MSNBC host and NBC chief White House correspondent Hallie Jackson repeatedly attacked Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND) on her Tuesday morning show with unfair, loaded questions about Trump’s legal battle contesting the election results. But instead, the senator hammered her network for their biased reporting and reminded Jackson of how the media spent the last four years discrediting Donald Trump’s presidency.
Jackson began by bringing up Cramer’s recent call for the Biden transition to begin (which it did overnight). But because the senator still supports the President’s legal efforts, the MSNBC journalist repeatedly badgered him to "acknowledge that Biden has won the presidency."
While Cramer acknowledged multiple times that it was “likely” that Biden would be sworn in, January 20, he defended the election process given to us in the Constitution before calling out MSNBC for their obvious "disrespect" for Trump supporters:
... I will say one thing up front that bothered me a little bit about some of Peter's reporting from the White House. He said that the reason 79% of President Trump's supporters want to continue this is because the president peppers them. I think that's disrespectful to the people for whom he's the representative. He reflects them. It's not so much the other way around. And so we need to restore trust in the system.
Jackson huffed at her network being called out. “I don't know. How can you say that, though, Senator?” she gushed before scolding Cramer on Trump and the GOP’s responsibility to “tell the truth” to the country. Cramer again addressed her concerns while calling out the media’s hypocrisy in how they colluded to deem Trump an illegitimate president in 2016 (click "expand"):
First of all Hallie, we haven't seen all the evidence. That's part of the problem. We haven't seen that evidence that they claim they have. We do need to see that. But he also needs to do it in a way that presents his legal case in the best forum. That's not always on national television. Now, that said, I acknowledge it’s increasingly looks like it's going to be a President Biden, but whether I say it or I don't say it, whether Donald Trump says it or doesn't say it, that’s not really the issue.
The issue in my mind is we can't let trust of the system be the goal. The goal has to be something worthy of the people's trust. And for the last four years, we've been dealing with a democratic party and a lot of national media that's sown a lot of distrust in the last election. And the legitimacy of this president. We've got to heal that. I don't think we heal that overnight. I think we have to let this legal system play out. That's the only thing in my mind that will ever satisfy not just President Trump but the millions of people who support him and want him to fight.
But an increasingly agitated Jackson kept pressing on. She blurted out, "I want to ask what you're waiting for here, Senator?" before pointing out the many lawsuits that have been dismissed in court. Cramer calmly explained to the frantic journalist that this process would restore confidence in the election and our republic would survive. But that wasn't good enough for the liberal activist MSNBC host.
"At what point Senator, do you feel like you are, then, continuing to spread this misinformation and deny the reality of what's in front of us?" she accused again, claiming he must be afraid of angering the president. That's when Jackson got the tables turned on her. Cramer attacked MSNBC and NBC for spreading disinformation:
"[W]e have a whole bunch of wild rhetoric that are fanning the flames of discontent coming from especially your network. I mean, Chuck Todd's monologue on Sunday was full of -- " he began before being cut off by Jackson. The ad-hominem attacks kept coming from Jackson about Republicans endangering democracy. The Senator pointed out how conservatives weren't causing violence in the streets despite Biden's apparent win. He even called out the media for spreading disinformation about the Trump campaign colluding with Russia, much to Jackson's annoyance:
CRAMER: Well Let me tell you what Republican voters aren't doing. They're not smashing windows, they’re not burning cars or beating up Democrats coming out of Joe Biden events. That's what we saw in the --
JACKSON: This is going a different direction. That's not happening based on the results of the election. The question I’m trying to get to--
CRAMER:[in background] [chuckles] Of course it’s not, that’s the point!
JACKSON: --The dangerous rhetoric related to the undermining of this democracy that you have sworn an oath to uphold!
CRAMER: Right. And I will uphold it and I do uphold it and I am upholding it. Part of it is the wonderful self-governing nation of ours with three co-equal branches. One of them being the judiciary. Let them play out their role. I'm not prone to panic in any circumstances if you can maybe can tell. But anyway, I wonder if you guys ever questioned the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation that had no evidence or the impeachment that had no evidence--
JACKSON: This is a left hand turn. Senator, I appreciate that you want to move on away from the question I posed to you. I think it's clear you've made your point clear, and have not acknowledged, of course, the incoming President-Elect...
The last tense exchange happened right after Jackson suggested Cramer wouldn't be open to confirming Biden's appointees. He denied that, saying he was open to "all of them" and again reminded her that this wasn't how Democrats treated President Trump's appointees: " But I would also then remind you, there were six Trump cabinet nominations that got zero support."
Google and Chevy sponsored this segment, you can contact them at the Conservatives Fight Back page links provided.
Read a partial transcript below:
11/24/2020
MSNBC Live
10:22:00 AM EST
HALLIE JACKSON: I have to ask, At what point Senator, do you feel like you are, then, continuing to spread this misinformation and deny the reality of what's in front of us? Are you waiting for the December 8th safe harbor deadline? What is the hold up here in acknowledging this and I have to wonder, is some of it because you are concerned about angering President Trump who as I know you are close with?
SEN. KEVIN CRAMER: I like him a lot. I'm grateful that he's the president. I wish--I hope he can be president for four more years, but I want to throw this back a little bit because we have a whole bunch of --[Jackson tries to interrupt] --wild rhetoric that are fanning the flames of discontent coming from especially your network. I mean, Chuck Todd's monologue on Sunday was full of [indiscernible]--
JACKSON: I disagree--I respectfully, senator -- I disagree with that respectfully. I think the question that I still -- I don't mean to press this point. I have other questions. If the president continues to invalidate this election moving forward, which he has sought to do. He has sought to just factually in an objective basis, raise questions that are unproven and unfounded and dangerous to this democracy. That's just an objective statement here.
CRAMER: [in background] Well, dangerous to democracy isn’t.
JACKSON: What's to say that it's not going to affect, for example, your election, your victory moving forward? How do you expect voters to believe you've won if they don't believe Joe Biden is winning now based on what the president is saying?
CRAMER: Well Let me tell you what Republican voters aren't doing. They're not smashing windows, they’re not burning cars or beating up Democrats coming out of Joe Biden events. That's what we saw in the --
JACKSON: This is going a different direction. That's not happening based on the results of the election. The question I’m trying to get to--
CRAMER:[in background] [chuckles] Of course it’s not, that’s the point!
JACKSON: --The dangerous rhetoric related to the undermining of this democracy that you have sworn an oath to uphold!
CRAMER: Right. And I will uphold it and I do uphold it and I am upholding it. Part of it is the wonderful self-governing nation of ours with three co-equal branches. One of them being the judiciary. Let them play out their role. I'm not prone to panic in any circumstances if you can maybe can tell. But anyway, I wonder if you guys ever questioned the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation that had no evidence or the impeachment that had no evidence--
JACKSON: This is a left hand turn. Senator, I appreciate that you want to move on away from the question I posed to you. I think it's clear you've made your point clear, and have not acknowledged, of course, the incoming President-Elect. But I have to ask, you may end up in a position you are going to end up in a position to conform or not confirm his cabinet members. He's announcing his cabinet members. You're on the armed services committee. There's reporting the incoming defense secretary could be is likely to be Michele Flournoy, obviously she would be a historic pick there. Is she somebody that you are open to confirming when President-Elect Biden gets sworn in and he starts to put in place his cabinet members if she's the one?
CRAMER: First, Hallie, I don't have any defaults to know on cabinet members or ts. I'm always open to hearing them out. I try not to prejudge. I don't know her that well. I'm open to all of them. But I would also then remind you, there were six Trump cabinet nominations that got zero support. Yes, I want to be and remain open minded. And by the way, I do believe the president has a right to make these nominations.
