No questions posted, not even examples.

Without a transcript I would be honor bound to include the considerable possibility that if he answered "I don't know" to some questions he might be telling the exact truth.

It is a fallacy to think that everybody has to know everything or especially when someone hates a person to expect them to know everything.

Also a fallacy to think that if a person doesn't like the answers then the interviewee must be lying.

so you know what I am talking about. It also assumes you know that one question from Rachel is about 500 words and therefore difficult to regurgitate.

I did not imply that the interviewee was lying, but that he is evasive.

Sorry to waste your time.

I'm highly skeptical about both options.

Maybe you need to retake reading comprehension.

... but I think she is smart and does not ask stupid questions. Again, I have not seen the show, but you proposed that there were only two options and neither one was believable. Limiting it to only those two options is indulging in quite fallacious debating.

Not Rachel's fault at all; he's just not cooperative.

I think he just can't answer certain questions.

that he would be dazzled enough by Rachel's insightful questions as compared to the assembly line of interviews he'd done to this point.

were because they involved actions occurring after he left.

that might jeopardize Mueller's investigation ... what is so hard to understand about that? And he HAS answered many of Rachel's question.

since the memos dropped as the show went up. She can't ignore them and said she was literally prepping for the new info as he sat down.

She talks more than him given most of his answer was "I don't know"

It feels very imbalanced, and not conversational. Most of her guests are eager for a chance to give their opinion. He is answering like he is in court.

usually 20 to 22 mins, where she keeps talking. She should go into interview mode.

based on the book, but got dumped with copies of his memos that literally released at 9pm ET, so like she has to do every show due to breaking news, she threw out the original show content and line of questioning, and has been asking questions based on the memos - literally trying to process that on the fly!

She even more long winded than usual, lots of old backstory stuff, and her views on what happened rather than letting Comey speak. She seems unprepared with far too many questions that don't sound like they were well thought out in advance, leaving Comey to keep repeating he doesn't know, or he can't answer.

Put most children in front of a tv camera and you won't get answers to anything other than yes/no questions. She is giving him a lot of opportunities to talk and he isn't taking her up on it.

Knowing his answers would be somewhat curtailed by FBI policies, she was asking for stuff that he couldn't reveal. She's had hundreds of guests and does interviews all the time, but she just wasn't getting the job done tonight. It seemed like she wanted to squabble with him rather than ask the open ended questions that would let him speak.I don't know, maybe she was fishing for a big scoop. She seemed to be looking for an angle to get the info she was after, but Comey's no neophyte either and he just didn't follow the breadcrumbs.

I've heard him give that response a lot in other interviews, probably more in this one but as others have said maybe that's because they are winging it some. I'd rather hear "I don't know" than to pretend he knows something he doesn't.

And USA Today interview I’ve seen.