip my hat to Sean Spicer. He is evolving as a speaker to a particular demographic while at the same time devolving in what he is actually saying. I am glad Sean Spicer is sharing his interests with the rest of us but it makes me wonder what his end game is. My theory is that he is trying to goad someone in the press pool to take a shot at him right then and rebut him in the press room rather than excoriating him in their respective media. Aside from Fox and Breitbart, the story is going to be about his meltdown.
Follow us on Twitter @writlargepodcst
Find us on Facebook at The Writ Large Podcast
What do you find interesting? Call and leave a message (719) 357-7003 and you can be on the Writ Large Podcast!
No comments:
Post a Comment