I'm convinced Wu wrote those questions herself. They were extremely self-mastabatory and she kept going "what an excellent question" as if she was congratulating herself.
Nah, her answers weren't really fluff answers for fluff questions, they were gobbledy-gook misdirections in response to light- to mild-questions. The "great question" before 4:00 was along the lines of "You want to fix/change a bunch of shit, but you'd be one little Representative and Dems have no power, so WTF you gonna do?" and John starts rambling some bullshit about Apple and Google and the "legislative side of solving issues" and veers off into understanding technology and infosec yada yada... and just on a second closer listen I realized just what a completely gibbering non-answer it really is... it's incoherent and legitimately makes absolutely no fucking sense. Yet it was preceded by "that is
such a great question! You know, I
really thought about that this last election...".[edit:
@Blue Jerkop:
double stalling]
He thinks he's got his canned "politician being interviewed" answers down pat, just like he think's he's got his
quippy talking points to feed to his ass-patters in the media. But in a live interview with a neutral (not even hostile) host, you don't have the ability to line them up for coherence and syntax ahead of time like with print (or with notes/script on the phone for an article that will only use a couple sound bites), and if you're not actually competent at bullshitting it just sounds retarded.
It does look like Wu fed them a bunch of leading info before shooting; essentially most/all of the GG crap (perhaps with some level of suggestion as to how some issues are to be approached).
P.S. 3:40 [interviewer]: "You are a really major figure in your world." Rarely is a statement both so false and yet so true.