Be careful what you wish for.

[kyzr]

Oh really? I gave you the court filing by someone wronged by Fox. Citing testimony by its executives and internal communications obtained through discovery. I eagerly await you showing me anything similar on the left. Or if you wish you can now state you think Dominion is lying in those court listings?

No proof? You consider statements from people contracted to FOX on the Republican side stating that they were purposefully pitted against "weak link" Democrats as no proof? You consider court filings stating unequivocally that Fox purposefully lied to their viewers as no proof? I don't mind the claim. I mind that you make the claim and aren't willing to give any argument to dispute besides simply claiming I have " no proof."

Just out of curiosity what to you is proof?

1. So about the Dominion lawsuit. Who cares? The Murdochs have lots of money and can afford the best lawyers. We'll see how that lawsuit plays out. Don't get your hopes up.

2. You want something similar on the Left?
I recall when a group of Catholic boys were waiting for their bus when they were accosted by troublemakers and one boy was crucified in the media. That boy is now a multi-millionaire. Got tons of that MSM money. How's that? Didn't even need to use google. You're welcome.

3. My "proof" is NOT seeing any Republicans on the propaganda MSM, like CNN and MSDNC. That is the ONLY PROOF. Its propaganda until we hear both sides.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

except Section 230 protects the Leftist companies from Lawsuits.

It protects all companies from lawsuits, not just leftist ones.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

He and others in the GQP are so desperate to please the base that they've developed a hyper-tunnel vision.

We'll see how America responds to their authoritarianism. The GQP's underperformance in the 2020 and 2022 elections may have provided a clue.

Authoritarianism = governing against the goals of the far left

 

[Harpy Eagle]

3. My "proof" is NOT seeing any Republicans on the propaganda MSM, like CNN and MSDNC. That is the ONLY PROOF.

What about Jonah Goldberg

 

[sparky]

What about our constitution? ~S~

 

[Care4all]

1. So about the Dominion lawsuit. Who cares? The Murdochs have lots of money and can afford the best lawyers. We'll see how that lawsuit plays out. Don't get your hopes up.

2. You want something similar on the Left?
I recall when a group of Catholic boys were waiting for their bus when they were accosted by troublemakers and one boy was crucified in the media. That boy is now a multi-millionaire. Got tons of that MSM money. How's that? Didn't even need to use google. You're welcome.

3. My "proof" is NOT seeing any Republicans on the propaganda MSM, like CNN and MSDNC. That is the ONLY PROOF. Its propaganda until we hear both sides.

There are two of them.... Smartmatic is suing as well....

Fox is not covering a lawsuit on themselves and neither are right wing media....they are withholding the news from you.... Time to search elsewhere.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The fairness doctrine would work, to dispell lies, as it has in broadcasting for decades.

No because the fairness doctrine was always subjective. What is liberal and what is conservative? That's besides the fact the fairness doctrine was there because we had limited selection. There was no cable TV or internet, just three or four stations to choose from. If they all broadcasted the same way, you never had any exposure to the other side.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Time is not the problem. Being unwilling is. It isn't that you can't come to an informed opinion. It's that an informed opinion that doesn't fit your own bias will be ignored by most people. Coming up with the flimsiest of excuses.

I don't come here for projects. This is a discussion group where most people can get their point(s) across in a paragraph or two.

 

[kyzr]

What about Jonah Goldberg

What about him?

 

[kyzr]

There are two of them.... Smartmatic is suing as well....
Fox is not covering a lawsuit on themselves and neither are right wing media....they are withholding the news from you.... Time to search elsewhere.

A lawsuit is NOT news, duh.
The result is news.

 

[blackhawk]

If the press would be more responsible and balanced in their reporting there would be no need for such legislation. When you see with very, very, few exceptions these so called mistakes by the media going in one direction there is a real problem a wise man said one time is an accident two times is a coincidence three or more is a pattern.

 

[whitehall]

Why should "journalists" who engage in slander be immune from lawsuits?

 

[Care4all]

No because the fairness doctrine was always subjective. What is liberal and what is conservative? That's besides the fact the fairness doctrine was there because we had limited selection. There was no cable TV or internet, just three or four stations to choose from. If they all broadcasted the same way, you never had any exposure to the other side.

The government didn't go after media btw. For fairness doctrine....

Why are you against the news media presenting both sides??

Shouldn't WE BE THE ONES to decide what to believe in the news instead of the media just presenting their own spin 24/7?

Don't be afraid....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The government didn't go after media btw. For fairness doctrine....

Why are you against the news media presenting both sides??

Shouldn't WE BE THE ONES to decide what to believe in the news instead of the media just presenting their own spin 24/7?

Don't be afraid....

Again, we have a choice today like we didn't have 30 or 40 years ago. If you want left-wing news media there is a host to choose from like CNN and MSNBC. If you want to hear from the right you have Fox, OAN and Newsmax. So there is no longer a need for a fairness doctrine. And even if you don't like those cable choices, there are a hundred more news outlets on both sides from the internet.

You want fairness? Then let's start with social media and work our way from there. No more censoring on Facebook, Instagram or YouTube. And while we're at it, let's bring the fairness doctrine to Hollywood as well.

 

[Batcat]

Time is not the problem. Being unwilling is. It isn't that you can't come to an informed opinion. It's that an informed opinion that doesn't fit your own bias will be ignored by most people. Coming up with the flimsiest of excuses.

So what you are saying is all the bombshells about Trump were great journalism and every one was true.

Read through the list in this article in case your memory is a lot like Joe Biden’s.

Nolte: Top 51 Fake News 'Bombshells' Media Spread About RussiaGate

Here are the top 51 pieces of fake news the establishment media spread about the Russia Collusion Hoax over the past two years.

www.breitbart.com

 

[forkup]

So what you are saying is all the bombshells about Trump were great journalism and every one was true.

Read through the list in this article in case your memory is a lot like Joe Biden’s.

Nolte: Top 51 Fake News 'Bombshells' Media Spread About RussiaGate

Here are the top 51 pieces of fake news the establishment media spread about the Russia Collusion Hoax over the past two years.

www.breitbart.com

READ: The Mueller Report, With Redactions

Attorney General William Barr has released special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. Democrats have pushed for Congress to get an unredacted version.

www.npr.org

This is the Mueller report. In it you will find plenty of examples of the Trump campaign "colluding" with Russia. What Mueller said was that that "collusion" didn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy. Collusion is a word in the dictionary that doesn't have any legal meaning. Criminal conspiracy does, and it takes more than extensive contacts with Russia to be able to be prosecuted for it. This is what is called a primary source. It's what I read when I want to come to an informed decision. Wich is why your list has plenty of items on it that I know weren't lies at all. For instance.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf
These are the findings of the Senate committee.

Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer.

, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska, and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine. On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik.
This is number 4 on your list of "lies"

While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump's electoral prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases,

This is number 10

It is filled with contacts between people in the Trump campaign and Russian officials.

This is number 22



As I said I used primary sources to inform my decision. Can you accept the information in those sources, or will you continue to lean on what Breitbart said?

 

[Mac1958]

Authoritarianism = governing against the goals of the far left

In a way, that's true. Both ends of the spectrum over-compensate whenever given the chance, and the GQP is doing that now.

Someone has somehow convinced you people that acting like a loud, ignorant middle school bully in a trailer park is a smart way to create long-lasting improvements.

That's just not true.

 

[forkup]

1. So about the Dominion lawsuit. Who cares? The Murdochs have lots of money and can afford the best lawyers. We'll see how that lawsuit plays out. Don't get your hopes up.

2. You want something similar on the Left?
I recall when a group of Catholic boys were waiting for their bus when they were accosted by troublemakers and one boy was crucified in the media. That boy is now a multi-millionaire. Got tons of that MSM money. How's that? Didn't even need to use google. You're welcome.

3. My "proof" is NOT seeing any Republicans on the propaganda MSM, like CNN and MSDNC. That is the ONLY PROOF. Its propaganda until we hear both sides.

1. So about the Dominion lawsuit. Who cares?

If you are interested in establishing who is a fair and balanced network, you should care. The fact that you don't seem to care tells me what I said before. You rather have a network that reaffirms your biases than one that is telling the truth. I gave you the example of Maddow. I didn't care that she "won" her lawsuit. I cared that in order to win she said she didn't actually did her due diligence. This directly speaks to her trustworthiness, and I will draw conclusions from that.

You on the other hand are flat out stating that you don't care an entire network was willing to lie.

2. You want something similar on the Left?
I recall when a group of Catholic boys were waiting for their bus when they were accosted by troublemakers and one boy was crucified in the media. That boy is now a multi-millionaire. Got tons of that MSM money. How's that? Didn't even need to use google. You're welcome.

I do wish you would source. I think I remember the incident. I'm also pretty sure it was something that was corrected by the MSM themselves. In other words they reported something they later found out was wrong and corrected it. NOT similar to knowing something is wrong and reporting it anyway as truth.

3. My "proof" is NOT seeing any Republicans on the propaganda MSM, like CNN and MSDNC.

pretty sure he's a Republican.

Here's 2 of the 4

Pretty sure she's one.

I can, of course go on and on showing you Republicans on those networks.

 

[kyzr]

If you are interested in establishing who is a fair and balanced network, you should care. The fact that you don't seem to care tells me what I said before. You rather have a network that reaffirms your biases than one that is telling the truth. I gave you the example of Maddow. I didn't care that she "won" her lawsuit. I cared that in order to win she said she didn't actually did her due diligence. This directly speaks to her trustworthiness, and I will draw conclusions from that.
You on the other hand are flat out stating that you don't care an entire network was willing to lie.

I do wish you would source. I think I remember the incident. I'm also pretty sure it was something that was corrected by the MSM themselves. In other words they reported something they later found out was wrong and corrected it. NOT similar to knowing something is wrong and reporting it anyway as truth.
I can, of course go on and on showing you Republicans on those networks.

1. Finding one potential "lie" and trying to paint FNC as 100% lies is moronic. The Harvard study already established that FNC is/was in-fact the most fair and balanced network. Leftist networks lie all the time. One example is calling J6 an "insurrection". J6 was not an "insurrection" it was a protest about a potentially fraudulent election. Leftist networks lie about Trump all the time. Leftist networks lie about Biden all the time, especially the laptop, calling it "Russian disinformation". The Leftist networks always criticize and lie about Republicans in congress.
Before you label FNC as "willing to lie" you need to wait for the lawsuit to playout.

2. Nick Sandman

CNN settles suit from MAGA hat-wearing Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann after March for Life video controversy

CNN has reportedly agreed to settle a lawsuit filed by Nick Sandmann, the MAGA hat-wearing teenager who stared down a Native American war hero. The news network settled with the Covington Catholic …

www.thesun.co.uk

3. Showing Republicans on the MSM isn't the issue. Not having Republicans on discussion panels is the issue. That is called "propaganda"

 

[Batcat]

READ: The Mueller Report, With Redactions

Attorney General William Barr has released special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. Democrats have pushed for Congress to get an unredacted version.

www.npr.org

This is the Mueller report. In it you will find plenty of examples of the Trump campaign "colluding" with Russia. What Mueller said was that that "collusion" didn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy. Collusion is a word in the dictionary that doesn't have any legal meaning. Criminal conspiracy does, and it takes more than extensive contacts with Russia to be able to be prosecuted for it. This is what is called a primary source. It's what I read when I want to come to an informed decision. Wich is why your list has plenty of items on it that I know weren't lies at all. For instance.

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf
These are the findings of the Senate committee.

Manafort hired and worked increasingly closely with a Russian national, Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik is a Russian intelligence officer.

, Manafort directly and indirectly communicated with Kilimnik, Deripaska, and the pro-Russian oligarchs in Ukraine. On numerous occasions, Manafort sought to secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik.
This is number 4 on your list of "lies"

While the GRU and WikiLeaks were releasing hacked documents, the Trump Campaign sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump's electoral prospects. Staff on the Trump Campaign sought advance notice about WikiLeaks releases,

This is number 10

It is filled with contacts between people in the Trump campaign and Russian officials.

This is number 22



As I said I used primary sources to inform my decision. Can you accept the information in those sources, or will you continue to lean on what Breitbart said?

So you found several items on a list of 51 that are questionable. I also agree that collusion is a term without legal meaning.

Good work. I’lll accept your opinion.

Now while we are talking about collusion which is not a crime, let’s look at wet hem Hillary colluding with the Russians.

Durham report proves Hillary Clinton — not Trump — was Putin’s puppet

Since 2016, Hillary Clinton has been trolling Donald Trump on social media over his alleged ties to Russia, calling him “Putin’s Puppet.” But Special Counsel John Durham’s probe has uncovered the t…

nypost.com