Ivanka Trump: ‘I’m really not’ concerned that anyone in my family colluded

Trump meeting on Fighting Human Trafficking on the Southern Border

Ivanka Trump gave an exclusive interview to Abby Huntsman at ABC News this week, and it aired on Good Morning America today. I’m sure the goal of this interview was likely to promote one of Ivanka’s vague policy initiatives, something about “women” and “empowerment.” Huntsman used her time well though, and asked Ivanka point-blank about the Mueller investigation and whether Ivanka is “concerned” that her complicit catface will be on the chopping block any time soon.

Ivanka Trump says in a new interview that she knew “literally almost nothing” about the Trump Tower Moscow project that’s become a central focus of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, adding that she has “zero concern” about the probe or the possibility that anyone close to her could be implicated.

“Are you concerned about anyone in your life that you love being involved?” ABC’s Abby Huntsman asked the President’s daughter and White House adviser in a taped interview that aired Friday on “Good Morning America.”

“No. I’m not,” Trump said. “I’m really not.”

Donald Trump’s real estate company was pursuing a proposed Trump Tower in Moscow while he was campaigning for the presidency, but Ivanka Trump said she knew “literally almost nothing” about it.

“There was never a binding contract. I never talked to the — with a third party outside of the organization about it. It was one of — I mean, we could have had 40 or 50 deals like that, that were floating around, that somebody was looking at. Nobody visited it to see if it was worth our time. So this was not exactly like an advanced project,” Trump said. “There’s nothing there, yet it’s created weeks and weeks and months of headlines,” she said. “So no, I have zero concern.”

She also downplayed doing business in Russia, arguing that it’s “not like it’s a strange thing” to have property in Russia.

“We’re not talking about Iran. It was Russia,” she said. “And we weren’t even advanced enough that anyone had even visited the prospective project site. So it really was just a non-factor in our minds. I’m not sure that anyone would have thought of it.”

[From CNN]

If you watch the clip, notice how Ivanka seems to launch into that “I knew literally almost nothing” argument on her own, without prompt, and how she then steps onto her own lie by detailing how unimportant this Trump Tower Moscow Project was, because you know, she didn’t know anything about it. And of course she’s lying about not being concerned too. Ivanka looks hunted – she’s wondering how she’s never, ever been asked to give any kind of testimony and whether that makes her one of the subjects of the investigation.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, ABC News.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

64 Responses to “Ivanka Trump: ‘I’m really not’ concerned that anyone in my family colluded”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eric says:

    I’d be crapping gummy bears if I thought I was a possible target of the Mueller or SDNY investigations.

    That’s the only place Ivankkka can see herself now. She hasn’t been questioned, deposed, or ordered to give testimony, under oath or not. Seems that everyone around her has, which can only lead her to think and conclude (in a whispery voice):

    “Why hasn’t anyone questioned me?? Oh I forgot…I’m complicit.”

    • Tiffany says:

      I have a feeling to SEC can be looking into her and her hubby too. They don’t say anything until they actually come and get ya.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      If they have evidence like emails and recorded phone calls (Cohen), then they might not need to question her to prove she’s committed a crime.

      I’d have a better opinion of the world if she actually faces consequences for her grifting.

  2. PhillyGal says:

    Oh, Ivanka girl. I don’t believe a word you said. You’re a liar, just like daddy.

  3. Scarlett says:

    Complicit Barbie is complicit.

    • Muffy says:

      And who does Complicit Barbie give an interview to?

      Complicit Skipper. Abby Huntsmans father, Jon Huntsman is … wait for it … Trump’s ambassador to Russia.

      The GOP is so fucked up.

    • Tourmaline says:

      complicit catface….LOL

      I know they are sibs but in the top picture Ivanka really looks so much like Donny Junior

      • Betsy says:

        All that surgery and her real face still leaks out.

      • BeanieBean says:

        I’m surprised she can still breathe through that nose, it’s so constricted.

      • justwastingtime says:

        All that plastic surgery and the ugly is still leaking out…. She is a fraud, trained at her daddy’s knee to lie so prettily.

        My older child is younger than Tiffany Trump (he is still in college) but attended the same private school as she did in CA. No surprise, word was he was a completely negligent parent. On father sports day when even the least involved fathers, the ones on their third or fourth marriage, show up in shorts and try to play, Trump showed up in a suit with an entourage and signed books, and apparently Tiffany ran off and cried.

        Turns out Tiffany was the lucky Trump child…

      • jwoolman says:

        She reminds me of Eric also, those three have a strong resemblance even though Ivanka has changed her face so much.

      • jwoolman says:

        She reminds me of Eric also, those three have a strong resemblance even though Ivanka has changed her face so much.

  4. Tiffany says:

    When her perp walk comes, I am taking the day off to celebrate.


  5. RBC says:

    Why should she worry about anyone she loves being involved? The only person she loves is herself, so in this instance she must be innocent. There may not be collusion, but they are all corrupt. Lock them Up!!

  6. lucy2 says:

    Considering that Mueller seems to have receipts on EVERYTHING, and the Trump clan is dumber than a box of rocks, I assume there are plenty of emails that show she knew a lot more than “literally almost nothing”.
    LOL at the “what’s the big deal about Russia, at least is wasn’t Iran” stuff she’s now spewing. Um…Iran wasn’t accused of manipulating the election and hacking the opposition.

    • Lizzie says:

      i’m glad she was pushed on the issue but it is so scary that they let her carry on with her iran comments. trump wants a war and he wants it with iran. this TV appearance is propaganda straight out of Goebbels handbook. i bet her prep was finding any way possible to spin questions into slamming iran. if they asked her about ross dress for less selling her shoes for $7.00 on triple sticker clearance she would have said “think about the women in iran who aren’t allowed to wear these kind of shoes”

      • Rapunzel says:

        Lizzie I think the Iran stuff was some “but Hillary” deflection more than anything else, since it’s Trumpster belief that Hillary sold uranium to them (she didn’t) and Obama gave them billions (of their own money).

      • adastraperaspera says:

        Good point. She seems to be indicating that Trump will make war with Iran his hail Mary pass if investigations don’t stop. She knows war might likely cover up her own crimes working with the Iranian Guard on the Baku project. You’re right, it’s very scary.

  7. mycomment says:

    note to princess: the fbi doesn’t interview targets of their investigations…

    • whatWHAT? says:

      at least not until they have everything they need to convict and are then seeking either some sort of confirmation or denial under oath (perjury).

      and I fully believe they have plenty on her.

      is it just me or is her face looking more and more plastic? *SHUDDERS* it’s creepy how little her nose is. and it looks crooked in that pic where she’s catching flies.

      • Lightpurple says:

        She had more work done during the shutdown when she couldn’t do her daily photo ops.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I really try not to focus on women’s looks, especially when there is so much else wrong with this person and her family, but she looks alien now. Her nose has whittled away to nothing and it throws off the shape of her face. She doesn’t look human being anymore.

      • JustBitchy says:

        @lightpurple exactly to my trained and surgical eye- I would say an upper blepharoplasty. She is the right age to stay ahead of the curve. The cheek liposuction is what sets her apart from Tiffany

      • Trashaddict says:

        I wonder if having your faced Botox’ed makes it easier to lie. None of those pesky facial twitches that might be a “tell”.

  8. Jessica says:

    She’s just delusional so…

  9. adastraperaspera says:

    Well, I guess it’s just a coincidence then that Ivanka gave this interview to Abby Huntsman, whose father Jon Huntsman Jr. is Trump’s Ambassador to Russia. It’s all connected.

    • Cay says:

      And I haven’t seen the interview, but on “The View” Abby Huntsman comes across as less than brilliant.

  10. Rapunzel says:

    Lol at the whole, “it wasn’t Iran” defense. Playing to the uranium one crowd, Nagini?

  11. gingersnaps says:

    She’s starting to look so much like her father and that’s not a compliment. I guess whatever your soul is on the inside your external appearance will eventually catch up with it.

    • whatWHAT? says:

      I was thinking something similar…that top pic where she’s got her maw hanging open, I can see how much she resembles her brother (the dumber one). all of her surgeries aren’t helping, apparently.

  12. JRenee says:

    The levels of deception run so deeply it’s frightening, very frightening..

  13. Cee says:

    And then she’ll find herself trying to make orange the new black.

  14. ariel says:

    May she rot in prison, with her beloved family.

  15. mycomment says:

    keep in mind… mueller is not the only investigation.. the southern district of new York has one — and dotard can’t do a thing about that one.

  16. Lightpurple says:

    So fed up! Any reporter who interviews her and doesn’t start by challenging the very fact that she has illegally and unethically ensconced herself in the West Wing should just go find another career. Failure to do so is to legitimize her unethical and illegal acts. CHALLENGE it instead! How many staff members does she have? What are their salaries? How much do they cost us in health insurance, office resources, travel, lodging, and meals? Has she used a government phone or computer for personal communications? What are her qualifications for any of this? Point out that this is illegal and unethical and that no President ever let an adult child do any of this and quite a few of them were far more qualified than Nagini will ever be.

    • Kitten says:

      Just came for LP’s Nagini’s analysis and I have to say: you are spot-f*cking-on per usual.

      • Lightpurple says:

        Thank you, Kitten. This latest scam she is running infuriates me. All our tax money being wasted in various agencies praising her for what essentially amounts to her making a video of herself talking about how wonderful she thinks she is and how we should be so excited to see our money spent on international trips where she will conduct her personal business. The idea of the initiative was stolen, of course, from an existing UN program, and it is grossly underfunded for its stated purpose. $50 million over 5 years is supposed to help 50 million women start businesses? Do they think we can’t do basic math? And that won’t even amount to $1 per woman once all the costs for staff and promotional crap and other expenses are deducted out of it. Reporters should challenge her on this instead of pretending to be in awe of her and asking questions about Russia that they know she’ll dodge.

      • Lightpurple says:

        I have a very nasty suspicion about this WGDP thing. She spent a year collecting pay to play bribes for that “Women’s Fund” she set up through the World Bank. Orange Voldy wouldn’t meet with someone until after a meeting with Nagini during which the “donation” would be announced. We were told that the fund would “empower women entrepreneurs” and that the World Bank, not Nagini would be handling the money and it’s distribution. However, the language governing applications for grants from the fund does not allow women to apply for start-up grants. Instead, agencies, like Nagini’s WGDP can apply and then get access to the money. And Nagini has been choosing the new World Bank president. Why do I think that Nagini will apply for all that money?

    • adastraperaspera says:

      I think was just a friendly interview for show (pretty sure Ivanka saw all the questions in advance and practiced her answers) to set the stage for Ivanka managing her burgeoning legal crises with the help of complicit media organizations. She knows very well she’s in deep, and I think she’s going to let the men go down and play “I’m a sweet, innocent mother” defense. I hope it doesn’t work.

      • Lightpurple says:

        They launched something called WGDP yesterday and she’s in charge of it. She’s promoting how she’s going to save the world through empowered women who will start businesses with the dollar she gives them, after her expenses are deducted from that dollar, of course.

      • adastraperaspera says:

        @LP, she is indeed corrupt to the core.

      • Esmom says:

        Yeah, the whole (stupid) exchange seemed really rehearsed. I could see her definitely wanting the practice for when the s%^t really hits the fan. Gah. She disgusts me to no end.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I wish I could put a megaphone up to your comment!

  17. lobstah says:

    Veneers gonna veneer.

  18. SM says:

    How can she think that since she doesn’t know what collusion means.

  19. Pandy says:

    She looked like she wanted to kill Cruella DeVille (or whoever the interviewer is). Ha ha ha. We’re waiting Nagini!!!

  20. Q T Hush says:

    Ivanka looks down to her left while stating her “no concerns” comment. That is a tell that she’s lying. Criminal behavior psychology 101.

  21. JanetFerber says:

    As another poster previously said on this site, this is the order of responses from Trump’s camp on his dirty doings:
    1. He didn’t do it (fake news).
    2. Even if he did it, it’s not illegal.
    3. Even if it’s illegal, he would have been smart to do it.
    4. He did it. So what?

  22. Julia says:

    I already complained about this on Twitter, but this week news came out that the CFPB is tossing some of the proposed limits on payday lending. You know who that will disproportionately affect? Women, who make up more than 60% of their customer base. Will Ivanka–whose JOB allegedly focuses on the economic empowerment of women–mention this, or is she too busy patting herself on the back for her series of feel-good photo ops that accomplish nothing? GEE I WONDER.

    Sorry. I really hate her. She shares all her family’s worst traits, but thinks that if she just packages herself differently no one will notice. And hell, maybe she’s right.

  23. ettig says:

    I noticed her eye movements
    Eye Direction. A number of studies talk about the direction of eyes during lies. Typically, when people look up and to the right, they are lying or tapping into their imagination. When they look up and to the left, they are remembering or recalling something, tapping into the memory part of the brain.

  24. jwoolman says:

    So Ivanka knows nothing about the planned Ivanka Trump suite and spa at the Trump Tower Moscow project?

    Did she claim to also not be involved in that shady Baku operation? We have a promotional video of her for that, shown on Rachel Maddow’s show about the curious case about a year ago. Long ago, I heard a trump say that he once was paid a million dollars for a speech, and that’s where he gave it. The project sounded like a money laundering scheme ultimately for the Iranian National Guard, to avoid sanctions limiting their ability to shuffle money around.


    is a link to Maddow’s March 2017 segment about it. Starts with the Tacoma Narrows bridge collapse but it’s relevant, trust me. It’s a good introduction to what to look for in money laundering schemes.