Tucker Carlson

[BillsFanNC]

8 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

The commie right.

 

 

Where a member of Canadian parliament and @redtail hawk prove thar they have zero ability to discern tongue in cheek commentary.

 

When you're so eager, as a stooge for commie left to be triggered, it's amazing how easy it is.

 

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

21 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Where a member of Canadian parliament and @redtail hawk prove thar they have zero ability to discern tongue in cheek commentary.

 

When you're so eager, as a stooge for commie left to be triggered, it's amazing how easy it is.

 

 

 

ah yes.  The "don't believe what I said" defense.  It worked with a trump appointed judge too:

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."  Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "  Not to worry, Carlson's lawyers said. In written briefs, they cited previous rulings to argue Carlson's words were "loose, figurative or hyperbolic." They took note of a nonjournalist's use of the word "extort," which proved nondefamatory because it was mere "rhetorical hyperbole, a vigorous epithet."

So, Carlsons lawyers, arguing for him in court, argue, in effect, that "it's all bs" and B-man wanted proof cuz he still believes what he says is the truth.

Only conclusion to be drawn therefore, is that most Carlson viewers are unreasonable.  Imagine that.

Edited February 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[BillsFanNC]

5 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

ah yes.  The "don't believe what I said defense".  It worked with a trump appointed judge too:

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

 

So you're not going to watch the video, go with your tired deflection shtick, and continue to make yourself look like a moron in the process?

 

Got it.

Edited February 2, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[Tommy Callahan]

9 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

ah yes.  The "don't believe what I said defense".  It worked with a trump appointed judge too:

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."  Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "  Not to worry, Carlson's lawyers said. In written briefs, they cited previous rulings to argue Carlson's words were "loose, figurative or hyperbolic." They took note of a nonjournalist's use of the word "extort," which proved nondefamatory because it was mere "rhetorical hyperbole, a vigorous epithet."

Only conclusion to be drawn therefore, is that most Carlson viewers are unreasonable.  Imagine that.

So exactly like Rachelle Maddow getting out of the AON lawsuit.

 

Where her lawyers argued that her statements are so over the top, no sane person would think its actual news or factual.

 

The challenged statement was an obvious exaggeration, cushioned within an undisputed news story,” Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. wrote in the opinion. 

“The statement could not reasonably be understood to imply an assertion of objective fact, and therefore, did not amount to defamation,” the judge added. 

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/568213-oan-loses-appeal-in-defamation-lawsuit-against-rachel-maddow/

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

6 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

So exactly like Rachelle Maddow getting out of the AON lawsuit.

 

Where her lawyers argued that her statements are so over the top, no sane person would think its actual news or factual.

 

The challenged statement was an obvious exaggeration, cushioned within an undisputed news story,” Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. wrote in the opinion. 

“The statement could not reasonably be understood to imply an assertion of objective fact, and therefore, did not amount to defamation,” the judge added. 

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/568213-oan-loses-appeal-in-defamation-lawsuit-against-rachel-maddow/

 

 

and who believes Rachel Maddow was right?  You?  so often you and your ilk's argument is "two wrongs make a right".  THEY DON'T.  lying to huge national audiences (one made up of a much larger audience of stupid people) under the guise of "exaggeration" is wrong and harmful.

So let's discuss the veracity of Carlson's "reporting" rather than on whataboutism.

Edited February 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[All_Pro_Bills]

26 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Where a member of Canadian parliament and @redtail hawk prove thar they have zero ability to discern tongue in cheek commentary.

 

When you're so eager, as a stooge for commie left to be triggered, it's amazing how easy it is.

 

 

 

Rumor has it that when his term as PM end, Trudeau plans on moving to the US where he will apply for citizenship and run for governor of California.  

[BillsFanNC]

2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

and who believes Rachel Maddow was right?  You?  so often you and your ilks argument is "two wrongs make a right".  THEY DON'T.

So let's discuss the veracity of Carlson's "reporting" rather than on whataboutism.

 

You mean just like YOU believed that Tucker wants to invade Canada with an armed force?

[Joe Ferguson forever]

2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Rumor has it that when his term as PM end, Trudeau plans on moving to the US where he will apply for citizenship and run for governor of California.  

lying and misinformation...it's what you do

Just now, BillsFanNC said:

 

You mean just like YOU believed that Tucker wants to invade Canada with an armed force?

I mean what he told the rubes to believe.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 minute ago, redtail hawk said:

and who believes Rachel Maddow was right?  You?  so often you and your ilks argument is "two wrongs make a right".  THEY DON'T.

So let's discuss the veracity of Carlson's "reporting" rather than on whataboutism.

In fairness, though, you’re linking to Russian State television as a reliable source of data, and I haven’t seen one person defending TC as an unimpeachable purveyor of truth.  
 

That begs the question—what’s your personal standard on comments about the truth?  What is it that compels you to comment specifically about TC, v politicians who lie or craft false narratives to influence others? 
 

I don’t watch TC, and recognize the bombastic nature of his program.   I personally don’t see a big difference between what he does, and some of MSM outlets or networks news.  You have to weed through the language used, consider the agenda, and consider what info might have been left out to shade the story. 
 

Much ado about nothing, really. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 minute ago, redtail hawk said:

lying and misinformation...it's what you do

Come on, it's funny.  And the reason its funny is because the authoritarian policies of both jurisdictions are so similar that the idea of replacing Newsom with Trudeau would be plug and play.  

[BillsFanNC]

6 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

You mean just like YOU believed that Tucker wants to invade Canada with an armed force?

 

Right as a smirking Tucker and his guest, a Canadian btw, yuk it up over the clearly tongue in cheek comment.

 

But please, continue. 

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

In fairness, though, you’re linking to Russian State television as a reliable source of data, and I haven’t seen one person defending TC as an unimpeachable purveyor of truth.  
 

That begs the question—what’s your personal standard on comments about the truth?  What is it that compels you to comment specifically about TC, v politicians who lie or craft false narratives to influence others? 
 

I don’t watch TC, and recognize the bombastic nature of his program.   I personally don’t see a big difference between what he does, and some of MSM outlets or networks news.  You have to weed through the language used, consider the agenda, and consider what info might have been left out to shade the story. 
 

Much ado about nothing, really. 

the effectiveness of his false narratives is the issue, to me.  A majority of people in what is now called the republican party believe that the election was stolen.  How many know of this court case where he admitted lying?  B man clearly was unaware.  I don't like lying to influence public opinion in any scenario.  And I don't like networks that use this premise as a business model.  I don't watch MSNBC either.

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[BillsFanNC]

Just now, redtail hawk said:

the effectiveness of his false narratives are the issue, to me.  A majority of people in what is now called the republican party believe that the election was stolen.  How many know of this court case where he admitted lying.  B man clearly was unaware.  I don't like lying to influence public opinion in any scenario.

 

Oh please!

 

Tucker from the clips I've seen has questioned many if the things about the 2020 election that are clearly questionable.

 

It's not like he went in TV night after night for years and screamed about a "stolen election".

 

You know like the entire rest of nightly cable news did for years about Trump stealing the 2016 election.

 

You really are lost dude. Completely lost.

[Joe Ferguson forever]

8 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Right as a smirking Tucker and his guest, a Canadian btw, yuk it up over the clearly tongue in cheek comment.

 

But please, continue. 

 

 

and I'm sure you can find him smirking during one of his myriad tirades about the "stolen" election...yet a majority of his audience believe it....

1 minute ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Oh please!

 

Tucker from the clips I've seen has questioned many if the things about the 2020 election that are clearly questionable.

 

It's not like he went in TV night after night for years and screamed about a "stolen election".

 

You know like the entire rest of nightly cable news did for years about Trump stealing the 2016 election.

 

You really are lost dude. Completely lost.

lost, is defending a known liar, who admitted to such in court as his defense.

[BillsFanNC]

4 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

and I'm sure you can find him smirking during one of his myriad tirades about the "stolen" election...yet a majority of his audience believe it....

 

Again, from the clips I've seen he goes out of his way to say he doesn't know what happened in the 2020 election and there is no proof it was stolen. He just asks obvious questions about the questionable stuff. As a talking head cable news opinion show host, asking questions is doing more journalism than most actual "journalists" do these days. But thats just me.

Edited February 2, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[All_Pro_Bills]

4 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

the effectiveness of his false narratives are the issue, to me.  A majority of people in what is now called the republican party believe that the election was stolen.  How many know of this court case where he admitted lying.  B man clearly was unaware.  I don't like lying to influence public opinion in any scenario.  And I don't like networks that use this premise as a business model.  I don't watch MSNBC either.

I agree with you about liars.  And I may be adding a little dramatic effect here, but the entire system that currently supports the elites in politics and money centers is based on lies and deceit.  We're in a late-stage decline phase of the American empire where those things what's holding a decaying and decadent system together.  I can think of few institutions and cultural values that are holding together.  If you hold to a base assumption that everything social, financial, and political elites and the government says is a lie you'll be right most of the time.      

[Joe Ferguson forever]

7 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Oh please!

 

Tucker from the clips I've seen has questioned many if the things about the 2020 election that are clearly questionable.

 

It's not like he went in TV night after night for years and screamed about a "stolen election".

 

You know like the entire rest of nightly cable news did for years about Trump stealing the 2016 election.

 

You really are lost dude. Completely lost.

except that it is...

[BillsFanNC]

3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

except that it is...

 

Prove it.

 

Because I can come up with mountains of lunatic screaming about Russia stealing 2016 for Trump.

 

Which you no doubt eagerly lapped up.

Edited February 2, 2023 by BillsFanNC

[Joe Ferguson forever]

5 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

I agree with you about liars.  And I may be adding a little dramatic effect here, but the entire system that currently supports the elites in politics and money centers is based on lies and deceit.  We're in a late-stage decline phase of the American empire where those things what's holding a decaying and decadent system together.  I can think of few institutions and cultural values that are holding together.  If you hold to a base assumption that everything social, financial, and political elites and the government says is a lie you'll be right most of the time.      

yes, anarchy.  That's the goal.  And some players are very, very effective.  defending them promotes the goal.  btw, can you explain why the rubes listen to an obvious "elite" like Carlson.  If one is elite but says what u want to hear then they're ok?

2 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Prove it.

to you?  not possible.  It's like trying to prove the world isn't flat.

Edited February 2, 2023 by redtail hawk

[wnyguy]

I didn't need Tucker to tell me that the election was a fraud, I have eyes in my head.