WATCH Anderson Cooper DESTROY Conway’s Dismissal Of Intel Report: ‘You Don’t Know!’

Donald Trump and his surrogates spent most of the day Wednesday in a constant cycle of spin, denial, and lying.

Wednesday evening on CNN, host Anderson Cooper squared off against Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, and Cooper wasted no time calling out Conway for remarks Sean Spicer made at Trump’s bizarre press conference earlier in the day. Spicer alleged that both CNN and BuzzFeed had reported on unsubstantiated claims about Russian intelligence having compromising information on the President-elect. Cooper told Conway:

“That’s simply not true.”

Conway doubled down on Spicer’s dubious allegation, replying:

“Our press secretary Sean Spicer was absolutely correct and so was our president-elect.

“I know that CNN must be feeling the heat today. You can’t say you’re not reporting it if it’s on your website!”

Cooper then asked Conway the most pertinent question of all:

“You can’t answer this question, what is inaccurate about the report?”

Instead of answering Conway tried to obfuscate by launching into a riff about how President Obama didn’t do enough to protect the United States from cyber hacking. That’s when Cooper destroyed Conway by telling her:

“I guess what you still have not answered. What is inaccurate in our reporting? Because you said, you weren’t in the briefing. You don’t know if what we’re reporting is true or not. You weren’t in the briefing and I guess you haven’t heard anything about what was in the briefing from anyone who was there… How can you say it’s not true?”

Exactly so! Conway wasn’t in the intelligence briefing, and she either doesn’t know or doesn’t care that what CNN reported is accurate and represents what was contained in the synopsis American intelligence gave to both President Obama and Trump on the matter of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

One thing appears to be certain: The Trump team is afraid of something in that intelligence report, and they are desperate to change the subject.

Here’s the full interview, in three parts:

This article was originally published by the same author at

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *