"The House overwhelmingly passed a measure Wednesday to force TikTok to split from its parent company or face a national ban, a lightning offensive that materialized abruptly..."

"... after years of unsuccessful negotiations over the platform’s fate. The legislation, approved 352 to 65 with 1 voting present, is a sweeping bipartisan rebuke of the popular video-sharing app — and an attempt to grapple with allegations that its China-based parent, ByteDance, presents national security risks. The House effort gained momentum last week after President Biden said he would sign the bill if Congress passed it.  But its fate now rests in the Senate, where some lawmakers have expressed concern it may run afoul of the Constitution by infringing on millions of Americans’ rights to free expression and by explicitly targeting a business operating in the United States.... Biden and his campaign opponent, former president Donald Trump, have taken conflicting public stances on the matter, with Biden endorsing it and Trump speaking out against the prospect of a ban."

WaPo reports.

Here's a WaPo article from yesterday about "Why Trump is now against a TikTok ban."

"'What are you doing, George?' I asked him plainly and calmly. I got the same answer every time... You work for a madman, George would say in a loud, sinister voice...."

"Night after night, I would come home from a busy day at work ... While I was minding dishes, dogs, laundry, managing adolescent dramas and traumas, George would be just steps away from me, tucked away in his home office, plotting against my boss and me."

Writes Kellyanne Conway, in her new book "Here's the Deal," quoted in "Kellyanne Conway memoir: Husband's attacks 'sneaky, almost sinister'" (Axios). 

Is it weird that those 2 are still married?

Kellyanne Conway "depicts Trump as a feminist who repeatedly supported and promoted her, allowing her to make history as the first woman..."

"... to manage a winning presidential campaign. 'Donald Trump had elevated and empowered me to the top of his campaign, helping me crack glass ceilings that had never even been dinged before,' she writes, adding that 'angry feminists' should “have at least once in their lives a "girl boss" as generous, respectful, engaging, and empowering as Donald Trump was to me and my other female colleagues.'"

From "In new book, Kellyanne Conway takes aim at many targets — except Trump Part personal chronicle and part political journey, the book is filled with the sorts of barbed one-liners and bon mots that she dispensed on cable news" by Ashley Parker (WaPo). 

Also:

In the waning days of his presidency, Conway also writes that, during a discussion with Trump on pardons and clemency, he turned to her and asked, “Do you want one?” 

“Do you know something I don’t?” Kellyanne asked Trump, she writes. “Why would I need a pardon?” 

“Because they go after everyone, honey. It doesn’t matter,” Trump replied, according the book.

They go after everyone....

The top-rated comment over there is:

"Why would anyone care what this lying harpy has to say? An admitted dispenser of 'alternative facts' her screechy voice made her an assault on both eyes and ears."

That gets some feminist pushback: 

"I detest her but your comment reeks of ugly misogyny. The term harpy and pointing out her voice for special loathing. It's possible to find someone detestable without venting sexism." 

And:

"Logged on to say the same thing. Harpy and screechy voice are sexist as hell. Men do this often. I’m no fan of hers, but it’s because of her placating TFG and being a phenomenal hypocrite. Stay away from physical attributes next time."

I had to google "TFG." The first hit is a Gail Collins column in the NYT, published February 17, 2021 — "Trump’s Dreaded Nickname": 

Sitting in disgraced, double-impeached political purgatory, Trump has been trying to retrain the world to refer to him as “the 45th president” during his unwelcome retirement. (If you are lucky enough to get a mass email from him, the return address will be “45 office.”) How cool would it be if he had to sit in front of the TV listening to people talk about “the former guy?” 

D.J.T. = T.F.G.

Perhaps the "dreaded nickname" caught on in some quarters, but I don't remember hearing it before. Collins's dream of what would be cool was not to be. We still hear Trump, Trump, Trump, and it's only going to get louder as we move into the 2024 election season which the disgraced, double-impeached Trump already dominates.

"There’s one thing about the people on the Trump team that I almost admire: When they do blurt out the truth, they really tell you the truth..."

"... in a way that’s so raw you’re left asking, 'Did they really say that out loud?' That was certainly my thought when Kellyanne Conway declared last week, 'The more chaos and anarchy and vandalism and violence reigns, the better it is for the very clear choice on who’s best on public safety and law and order.' The better it is? How could anyone be 'better' in America if we have more chaos, anarchy, vandalism and violence? It couldn’t be better — except for one man: Donald Trump."

Wait a minute! Isn't it also better for the people who are doing the chaos and anarchy and vandalism and violence? Why are they doing it otherwise — doing it for months on end? It must be their idea of better, and they are in control of it, their own actions. But you don't talk to them. I wonder why not. It's so much easier to sit back and listen to things said by Trumpers, things that, of course, always inspire outrage... except to the extent that you can toy with edginess by saying almost admire the balls.

The quote above is from NYT columnist Thomas A. Friedman, in "For Biden to Win, Listen to Minneapolis/Not everyone is for defunding the police. Especially those in communities that would be most affected."

Friedman proceeds to do the same thing Kellyanne did: Look at the chaos and anarchy and vandalism and violence and jump right to what apparently matters most — how it affects the presidential candidate you care about.

So, Joe Biden has a real challenge on his hands. To mobilize the majority he needs to credibly assure enough voters that he takes both the violence seriously and its social, policing and economic roots seriously. His “looting is not protesting” speech in Pittsburgh on Monday was a good start....

Key word: "start." Biden did the easy and obvious part, but he didn't do anything bold or courageous or difficult. He didn't demonstrate leadership. Indeed, he only read a text off a teleprompter. He won't submit to questioning. He has not had to show us one thought dredged up directly from his own head.  Friedman goes on to offer some nuanced notions about practical police reform that Biden could use to progress from "good start" to something of real substance.

[Martin Luther King Jr.] decried riots as “self-defeating,” but he also pointed out that “a riot is the language of the unheard..." Economic progress and social justice, King argued, “are the absolute guarantors of riot prevention.” Which is why Biden, if he frames it right, can be the real “law and order” candidate in this election. Because he’s not for disbanding the police, but for improving them — which is how you build respect for the law from everyone — and because Biden knows that sustainable order can only come from a president who wants to build healthy and just communities, not from a president who thinks it’s “better” for him politically if they’re torn apart.

Trump wants "healthy and just communities" too, and Biden wants to do what's better for him politically too. I'm so tired of that template — hating Trump and puffing up Biden. Let's see Biden step up and show some real leadership and intellectual heft. Let's see him submit serious questioning and cruelly neutral criticism. So far, he won't do it, and the media are facilitating his evasion of any real test. I'm beyond fed up with this treatment of Biden and Trump.

"Kellyanne Conway announces she's leaving the White House and George Conway is stepping away from Lincoln Project."

CNN reports.

"I will be transitioning from the White House at the end of this month. George is also making changes," Kellyanne Conway said in a statement. "We disagree about plenty but we are united on what matters most: the kids. Our four children are teens and 'tweens starting a new academic year, in middle school and high school, remotely from home for at least a few months. As millions of parents nationwide know, kids 'doing school from home' requires a level of attention and vigilance that is as unusual as these times."

George Conway tweeted minutes earlier that he was withdrawing from The Lincoln Project -- a group formed by anti-Trump Republicans -- to "devote more time to family matters."...

One of the Conways' high school-aged daughters has generated attention on social media about her family and their political views over the last several months.

Here's yesterday's post about Claudia Conway's social-media cry for help.

ADDED: For once, it's believable that somebody left their job to spend more time with their family.

AND: Congratulations to the girl for putting out such an effective cry for help.

ALSO: "Look what I did. Look at what I did, ladies and gentlemen."

"Left-leaning Claudia [Conway] has been openly feuding with her parents on TikTok and Twitter all summer, bashing them for their conservative views."

"At one point she urged progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to adopt her. Saturday’s tweet ['I’m officially pushing for emancipation'] came alongside many more in which she penned her frustration over her [mother Kellyanne Conway's] work for the president, and over recent praise of her father, George Conway, for his work as co-founder of the Lincoln Project, a Republican anti-Trump group. 'As for my dad, politically, we agree on absolutely nothing. We just both happen to have common sense when it comes to our current president. Stop "stanning" him,' Claudia tweeted.... 'My mother’s job ruined my life to begin with,' she wrote. 'Heartbreaking that she continues to go down that path after years of watching her children suffer. Selfish. It’s all about money and fame, ladies and gentlemen.'... 'I’m a savage lol I’m aware,' read her last tweet...."

From "Kellyanne Conway’s daughter Claudia 'officially pushing for emancipation'" (NY Post).

I see she got a response — a wise response — from Marianne Williamson:

I don’t agree with your mother politically, Claudia, but she’s still your mom. I promise you your life ahead will be better if you handle your issues with her privately. I’m sure she’d go to counseling with you, if you don’t already. Love has got to trump politics. It just has to

— Marianne Williamson (@marwilliamson) August 23, 2020

Claudia sounds like she is what she is — a 15-year-old kid. She's saying things that would only be shouted around the house if it weren't for social media and that would go nowhere on social media if her parents weren't famous.

6 NYT reporters try to catch up with Trump in "How Trump Reshaped the Presidency in Over 11,000 Tweets."

Here. Lots of counting things — like the percentage of tweets containing personal insults — and lots of graphs. Lots of effort at analysis — slanted toward disparaging Trump (predictably shrinking from acknowledging his greatness as a genius of social media):

Early on, top aides wanted to restrain the president’s Twitter habit, even considering asking the company to impose a 15-minute delay on Mr. Trump’s messages. But 11,390 presidential tweets later, many administration officials and lawmakers embrace his Twitter obsession, flocking to his social media chief with suggestions. Policy meetings are hijacked when Mr. Trump gets an idea for a tweet, drawing in cabinet members and others for wordsmithing. And as a president often at war with his own bureaucracy, he deploys Twitter to break through logjams, overrule or humiliate recalcitrant advisers and pre-empt his staff.

“He needs to tweet like we need to eat,” Kellyanne Conway, his White House counselor, said in an interview.

If I were — like these reporters — into counting things, I would count the number of times this article uses the word "attack." As they look at Trump's tweeting, what they see is relentless attacking — like he's always agitated and angry. But I read Trump's tweets every day — his is one of the 310 Twitter accounts I follow — and I see lots of humor and good fun... in tweets that are also, of course, eligible for classification as an "attack."

The president has tweeted more attacks so far this year than in the previous two years combined. In total, he has attacked at least 630 people and things in 5,889 tweets since taking office.

Yes, he fluidly uses Twitter to defend himself. He's under constant attack and the media transmit and amplify the attacks. The NYT should have counted how many of 5,889 attack tweets were in defense after he'd been attacked. Trump calls himself a "counterpuncher." How true is that? The NYT doesn't say.

To its credit, the NYT does tell us that his campaign aides say that Trump is using Twitter stand up to what Trump has called "the unholy alliance of corrupt Democrat politicians, deep-state bureaucrats and the fake-news media" and that they think "his unvarnished writing, poor punctuation and increasing profanity on Twitter signals authenticity — a contrast to the polished, vetted, often anodyne social media style of most candidates." And the NYT gives the last word to Kellyanne Conway:

“It’s the democratization of information,” she said. Everyone receives Mr. Trump’s tweets at once — the stay-at-home mom, the plumber working on the sink, the billionaire executive, the White House correspondent.

“They all hear ‘ping,’” she said, “at the same time.”

ADDED: There's a second NYT article — "In Trump’s Twitter Feed: Conspiracy-Mongers, Racists and Spies" — which is about tweets Trump might be seeing because they tag him:

The president is also awash in an often toxic torrent that sluices into his Twitter account — roughly 1,000 tweets per minute, many intended for his eyes. Tweets that tag his handle, @realDonaldTrump, can be found with hashtags like #HitlerDidNothingWrong, #IslamIsSatanism and #WhiteGenocide. While filters can block offensive material, the president clearly sees some of it, because he dips into the frothing currents and serves up noxious bits to the rest of the world.

Anyone can tag him. It's absurd to try to hang this stuff on him. Really unfair. What is the actual process by which Trump looks at things as potentially retweetable? How about if I look for the ugliest hashtags in tweets that tag the NYT and its reporters?

"What's your ethnicity?"

The best you can say about this is: awkward rhetorical move.



And let me close in on this part, a word salad with one edible nugget...



... she is tired.

Wearing quilted armor in 90° heat, Conway tries to deliver her lines. But the newsman won't do the dialogue. Of course he won't! Why would he respond to startling nosiness with personal information? The "What's your ethnicity?" was never going to work. So she plunges forward into her — scripted? — "sick and tired" incantation.

She's sweating profusely, but only below the face, which is, I'm guessing, sealed with the waterproof spackle of makeup.

ADDED: How to spackle your face:



You've heard of building the wall. Your face is a wall, and a good wall needs spackle.

Tongue.

A Drudgetaposition:



(Click image to enlarge and clarify.)

Morally conflicted.

Am I supposed to enjoy this as much as I am? I'm morally conflicted here. 😂 https://t.co/1dxCAiKRPt

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) March 20, 2019

"Chris Cuomo and Kellyanne Conway Slug it Out For 39 Absolutely Crazy Minutes on CNN."

Mediaite headline. It's not that crazy, but Drudge linked to this so I clicked. The headline is click bait, and I couldn't watch much of the clips. In real life, I avoid watching any of the TV commentary shows, so I'm not the audience for this anxious roiling. It's theater — put on for the money and for the power. It's not crazy at all, let alone "absolutely crazy."

I was motivated to look up the word "crazy" in the OED. One of the meanings — going back to 1927 — is: "slang (orig. U.S.). (a) Of music, esp. jazz: unrestrained, wild; exciting. (b) Hence as a term of approbation: excellent, admirable, satisfying. Cf. cool adj. 8b."

1935 Hot News Apr. 13/1 Where musicians are concerned..if I say a man is crazy you may be sure that I think he is very, very good.
1953 Time 14 Sept. 68/3 The latest Tin Pan Alley argot, where ‘cool’ means good, ‘crazy’ means wonderful.
1959 Punch 14 Oct. 319 The swing-cats sway, the hipsters tap their feet As Victor pounds his low-down crazy beat.

I guess I'd accept the Mediaite headline if I thought it was mean in the sense of "unrestrained, wild; exciting." But I do find that sort of present-day political excitement quite boring.

Camp David fires, long consumed, and bones that bleach in the sunshine.

"Yeah, Camp David is very rustic, it's nice, you'd like it. You know how long you'd like it? For about 30 minutes."

Said Donald Trump, a while back, before he was President. You might think that as President, he never goes to Camp David, but he's there this weekend (strategizing with congressional Republicans). And he's been there "a half-dozen times."

Maybe he goes there because it's unlikeable. It lights a rustic fire under those he's compelled to meet with him there, so the hate-it-after-30-minutes quality suits his low-attention-span psyche.

[T]he president is expected to push GOP leaders to focus on an economic agenda, including a long-awaited proposal to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure.... Trump campaigned on investing $1 trillion in U.S. infrastructure, and there were early signs of bipartisan support for the idea. But momentum for the plan slowed this year, and the White House has sent conflicting signals on what shape it might take.

“We have a lot of things to work on, a lot of things to accomplish,” Trump said as he left the White House on Friday for Frederick County. “We're going to Camp David with a lot of the great Republican senators, and we're making America great again.”

All right, we'll make America great again. Just let us out of this rustic hellhole.

Another reason to go to Camp David this weekend is to generate evidence that undermines the picture of Trump created by the book everyone's talking about this week, "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House":

Kellyanne Conway... was surprised that New York and Trump Tower were suddenly stricken from his schedule. Conway thought that the president, in addition to being aware of the hostility in New York, was making a conscious effort to be “part of this great house.” (But, acknowledging the difficulties inherent in his change of circumstances and of adapting to presidential lifestyle, she added, “How often will he go to Camp David?”—the Spartan, woodsy presidential retreat in Catoctin Mountain Park in Maryland—“How ’bout never.”)

In case you're wondering how my reading of "Fire and Fury" is coming along, let me tell you it's not. This is a 300-page book that goes over the story of Trump, which I've been following and writing about each day. If I wanted to read a summary of all the complicated events —  the Russians, repealing Obamacare, North Korea, etc. — I wouldn't pick this author. He's marshaling the evidence that Trump is a disaster. I could see doing a word search for "Bannon" and read whatever quotes turn up but Kindle seems to max out at about 100 hits, so this strategy for getting to the juicy bits fails at page 180.

I downloaded "Fire and Fury" yesterday morning, and you wouldn't believe — talk about low attention span — all the things I was reading while my inner critic nagged me to get on with the "Fire and Fury" project. I read half of a novel that was the basis of a movie I'd watched on TV the night before. I read the first page of another novel that Amazon thought I'd be interested in based on the fact that the word that was the title of the novel I was reading was in the title of this other book, from the 1940s, and when that old book quoted some lines from an epic poem the 19th century, I was locking into sentences like...

Fair was she and young; but, alas! before her extended,
Dreary and vast and silent, the desert of life, with its pathway
Marked by the graves of those who had sorrowed and suffered before her,
Passions long extinguished, and hopes long dead and abandoned,
As the emigrant’s way o’er the Western desert is marked by
Camp-fires long consumed, and bones that bleach in the sunshine.

Part 3 of the Project Veritas attack on CNN.

This time the victim of secret filming is Jimmy Carr, who is said to be the Associate Producer for CNN’s "New Day." James O'Keefe tells us Carr is based in Brooklyn, and urges Paul Farhi — the WaPo writer who made much of the failure to say that the victim in Part 1 was based in Atlanta — to take note that he's naming the place.

In the new video, Carr purports know the opinion of everyone at CNN: "We’re all on, 90% of us are on board with just the fact that  [Donald Trump] is crazy." And:

"On the inside, we all recognize he is a clown that he is hilariously unqualified for this. He’s really bad at this and that he does not have America’s best interests. We recognize he’s just fucking crazy... He’s not actually a Republican. He just adopted that because that was the party he thought he could win in. He doesn’t believe anything that these people believe. The man is on his third wife. I guarantee you he’s paid for abortions. He doesn’t give a shit about abortion. He doesn’t care about gay marriage."

And this is especially interesting right now, when everyone purports to be shocked that Donald Trump tweeted that Mika Brzezinski was "bleeding badly from a face-lift": Carr says that Kellyanne Conway "looks like she got hit with a shovel."

After Ossoff.

1. Trump revels: "Well, the Special Elections are over and those that want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN are 5 and O! All the Fake News, all the money spent = 0."

2. Cruder gloating from Kellyanne Conway: "Laughing my #Ossoff." "Thanks to everyone who breathlessly and snarkily proclaimed #GA06 as a "referendum on POTUS @realDonaldTrump"/You were right/#winning."

3. A WaPo column (by Paul Kane) rationalizes: "Ossoff chose civility and it didn’t work": "So Ossoff chose the high priest route instead of the fierce warrior. It was civil disobedience rather than civil unrest. And he still lost, by an even wider margin than the almost forgotten Parnell."

4. A Daily Beast columnist (Patricia Murphy): "Jon Ossoff's $23 Million Loss Shows Dems Have No Idea How to Win in the Age of Trump."

5. Another WaPo column (by Aaron Blake): The Democrats "had nine weeks after the primary to get from 49 percent of the vote that day to 50 percent-plus-one on Tuesday, and they didn't do it. For a party still smarting from somehow losing a 2016 presidential race that was well within their grasp, they have to feel the need to do some soul-searching and figure out why their strategies aren't resulting in actual wins. Commence bloodletting."

6. Matt Yglesias at Vox: "Jon Ossoff’s Georgia special election loss shows Democrats could use a substantive agenda."

Karen Handel didn’t argue that the Republican Party’s health care bill is a good idea (it’s very unpopular) or that tax cuts for millionaires should be the country’s top economic priority (another policy that polls dismally). Instead, her campaign and its allies buried Ossoff under a pile of what basically amounts to nonsense — stuff about Kathy Griffin, stuff about Samuel L. Jackson, stuff about his home being just over the district line, stuff about him having raised money from out of state — lumped together under the broad heading that he’s an “outsider.”...

Ossoff’s team... attempted to counter this move by positioning Ossoff as blandly as possible — just a kind of nice guy who doesn’t like Donald Trump — and dissociating him from any hard-edged ideas or themes....

7. Alexander Burns and Jonathan Martin in the NYT: "Democrats Seethe After Georgia Loss: ‘Our Brand Is Worse Than Trump.'"

[A] half-dozen Democratic elected officials and operatives privately vented in text messages and phone calls about a dispiriting trend emerging in this year’s special elections: When their candidates appear to gain traction in the polls, Republicans can easily halt the momentum by invoking Ms. Pelosi....

[P]opulist forces on the left took Mr. Ossoff’s defeat as an occasion to criticize the whole notion of centrism as a Democratic strategy. Jim Dean, the chairman of Democracy for America, a liberal activist group, blasted Mr. Ossoff overnight for “lighting millions of dollars on fire” and delivering an “uninspiring message” that he predicted would fail again in 2018. “The same, tired centrist Democratic playbook that has come up short cycle after cycle will not suffice,” Mr. Dean said in a statement.

"She would get off the air, the camera would be turned off, the microphone would be taken off, and she would say ‘Blech, I need to take a shower,’ because she disliked her candidate so much."

She = Kellyanne Conway, according to Mika Brzezinski (reported in the NYT).

"Conway is seen perched on her knees on the couch with her feet behind her in photos taken Monday while President Donald Trump met with leaders of historically black colleges and universities."

WaPo reports.

According to the article, Kellyanne Conway had her shoes on, but you can't see that in the picture.

To help you think about this, here's a recent post where we were talking about Obama sitting on the desk in the Oval Office.

And here's a post from 2011 that explored the politics of shoes.

ADDED: The Daily Mail puts the story in a completely different light. By showing a series of photographs of Conway, it makes it clear that she was getting iPhone photographs of the people who were meeting with President Trump. WaPo just used the photo of her looking at the phone, which makes her seem to be disrespecting these people — ignoring them and checking stuff on her phone.

The Daily Mail does make it clear that her shoes are on.

AND: The top-rated comment at WaPo is:

These low-class, white trash grifters have zero sense of history or decorum. They sully the White House by their very existence. Just like the ignorati who voted them in. Anything of quality is wasted on that legion of shiftless losers.

Second highest:

When I read "Kellyanne caught kneeling in the Oval Office," I thought, "Well, that doesn't seem like news." Then I realized there was a couch involved.

Of course, that made me think of Bill Clinton.

UPDATE: Just after I put up the post, WaPo published a Chris Cillizza piece titled "The ‘Kellyanne Conway on the couch’ controversy is so incredibly dumb."

We have reached a point in our politics — and Trump was the agitator if not the originator of this latest flash of polarization — in which even the most mundane of events is somehow invested with nefarious symbolism.

This is not only dumb, but it distracts from more serious and consequential debates like Trump's travel ban, his campaign's contacts with Russian intelligence officials and his war against leaks. We're WAY better than this. We need to act like it.

"Law professors seek to have Kellyanne Conway disbarred for bringing 'shame upon the legal profession.'"

"Here’s the actual letter, complete with the names of the law professors who have disgraced themselves. But if you want to establish a rule like this for all lawyers in the public eye, well, enjoy it. Sauce for the goose, and all that."

They should make a movie about Kellyanne Conway.

It's obvious who should play the role.

ADDED: The "SNL" impersonation of Kellyanne Conway (by Kate McKinnon) does not get at what makes Conway an interesting character. There's too much hate, too much disrespect, and maybe just not enough acting ability (or time on that show to develop anything deep). I think Reese Witherspoon not only looks like Conway — especially in the photo at the top link — but she has the acting ability to bring out all kinds of interesting detail in the character of an ambitious, high-energy woman, as we saw in the great political film, "Election."

Kellyanne Conway: "If you are part of team Trump, you walk around with these gaping, seeping wounds every single day, and that's fine."

That was on Fox News Sunday this morning.

We may finally have the answer to that "blood coming out of her whatever" mystery. There are gaping, seeping wounds!

Now, what's this all about? The moderator, Chris Wallace, was questioning her about Steve Bannon's attack on media, which was:

The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while... The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence and no hard work.  You’re the opposition party.  Not the Democratic Party.  You’re the opposition party.

Wallace asked her if she knew how offensive it is to tell the press to shut up. Conway said she knows Bannon and his point was the need to listen before speaking. She complained about everyone jumping on her phrase "alternative facts," last week when she went on 3 Sunday shows. They cherry-picked those 2 words to make her look bad instead of how she'd "ripped a new one to some of those hosts" on many other issues.

Not one silly political analyst and pundit who talked smack all day long about Donald Trump has been let go. They are on panels every Sunday. They’re on cable news every day.... I’m too polite to call them by name. But they know who they are, and they’re all wondering, will I be the first to go?...  They embarrassed, they failed to protect their shareholders and their board members and their colleagues.

And yet we deal with [them] every single day. We turn the other cheek. If you are part of team Trump, you walk around with these gaping, seeping wounds every single day, and that's fine. I believe in a full and fair press.  I’m here every Sunday morning. I haven't slept [in] in a month. I believe in a full and fair press. But with the free press comes responsibility. And responsibility is to get the story right. Biased coverage is easy to detect. Incomplete coverage impossible to detect. That’s my major grievance, is the media are not -- they’re not giving us complete coverage.

President Trump has signed all these executive orders this week. He's met with these heads of states. He's done so many things to stimulate the economy, to boost wages, to create jobs. Where's the coverage? 

Wallace had to end it there. Kellyanne said "thanks" and "It's been fun." Wallace said, "And let me say, you didn't rip me a new one." She agreed and added: "I talk like a Jersey girl sometimes."

Kellyanne Conway is, indeed, a "Jersey girl." She was born Kellyanne Elizabeth Fitzpatrick in Camden, New Jersey to a father of Irish ancestry and a mother of Italian ancestry. Her parents divorced when she was 3, and she grew up with her mother, grandmother, and 2 unmarried aunts. That's a lot of New Jersey Italian women.

They lived in Waterford Township, New Jersey, which is in a part of south Jersey I am very familiar with. I lived in northern New Jersey for 5 years before I went to college, but then, because my father's job moved from NYC to Philadelphia, my parents moved to a place less than 10 miles down the White Horse Pike from Waterford Township. It was quite an experience to have to go home for the summer to that strange part of the country. One summer I worked at the White Horse Diner. Maybe I waited on the 3-year-old Kellyanne Conway when I was 19.

"I don’t consider myself a feminist. I think my generation isn’t a big fan of labels. My favorite label is mommy."

"I feel like the feminist movement has been hijacked by the pro-abortion movement or the anti-male sentiments that you read in some of their propaganda and writings. I’m not anti-male. One does not need to be pro-female and call yourself a feminist, when with it comes that whole anti-male culture where we want young boys to sit down and shut up in the classroom. And we have all of these commercials that show what a feckless boob the man in the house is. That’s not the way I see the men in my life, most especially my 12-year-old son. I consider myself a postfeminist. I consider myself one of those women who is a product of her choices, not a victim of her circumstances."

Said Kellyanne Conway to The Washington Post.