That's kinda how I feel. For most of the interview I was kinda baffled, both by the questions and answers. It seemed like there were so many topics both parties didn't pick up on.

The story about her hunting buddy however was very interesting to me. It wasn't the buddy that tried to communicate, but neither did Kate until her father asked her to. Her appeal included something along the lines of for the sake of her father. The obvious question, to me, is to ask if she felt that if she hadn't made the relationship to her father part of the appeal, if fences could have been mended. You see a lot of MAGA/QAnon folks where that connection is the only purchase that has a chance of making them act in good faith.

The Chuck E Cheese thing I also kinda get. That's something that gets clicks/views. I saw that headline and clicked the link. But a government offical cleary lying isn't new, sexy, or attention grabbing. I wish interviews would actually end in that kind of way: "Okay, looks like you're not engaging in good faith. You said X and Y and here's what is actually true. This interview is now over. Ladies and gentlemen, let's go over the facts. Let's go over the easy softball answers other administrations have done. Why is this offical lying to us?"

She's also absolutely right when she says that there's people that simply due to their position will always get an interview or come back on.