Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

fredrogers-feature-1024x585.jpg Reminder kids, today's PPP falsehood of the day is. . . . . . . . "self admittedly"

 

 

If you can keep repeating this twist narrative, who knows ?  it may actually convince another low input poster to believe it

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

Now, Fred was truly a great man.  I wish we were all like him, spreading absolute goodness.

Edited by redtail hawk
Posted (edited)

could this shill be any less honest as a TV personality?  https://www.mediaite.com/tv/tucker-carlson-called-trump-a-demonic-force-and-a-destroyer-on-day-of-capitol-riot-per-newly-released-text/

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/16/1157558299/fox-news-stars-false-claims-trump-election-2020

selling out the country for ratings.  Even Murdoch knew it was too much. scum...

Edited by redtail hawk
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

 

Did you double check for bias before posting links to mediaite and npr?

 

:lol:

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Did you double check for bias before posting links to mediaite and npr?

 

:lol:

You're on ignore but I had to see how you'd defend this. Typical and anticipated. 

Read this and shove your biased news argument. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint

Do you think maybe Fox would sue the cited actual news agencies (and win) if the court papers weren't accurately quoted?:

Stupid people are destroying this country by allowing themselves to be influenced by proven liars.  They are disenfranchised by their own lack of valuable skills and see violence and deceit as their only chance at some measure of success.  It's sad really. 

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

You're on ignore but I had to see how you'd defend this. Typical and anticipated. 

Read this and shove your biased news argument. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint

Do you think maybe Fox would sue the cited actual news agencies (and win) if the court papers weren't accurately quoted?:

Stupid people are destroying this country by allowing themselves to be influenced by proven liars.  They are disenfranchised by their own lack of valuable skills and see violence and deceit as their only chance at some measure of success.  It's sad really. 

 

Nah. I'll just put you on ignore in kind. You have more than proven yourself to be in the @BillStime and @Tiberius class.

 

A useless PPP poster not worth a nanosecond more of my time.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

 

Stupid people are destroying this country by allowing themselves to be influenced by proven liars.  They are disenfranchised by their own lack of valuable skills and see violence and deceit as their only chance at some measure of success.  It's sad really. 

Antifa watches Tucker Carlson? I’m not sure that’s his target demographic but you do you. 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
Just now, redtail hawk said:

and the debate judges quickly invalidate the rebuttal but are in turn called elitists by the losers.

I have no idea what that means but I think it made me chuckle. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I have no idea what that means but I think it made me chuckle. 

yes, $hi!s and giggles.  but I'm very interested in the response to the court papers by the Tucker acolytes.

Edited by redtail hawk
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

is this source more comfortable to you Tucker (and in graham, hannity, Hobbs etc) fans?  https://www.fox5vegas.com/2023/02/16/fox-dominion-defamation-suit-is-assault-first-amendment/

Now do CNN and the rest of the mainstream media with the Russia-gate, and Hunter laptop stories. Do ALL of these channels, including Fox, have an agenda and a target audience? Obviously they do. 

  • Agree 2
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Now do CNN and the rest of the mainstream media with the Russia-gate, and Hunter laptop stories. Do ALL of these channels, including Fox, have an agenda and a target audience? Obviously they do. 

yes, that's why I ingest both sides and original source material.  But let's talk about the recent Dominion court papers.  Do you defend Fox actions in this particular case?   Are their actions helpful to meaningful political discourse and democracy?

Edited by redtail hawk
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

yes, that's why I ingest both sides and original source material.  But let's talk about the recent Dominion court papers.  Do you defend Fox actions in this particular case?   Are their actions helpful to meaningful political discourse and democracy?

Oh come on! The other side literally and knowingly lied to the American people to sway the electorate prior to an election. And that was after they literally, and knowingly lied to the electorate to promote a ridiculous impeachment proceeding, only to hire these same ‘insurrectionists’ as contributors. And that was after they promoted a later to be convicted criminal as the next democratic presidential candidate. Shall we go on? Yes…BOTH sides are looking for ratings. Is this somehow complicated to you? 

  • Agree 3
Posted
24 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Nah. I'll just put you on ignore in kind. You have more than proven yourself to be in the @BillStime and @Tiberius class.

 

A useless PPP poster not worth a nanosecond more of my time.

 

 


So difficult to swallow pride.
 

How embarrassing - their “leaders” and “mouthpieces” embarrass these freaks every single day.

 

Are you tired of winning? 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Oh come on! The other side literally and knowingly lied to the American people to sway the electorate prior to an election. And that was after they literally, and knowingly lied to the electorate to promote a ridiculous impeachment proceeding, only to hire these same ‘insurrectionists’ as contributors. And that was after they promoted a later to be convicted criminal as the next democratic presidential candidate. Shall we go on? Yes…BOTH sides are looking for ratings. Is this somehow complicated to you? 

not complicated at all.  Searching for the truth is difficult in today's news environment.  As I recall, trump was actually impeached in the house.  That takes a majority of elected house members, not my pillow quacks and lawyers who Fox' own personalities call nuts (and then interview as purported experts).  I'm unaware of cases that I would consider analogous in my favored references. There are probably threads here with hundreds of posts trying to make that case, however,

Let's move on from what aboutism and discuss Tucker and his proven (more info by the day)dishonesty and self serving, destructive actions.
 

Edited by redtail hawk
  • Eyeroll 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Oh come on! The other side literally and knowingly lied to the American people to sway the electorate prior to an election. And that was after they literally, and knowingly lied to the electorate to promote a ridiculous impeachment proceeding, only to hire these same ‘insurrectionists’ as contributors. And that was after they promoted a later to be convicted criminal as the next democratic presidential candidate. Shall we go on? Yes…BOTH sides are looking for ratings. Is this somehow complicated to you? 

Of course they did.  There is a mountain of evidence detailing exactly what happened, but in spite of that, the election denier-deniers are perfectly comfortable ignoring it.  The "Stolen election" claims followed the previous election model formulated by democrats and their "Illegitimate Election" strategy.   We can look back farther various and sundry ways dems pitched stolen elections, sought to use the electors to derail a vote, spoke of widespread voter disenfranchisement that resulted in illegitimate elections, and on and on. 

 

 

*See @redtail hawkabove for "...but I don't want to talk about that..'

 

Edited by leh-nerd skin-erd
  • Disagree 2
  • Agree 3
×
×
  • Create New...