Jump to content

No Surprise Here


UT alum

Recommended Posts

Rupert Murdoch admits under oath his employees knowingly lied to FOX viewers about  the big lie, and you talk about crickets! The walls are crumbling and you folks are using toothpicks to try and shore them up. So, when the jury decides against the liars, who will the liars be then? The whole thing will be rigged? I can’t wait to see the squirming spin dance you do for that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

Rupert Murdoch admits under oath his employees knowingly lied to FOX viewers about  the big lie, and you talk about crickets! The walls are crumbling and you folks are using toothpicks to try and shore them up. So, when the jury decides against the liars, who will the liars be then? The whole thing will be rigged? I can’t wait to see the squirming spin dance you do for that one.

Could this be known as fake news? Imagine that!!!! Some people get their panties in a wad because they have been lied to, yet they still watch cnn and msnbc. Lmao

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, baddog said:

Could this be known as fake news? Imagine that!!!! Some people get their panties in a wad because they have been lied to, yet they still watch cnn and msnbc. Lmao

ahhh yes, starting the day off with an immediate 

 

- fake news

- what about CNN / MSNBC

 

Another day, another sucker.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is it that Murdoch supposedly admitted to lying about?

 What does any of it have to do with political stances?

Are people who are for closing the border, less welfare, ending most gun possession laws, not raising taxes, etc., going to feel or vote differently because of Murdoch?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tvc184 said:

What is it that Murdoch supposedly admitted to lying about?

 What does any of it have to do with political stances?

Are people who are for closing the border, less welfare, ending most gun possession laws, not raising taxes, etc., going to feel or vote differently because of Murdoch?

 


Do you have your head in the sand? Fox News execs and hosts knowingly lied about the stolen election BS to keep their ratings up (milking the suckers)

The same people calling everything fake news, fell for the fake news themselves. Hilarious and sad. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya'll sure are excited only hearing one side........It seems Fox will play this out in court and not on setxsports or Social Media......

“There will be a lot of noise and confusion generated by Dominion and their opportunistic private equity owners, but the core of this case remains about freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which are fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and protected by New York Times v. Sullivan. Dominion has mischaracterized the record, cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context, and spilled considerable ink on facts that are irrelevant under black-letter principles of defamation law,” the network said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

Ya'll sure are excited only hearing one side........It seems Fox will play this out in court and not on setxsports or Social Media......

“There will be a lot of noise and confusion generated by Dominion and their opportunistic private equity owners, but the core of this case remains about freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which are fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and protected by New York Times v. Sullivan. Dominion has mischaracterized the record, cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context, and spilled considerable ink on facts that are irrelevant under black-letter principles of defamation law,” the network said.

Kill them with facts. Lmao. Democrats believe in free speech to present your side until they come to the realization that there is indeed another side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, thetragichippy said:

Ya'll sure are excited only hearing one side........It seems Fox will play this out in court and not on setxsports or Social Media......

“There will be a lot of noise and confusion generated by Dominion and their opportunistic private equity owners, but the core of this case remains about freedom of the press and freedom of speech, which are fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution and protected by New York Times v. Sullivan. Dominion has mischaracterized the record, cherry-picked quotes stripped of key context, and spilled considerable ink on facts that are irrelevant under black-letter principles of defamation law,” the network said.

I'd say that too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The overwhelming majority of Fox's argument was made in sealed motions filed last week asking the presiding judge to dismiss Dominion Voting Systems' $1.6 billion suit before it is to go to trial in April. Yet in supplementary public filings, the contours of the Fox team's reasoning emerge more sharply in focus.

Of the approximately 115 statements on Fox by its hosts and guests that Dominion contends are defamatory, Fox News wrote in its filing, "there is not a single statement for which Dominion can prove every element of its claim for defamation."

Fox and Dominion did not comment for this story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven’t really been paying attention to any of this nor do I watch Fox News ( I ll sometimes get on Fox and cnn websites)

so what did they lie to the viewers about

actual voting numbers?

how the swings states stopped counting?

dead people voting?

dominion?

vote harvesting?

 

I don’t trust big govt period.

I really don’t want to believe that cognitive delayed Biden broke the record by a long shot on tallied votes.  Just a huge red flag on the voting block as well as where we are headed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

I haven’t really been paying attention to any of this nor do I watch Fox News ( I ll sometimes get on Fox and cnn websites)

so what did they lie to the viewers about

actual voting numbers?

how the swings states stopped counting?

dead people voting?

dominion?

vote harvesting?

 

I don’t trust big govt period.

I really don’t want to believe that cognitive delayed Biden broke the record by a long shot on tallied votes.  Just a huge red flag on the voting block as well as where we are headed.

 

I can't remmeber how to merge topics, but this has been posted in another thread. 

 

► In the wake of the election, Murdoch wrote in an email to the New York Post’s Col Allan, describing election lies that Trump was pushing as “bulls**t and damaging.”


► Murdoch said it was “wrong” for Tucker Carlson to host conspiracy theorist Mike Lindell after the election. When asked why he continued to allow the MyPillow CEO to continue appearing on Fox News, Murdoch signaled it was a business decision. “It is not red or blue, it is green,” he said. That’s a shocking admission from Murdoch about what actually guides coverage at Fox News


 

► Murdoch responded to one email from Ryan by telling him that Sean Hannity had “been privately disgusted by Trump for weeks, but was scared to lose viewers.” In other words, Hannity, who always claims to say the same things on camera as when he’s off camera, was not being up front with his loyal audience for fear they’d rebel against him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bobcat1 said:

I can't remmeber how to merge topics, but this has been posted in another thread. 

 

► In the wake of the election, Murdoch wrote in an email to the New York Post’s Col Allan, describing election lies that Trump was pushing as “bulls**t and damaging.”


► Murdoch said it was “wrong” for Tucker Carlson to host conspiracy theorist Mike Lindell after the election. When asked why he continued to allow the MyPillow CEO to continue appearing on Fox News, Murdoch signaled it was a business decision. “It is not red or blue, it is green,” he said. That’s a shocking admission from Murdoch about what actually guides coverage at Fox News


 

► Murdoch responded to one email from Ryan by telling him that Sean Hannity had “been privately disgusted by Trump for weeks, but was scared to lose viewers.” In other words, Hannity, who always claims to say the same things on camera as when he’s off camera, was not being up front with his loyal audience for fear they’d rebel against him.

Didn’t really answer anything I stated.

did they lie about these

actual voting numbers?

how the swings states stopped counting?

dead people voting?

dominion?

vote harvesting?

postal workers losing/burning mail in ballots?

illegal alien votes?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

I haven’t really been paying attention to any of this nor do I watch Fox News ( I ll sometimes get on Fox and cnn websites)

so what did they lie to the viewers about

actual voting numbers?

how the swings states stopped counting?

dead people voting?

dominion?

vote harvesting?

 

I don’t trust big govt period.

I really don’t want to believe that cognitive delayed Biden broke the record by a long shot on tallied votes.  Just a huge red flag on the voting block as well as where we are headed.

 

Exactly!!  Plus they told him to stay in the basement because "we got this!"  Trump had 74,000,000 votes.  The MOST out of any President in history seeking reelection.  2,000 Mules shows how it was done.  They have everything on camera.  And these are federal/state cameras.  All ballot drop boxes must have cameras on them.  They noticed the same people kept showing up at many different drop boxes at, like, 3 in the morning.  Who makes ballot drops at 3 in the morning?!  Plus they pinged these people's phones.  They knew exactly were they went.  All of this is actual.  Not theory or here say.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Reagan said:

Exactly!!  Plus they told him to stay in the basement because "we got this!"  Trump had 74,000,000 votes.  The MOST out of any President in history seeking reelection.  2,000 Mules shows how it was done.  They have everything on camera.  And these are federal/state cameras.  All ballot drop boxes must have cameras on them.  They noticed the same people kept showing up at many different drop boxes at, like, 3 in the morning.  Who makes ballot drops at 3 in the morning?!  Plus they pinged these people's phones.  They knew exactly were they went.  All of this is actual.  Not theory or here say.  

They could zoom in on the ballots to show they were voting for Biden? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Didn’t really answer anything I stated.

did they lie about these

Everything you mentioned has been stated or reported on at Fox News. IMO I see Fox coming out on top. If Fox loses, then can Trump sue CNN and MSNBC and others for accusing him of Russian collusion?  These days all news is more of a combination of facts, lies and opinions.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, baddog said:

Could this be known as fake news? Imagine that!!!! Some people get their panties in a wad because they have been lied to, yet they still watch cnn and msnbc. Lmao

It is from his deposition taken under oath. What is fake about that? Like I said, ya’lls news sources create realities that bring the ratings, not the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tvc184 said:

What is it that Murdoch supposedly admitted to lying about?

 What does any of it have to do with political stances?

Are people who are for closing the border, less welfare, ending most gun possession laws, not raising taxes, etc., going to feel or vote differently because of Murdoch?

 

Murdoch didn’t lie. He told the truth under oath. He knew that Carlson, Hannity, Bartiromo, Dobbs, Pirro we’re all misleading viewers about the 2020 Presidential election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, UT alum said:

It is from his deposition taken under oath. What is fake about that? Like I said, ya’lls news sources create realities that bring the ratings, not the truth.

Why does everyone miss the point? Is it intentional? cnn has been lying to us for years now. Do I need to list? It is known as fake news. Fox is said to have been lying about election results. I’m saying is that fake news we were receiving? It’s really pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DonTheCon2024 said:


Do you have your head in the sand? Fox News execs and hosts knowingly lied about the stolen election BS to keep their ratings up (milking the suckers)

The same people calling everything fake news, fell for the fake news themselves. Hilarious and sad. 
 

 

I don’t watch Fox News and I haven’t made any comments about stolen elections. What is sad if that you think it matters. I notice that you didn’t address what I said. 

Do you think that people really vote by what a media executive thinks or says?

I realize that people in forums try to light a fire just to see if someone will respond by throwing gasoline on the flames but you are delusional if you think someone is going to change who he/she supports because of a media owner.
 

Like, “Gee, I was completely against gun control but if a guy named Rupert Murdoch lied, I am turning all of my guns in!”. 

Yeah….. people are going to change their beliefs because of a guy they probably never even heard of made a comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,994
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    janaxad4
    Newest Member
    janaxad4
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Read it all - good info - thanks
    • Two political opponents pointing to each other and calling each other a liar…..  Is like two roosters fighting  and then pointing to the other and calling him a chicken. 
    • Trump was indicted for his activities on January 6. He appealed the indictment to the District Court (trial court) and the way I read it, they pretty much said he has no immunity, period. So he appealed to the Circuit Court which is not a trial court, but is a constitutional court one step below the US Supreme Court. Both the District Court and the Circuit Court denied even reviewing the case. I believe they simply said that a former president has no such immunity. The US Supreme Court then took up the case on a constitutional basis. Remember at this point there has been no trial so no facts of the case have come out. It has been only appeals on the constitutionality of immunity. The Supreme Court ruling today said that the president has absolute immunity for constitutional authority (conclusive and preclusive).  What that means to me is, if it’s something the Constitution gives him the authority to do, he absolutely cannot have charges filed against him. An easy example that I can think of is the Constitution makes him the commander-in-chief of the military. So if a president authorizes the military to do something such as Reagan authorizing the bombing of Libya in retaliation for terrorist attacks, the president cannot be sued or held to criminal charges because some civilians in Libya got killed. That is his authority as commander-in-chief and protection of the country. The Supreme Court then ruled that the president has presumed official acts immunity. A presumption under law in a case such as this means that it is assumed that the person accused, such as a president, is not guilty. The presumption is that he followed the law. The presumption does allow however for the prosecution to try and prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the presumption does not exist. The person accused does not have to prove anything. The president does not have to prove that he had immunity. The prosecution has to prove that more likely yes than no that he didn’t have immunity. So technically there’s an opening to prosecute but you start out with the presumption that the person accused is not guilty with nothing to prove. As an example, the president has wide authority in many areas including issuing some executive orders. Those are authorities as official acts. If the president was to do something like order the unjustified jailing of a political opponent in an upcoming election and order the opponent held in Gitmo to keep from campaigning, that would not be included under an official act immunity. So it is possible to overcome the presumption of immunity but it will take quite a bit of work.  The president has no immunity whatsoever that is outside of constitutional authority or an official act. As an example of the president gets drunk and manages to sneak past his Secret Service bodyguard. He gets in the car and drives DWI and kills someone. That is not covered under an official act so he could be held accountable for a homicide. So…. For constitutional authorities, the president has absolute immunity. For an official act, he has presumed immunity. Anything outside of a constitutional or official act, such as driving DWI, has no immunity. In this ruling the Supreme Court vacated the indictment because the District Court, and the Circuit Court did not even consider immunity. The Supreme Court did not clear Trump because at this point they have not even heard the evidence. All they issued was a constitutional ruling that the lower courts have to at least consider immunity under the rule that they just established. Therefore the case goes back to the prosecution to bring a case at the trial court level and try to prove that whatever Trump is accused of, it was not an official act. Certainly the DOJ could read this Supreme Court ruling and drop the case, saying that they cannot overcome immunity. I’m not going to hold my breath, waiting for the DOJ to come to that conclusion. Simply disagreeing with a president actions does not disprove immunity. I disagreed with some of the things that Biden did such as ordering vaccines for some workers. Some of that was appealed and the courts threw out some of those mandates, especially under OSHSA. I don’t think Biden could be prosecuted however for issuing an executive order to one of his federal agencies because that is probably covered under an official act immunity. Not liking it does not automatically qualified as a crime. Therefore…. Can the DOJ try to again get an indictment against Trump and try to prove in court that he is not covered by one of the immunities listed? Yes. The Supreme Court  has stated that under their ruling absolute immunity must be taken into consideration for a constitutional act and presumed immunity must be taken into consideration for an official act. Let’s just say that the DOJ pushed this case again and convince the trial court and the appeals court that Trump has no immunity and they get a criminal conviction. At their discretion, the Supreme Court can take this case up again since the trial would have been held and the Supreme Court could see how the lower courts came to their conclusion. The Supreme Court could agree that with the lower courts that there was no immunity and a conviction stands or they could say, y'all weren't paying attention to our ruling and they can throw the whole case out. If you don’t want to read all of that……  To date the ruling is, yes a former president has immunity from what he did in office and by law that must be taken into consideration under the rules that the Supreme Court just set. The rest will play out in the future. 
    • I bet he has woodville in the top 2 in the region
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...