March 6, 2018

"No, I don't care what they say... They have a President... What is he at 38%?... if Roger and me were in there, Trump would be at 55%..."

"So whatever they want to say they can say whatever they want about me, I don't care. Once again, I would say, they're doing a terrible job for him. And they've been doing terrible job since he's been alive... I would once again say that Sarah Huckabee is a terrible press officer. That Trump has a 38% approval rating. That the Republicans are going to lose the House in the midterms and that's a fact. And they can say whatever they want about me. They've treated Roger [Stone] and me terribly. Now, Roger won't say that."

That's Sam Nunberg, responding to Erin Burnett's confronting him with the opinion that some people think he's "drunk or off your meds." Here's the whole transcript. Here's the 30-minute video, which I didn't get 3 minutes into without needing to retreat to the transcript because I need to avert my eyes from someone who seems to be drunk or off his meds.



Maybe you find this sort of thing entertaining or creepily satisfying. I can see that the media have gone wild for Sam Nunberg in the last 24 hours. Do I need to pay attention to this rather than to something else? I can see this is a circus and he's a clown, but why must we go to the circus? It this the only show in town?

45 comments:

rhhardin said...

I'll wait for the fallout. The left's reaction is the entertainment, not the triggering event.

traditionalguy said...

When someone once connected to Trump acts crazier than his CNN interviewer does, that goes a long way towards rehabilitation of CNN. This clip will be re-run thousands of times.

David Begley said...

Erin Burnett, to her credit, asked if he was drunk. She said she smelled booze on his breath. CNN and MSNBC have hit a new low.

Or maybe this guy was trying to discredit himself. Crazy like a fox.

Matt Sablan said...

On the one hand, why cooperate with an obvious witch hunt? Abedin and others lied or refused to answer questions and faced no consequences. So why should he bother to participate in this charade?

On the other hand, I don't like people flouting the law.

Clyde said...

Hey, Democrats! This racist, sexist loudmouth Nunberg hates Trump just like you! He's your new bestest buddy. Enjoy.

Ann Althouse said...

"Erin Burnett, to her credit, asked if he was drunk. She said she smelled booze on his breath. CNN and MSNBC have hit a new low."

Are you suggesting that CNN should be charged with a violation of journalism ethics for putting him on the show (especially if, as it seems, it was done with an intent to humiliate him and expose him to legal damage)?

traditionalguy said...

Very interesting news day. First CNN reminds us of 1 Samuel 21:13-15. And then North Korea signals it is giving up its nukes. And finally Saudi's new King Salman makes friends with the Coptic Christians in Egypt.

Wake me when it's over.

Clyde said...

@ Matthew Sabian: The problem here is abuse of power by the Special Counsel. Mueller's team has the full resources of the American government's power at their back. They can financially ruin anyone they want to by forcing someone to hire lawyers to defend themselves for years against baseless allegations and "process crimes" where no underlying crime was committed but the defendant couldn't keep the details of his story straight. This is what happened to General Flynn and why he pleaded guilty. Telling them to go fuck themselves may not be the smart play, but it does feel good to hear someone doing it.

David Begley said...

Ann:

There is no such thing as journalistic ethics. Or it is an oxymoron.

As you know, doctors, lawyers and dentists can all lose their licenses for violating a real ethics code.

Matt Sablan said...

Isn't making fun of someone as off their meds ableist?

Clyde said...

@ Althouse

It's a bit late the game to even associate CNN with journalistic ethics in any way, shape or form.

Jake said...

I just hope most people are as bored as I am with all this gobbledegook.

rhhardin said...

Journalistic ethics doesn't come in. It's ratings for their target audience.

If there were an audience for high journalistic ethics, there would be a channel with high journalistic ethics.

But think boredom.

rhhardin said...

There's a market for good readings of situations but it's mostly in blogs, where it has trouble monetizing itself. You see digressions into entertaining outrage situations.

rhhardin said...

I'm waiting for a "teach women not to nag" meme on Insty. That heart of the situation hasn't come up yet.

H said...

Back in the watergate days, John Mitchell's wife used to call reporters late at night when she was in her cups. I am pretty sure that "respectable" news outlets reported on this. Do journalistic ethics require statements by people under the influence to be ignored, or not reported?

Mark said...

Who is this nobody? And why should anyone spend one second on him?

Actually, don't bother with the first question. No one cares except for the mouth-foaming anti-Trumpers.

Ralph L said...

I've long thought Roger Stone is a creep of the first water, and a few minutes with this disciple confirms my opinion. His involvement with Trump was a major factor in my non-support of candidate Trump. His ex-wife Ann Stone, pro-abortion Republican shill, ran for mayor of Alexandria before I left in 1992.

Mark said...

That said, someone does need to stand up to Mueller and his out-of-control, extra-legal abuse of power going far afield from any legitimate authority into demanding that anybody and everyone answer his questions. Mueller proves the farce that the grand jury system has become.

Ralph L said...

Can a non-target use a judge to squash his subpeona if it's outside Rosenstein's letter of authorization?

tola'at sfarim said...

Mueller almost ruined hatfill and drove ivins to suicide. If he was on my case I might also be drinking

Ignorance is Bliss said...

As the Russians say, In vodka veritas.

William said...

Jon Lovitz must have rejoiced when he saw this interview. Lovitz, no doubt, will soon be doing the cold open on SNL.......Is there some kind of overlap between incoherence and perjury? How can you try someone for perjury when their utterances are incomprehensible?

Mark said...

Can a non-target use a judge to squash his subpeona if it's outside Rosenstein's letter of authorization?

If Mueller were to drag in Ralph and demand that he answer questions, would that be subject to the subpoena being quashed? Yes, of course.

A subpoena is basically a seizure of the body and a compulsion to speak. The government's agent attorney does not have the power to do that willy-nilly. There are limits. And the person served has rights and liberties not to be forced to go and do something against his will. While a person does have an obligation to give testimony in certain circumstances, as in a reasonable and legitimate legal procedure, that obligation does not extend to anything and everything at the government prosecutor's will.

The judge needs to start quashing a lot of these things if only to assert rightful oversight over the grand jury process away from Mueller. It is not Mueller's plaything to do with whatever he wants.

sane_voter said...

Lovitz won't be on SNL anytime soon. He called Obama an F'n asshole.

sane_voter said...

Now if he said that about Trump, cold open!

robother said...

You can see why Mueller wants to depose this guy. He's a walking perjury trap, and then he'll say whatever Mueller needs him to say about Trump. "Trump talking on the phone, taking orders from Putin. Yeah, I witnessed that."

Ray - SoCal said...

Phrase of the day - “top aid”.

Charlie Currie said...

He's outsmarted Mueller, so I'd rate him at 175. What grand jury is going to believe anything he says?

Ray - SoCal said...

In just one of those coincidences that happens frequently around the Clintons...

Australian diplomat that reported conversation had Clinton ties:

http://thehill.com/376858-australian-diplomat-whose-tip-prompted-fbis-russia-probe-has-tie-to-clintons

whitney said...

You don't need to pay attention to that

Ray - SoCal said...

Good write up that follows the trend here the presses conduct was shameful.

https://www.axios.com/sam-nunberg-metldown-msnbc-cnn-cable-news-mueller-51798471-2535-4d1f-86ba-d3f1417a9e36.html

The images of his meltdown live will follow him for the rest of his life.

Somehow he seemed to lack common sense. Probably is a side effect of the anti depressants.

Danno said...

Are you suggesting that CNN should be charged with a violation of journalism ethics for putting him on the show (especially if, as it seems, it was done with an intent to humiliate him and expose him to legal damage)?

What happens if he commits suicide shortly after this humiliation?

Ray - SoCal said...

Contrast how he is treated with the New Yorker puff peace on Steele:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/christopher-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier

Larvell said...

"Find someone no one's ever heard of and pretend he/she is the face of the Republican party" is a game that never gets old.

JAORE said...

Circus?

Nope, Freak show in a traveling carney.

Michael K said...

I read Lewandowski's book and that guy never appeared.

Manafort was a bad mistake by Trump's kids who thought they know more than they did.

Kevin said...

I can see that the media have gone wild for Sam Nunberg in the last 24 hours.

He's the new Michael Wolff.

narayanan said...

How come no one else is simply deleting emails / smashing up hard drives / wiping with bleachbit etc. and daring FBI/DOJ/Mueller? Should be SOP for the future investigatees.

Matt Sablan said...

"How come no one else is simply deleting emails / smashing up hard drives / wiping with bleachbit etc. and daring FBI/DOJ/Mueller?"

-- Because Republicans suffer consequences for those actions.

robother said...

Anti-depressants? Alcohol? Give this guy a 9mm and he'll blow the lid off CNN or MSNBC ratings. Paddy Chayefski, thou shouldst be living at this hour!

Rosalyn C. said...

Nunberg is clearly unbalanced, has an inflated opinion of his position and importance in Trump's campaign, and has nothing of factual value to offer. Easy to see that Nunberg has a big mouth (a fat mouth) and would offer endless avenues of speculation and Mueller would want to squeeze as much as possible. But to what end? Mueller might find useful the image of Nunberg being dragged off to jail, but I don't think that's going to happen. I think Mueller's image would be tarnished by that pathos. Stay tuned. Is this what Washington is really all about? No wonder it's so hard to get anything done.

readering said...

I didn't watch but all kinds of crazy people get interviewed on cable news. They have to fill time 24-7.

Martin said...

Nunberg is mental, in the way we used the term back in my high school in the 1960s.

Mark Daniels said...

I saw him interviewed by Ari Melber. When several other guests were brought into a segment with Nunberg, it felt like an intervention. No matter his politics or his heroes (Roy Cohn and Roger Stone?), I felt that this was a person who needed friends. Hopefully, he has some and they have been helping him since his daylong media blitz.

As to whether he was drunk or "off his meds." I can't possibly know. But several journalists who have known him for years said that in his appearances on TV yesterday, he was precisely the person they've always known him to be.