Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Infohawk
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
OK, one at a time for the slow(and/or those who didn't/cant read the linked article)....
Who's [sic] 10 minute interview ran 14 minutes before being cut off?
Russert's interview of Powell was ended abruptly (moving the camera off of Powell...and Powell demanding the interview to continue on.) after 13 minutes.
Who's [sic] 10 minute interview ran 8 minutes before being cut off?
The article doesn't say that Russert's aid cut off the interview after 8 minutes. All it says is the interview quickly ended. It may have continued on to a graceful ending. I'm betting that's the case as the article was intentionally vague on that point.
Yes - sorry it was 13 minutes - it ended up being 14 or so.
My point though was that info's assumption that powell's interview wasn't for time reasons is absurd. It is just as likely if not more so that his was because of time than Russert's because Powell's ran OVER the alloted time and Russert's did not.
CkG
Thank you conjur for getting to the bottom of CkG's obfuscation.
There are reports that say Powell's interview was cut short because of non-time concerns. Hence, it is not absurd for me to assume Powell's interview was cut short because of non-time concerns.
No such reports have been presented for Russert's interview. This article, for example, does not clarify that there was a non-time based concern or not.
Buahahahahahaha!!!! It doesn't matter. 13-14(which was the length of the interview) The point remains you ASSume Powell's wasn't for time reasons when it is CLEAR the interview was past the allotted time. Yet, somehow it's a perfectly good excuse for cutting off an interview that had not yet reached it's alloted time.
So bleat on about 13 or 14 and think it proves something- it doesn't. 13 into the interview that went 14 minutes. It still doesn't change the fact that YOU don't understand logic and have troubles with reading and comprehension as shown by your posts here.
Now again - YOU ASSume Powell's aid cut it off because of the questioning instead of time because that's what the accusation was- however the FACT that the interview was over the allotted time shows there is evidence it was as she claims - because of time. I don't care about Russert's excuse for time - but if his was about "time" then I fail to see why someone elses couldn't be about "time".
CkG