George Conway Ups His Game Against Trump While Kellyanne Tries To Save Her Own Face and Trump’s A$$

4346

Donald Trump must have had another nightmare, or maybe he even wet the bed. Upon awakening, he grabbed for his phone, like Linus for his blanket and tweeted out into the ethernet, “Where’s the Whistleblower?” (Pssst…one’s in the closet and the rest are under the bed, Donny, and there are more coming…think about that while going to sleep tonight.) George Conway apparently interpreted the tweet as infantile as well, because his response was to patiently explain to the Infant in Chief how all of this works in the real world.

Probably the greatest mystery in Washington D.C. is how Kellyanne and George Conway stay married, when Kellyanne spends her life spinning, lying and gaslighting for Donald Trump and George devotes a good portion of his to deflating Trump’s bubble. George Conway recently revised his Twitter profile, to reflect in no uncertain terms exactly where he stands with respect to his wife’s boss.

“Lawyer. Human scum who believes real power is truth. Windmill cancer survivor. And “not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up.”

The Conways both demur when asked to go on record explaining their all-too-blatant differences of opinion, with respect to Trump, which have been public since June of 2017, when George Conway criticized Trump’s travel ban on Twitter. Since then, he has made it plain that he’s an adversary of Trump, which has only escalated speculation about the differences between George and Kellyanne. It’s even been opined that Kellyanne is the famed White House leaker of legend and lore, and/or the author of her husband’s Twitter account. And a few days ago, Kellyanne went off on a reporter for the conservative Washington Examiner, and that conversation shed some interesting light on how Kellyanne views her relationship with her husband.

[If you’re not familiar with this particular fracas, the back story is that Kellyanne’s name was floated as a possible replacement for chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. A reporter for the Washington Examiner mentioned George Conway’s tweets in connection with the story, and Kellyanne took issue with that, to put it mildly.]

Conway: Hey, Caitlin. Kellyanne Conway. So I just am wondering why in God’s earth you would need to mention anything about George Conway’s tweets in an article that talks about me as possibly being chief of staff. Other than it looks to me like there’s no original reporting here, you just read Twitter and other people’s stuff, which I guess is why you don’t pick up the phone when people call from the White House because if it’s not on Twitter or it’s not on cable TV, it’s not real. I’m just wondering why you would have, A — why or what ever would give you the idea that I’m, quote, caught in the middle of some of these Twitter feeds and the president of the United States, B — who would be able to tell you that except for me? We’ve never talked, as far as I know.

Yilek: We have never talked. I did cite the Bloomberg News article. And the reason I didn’t pick up the call was because it said it was from Egypt, and I called it right back. In terms of mentioning George Conway, it’s relevant context

Conway: I know it’s just for clicks, but you’re going to have to give me, like, a journalistic reason here, especially if you admit that you just are repeating what another news source said and the president disputed that anyway. So, it’s sort of, like, doubly embarrassing. There’s no original reporting. If you’re going to call yourself a reporter, let’s see some reporting. There’s no original reporting, and then, it’s just lazy. Respectfully, of course, it’s just lazy to talk about somebody’s Twitter feed. Do you talk about other people’s spouses in your pieces, ’cause I’ve been looking around, I haven’t learned a single thing from any of your pieces, and I’m just wondering if you routinely talk about people’s spouses.

Yilek: Uh, yes. My editor requires us to put in context about people’s families or spouses when it’s relevant.

Conway: Why is it relevant here? George’s position is what?

Yilek: That he’s against the president and the president has attacked him back.

[Trump called George Conway “a wack job” and “the Husband from hell.”]

Conway: Uh, well, the president is supportive of me. You mean last March?

Yilek: If that’s when —

Conway: You mean seven months ago?

Yilek: If that’s when he last attacked George Conway, then yes.

Conway: You don’t know when that was?

Yilek: I don’t know the date off the top of my head.

Conway: Is this forever going to be relevant? You’re the, quote, breaking news reporter, is what it says here. And I’m just trying to understand what the breaking news was there.

Yilek: I’d be happy to have you talk —

Conway: So far, I don’t see breaking news, and so far, I don’t see reporter. So, I’m just trying to understand either one, let alone all three together.

Yilek: I would be happy to have you talk to my editor.

Conway: Um, yes, so, always, right, exactly. You’re really going places. Let me tell you something, from a powerful woman. Don’t pull the crap where you’re trying to undercut another woman based on who she’s married to. He gets his power through me, if you haven’t noticed. Not the other way around. [FYI, George Conway was Paula Jones’ attorney before he met Kellyanne. He’s not a lightweight.] And if these are the, quote, standards, unquote, at the Washington Examiner, then yes, I’d be happy to talk to your editor. But I’ve known your editor since before you were born. So, I can call your editor either way. I’m just trying to give you a chance to explain why you think what you wrote qualifies as breaking news or reporting.

The conversation went on in this vein for a short time longer and ended with Kellyanne’s not-so-veiled threat that if the reporter continued to cover her “personal life” that the White House “is welcome to do the same around here.” Clearly, some nerve got struck for Kellyanne, or she wouldn’t have picked up the phone to begin with, much less berated the reporter. Meanwhile, George Conway keeps on tweeting his utter contempt for Trump, even as Kellyanne goes on Fox News to try to save Trump’s face — not to mention his ass. Friday, Kellyanne babbled for twenty minutes in the driveway of the White House about everything from parking tickets to journalists’ “presumptive negativity,” desperately hoping that her argument that the Ukraine call was not a quid pro quo made sense to somebody — preferably somebody who could vote. As the old Charlie Rich song says, “no one knows what goes on behind closed doors.” Nowhere is that line more applicable in Washington, D.C. than the Conway residence.

 

Thank you to all who already support our work since we could not exist without your generosity. If you have not already, please consider supporting us on Patreon to ensure we can continue bringing you the best of independent journalism.

Leave a Comment

8 Comments on "George Conway Ups His Game Against Trump While Kellyanne Tries To Save Her Own Face and Trump’s A$$"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Stephanie
Guest
Stephanie

Short story: the whistle has been blown, it has been heard and responded to, it doesn’t need to keep being blown, it doesn’t matter who blew it. “Get over it.”

Rutokin
Guest
Rutokin

Sounds like she’s trying to say that she wears the pants in the family, I’ve read many of his tweets, I like what he says but her on the other hand, is she on meth or something? She sounds like a speed freak half of what she says is jibberish and not really relevant to many questions asked of her

Mick owens
Guest
Mick owens

As a foreigner i cannot believe, he hasnt been removed from office….??? Hes as nutty as a squirrel.. he obviously has mental health issues

chris whitley
Guest
chris whitley

What powerful woman does she think she is. All she is, is a trump fluffier. I always think of what happens in porno movies. The fluffier is off out of camera and it’s their job to make sure that the actor is standing at attention when he walks on the set.