That's because the interviewer is an activist, not a journalist, and a bad one at that. Barney Frank was simply the more intelligent person in this interview.

That's because the interviewer is an activist, not a journalist, and a bad one at that. Barney Frank was simply the more intelligent person in this interview. The fact he had such an answer prepared shows he has thought about it over the years, far longer than the reporter spent thinking about a gotcha question based on the superficial premise of "revolving door bad." As for the reporter, the interview doesn't start any better than it ends. Those are some embarrassing questions based on factually incorrect premises, and Frank consistently corrects him, only to be told "well, look what the Washington Post said in 2018!" How embarrassing. I admire Frank's patience. Can you imagine a reporter childishly grilling you about your subject of expertise while insisting you're wrong?