media matters

[Typical Lax Dad]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Gaslighting. Somebody wants to make you feel like you're the one who can't follow along.

Plainly the case here. Because as he usually does...he leaves the conversation when he thinks he's being forced into saying something bad about his team. If I was asking this about CNN or MSNBC...he would have given his anger over this lie the very day that it was exposed.

it's really tiring, because he keeps claiming to want to have level headed discussions, and swears it's not about R's and D's. And yet when I put the T-ball on top of the ol' Tee? He walks....instead of simply saying "yeah, what Tucker and Fox have been doing doesn't have a parallel. This hasn't happened in modern big media history. Tucker should be removed immediately".

I pointed this out as Trump took office and was met with “they all do it”….they all don’t.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Gaslighting. Somebody wants to make you feel like you're the one who can't follow along.

Plainly the case here. Because as he usually does...he leaves the conversation when he thinks he's being forced into saying something bad about his team. If I was asking this about CNN or MSNBC...he would have given his anger over this lie the very day that it was exposed.

it's really tiring, because he keeps claiming to want to have level headed discussions, and swears it's not about R's and D's. And yet when I put the T-ball on top of the ol' Tee? He walks....instead of simply saying "yeah, what Tucker and Fox have been doing doesn't have a parallel. This hasn't happened in modern big media history. Tucker should be removed immediately".

...you clowns would do well to search back in my post-election posts, say Nov '20 -- Jan '21, & see what I had to say about Trump's post election conduct & my interest in his "stop the steal" claims.

We are talking about FoxNews and Tucker and the crew.

[old salt]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Gaslighting. Somebody wants to make you feel like you're the one who can't follow along.

Plainly the case here. Because as he usually does...he leaves the conversation when he thinks he's being forced into saying something bad about his team. If I was asking this about CNN or MSNBC...he would have given his anger over this lie the very day that it was exposed.

it's really tiring, because he keeps claiming to want to have level headed discussions, and swears it's not about R's and D's. And yet when I put the T-ball on top of the ol' Tee? He walks....instead of simply saying "yeah, what Tucker and Fox have been doing doesn't have a parallel. This hasn't happened in modern big media history. Tucker should be removed immediately".

...you clowns would do well to search back in my post-election posts, say Nov '20 -- Jan '21, & see what I had to say about Trump's post election conduct & my interest in his "stop the steal" claims.

Here ya go boys. i'll do it for ya. > a year later I was still being trolled for not discussing it.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/politics ... index.html

"Federal prosecutors are reviewing fake Electoral College certifications that declared former President Donald Trump the winner of states that he lost, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco told CNN on Tuesday.

"We've received those referrals. Our prosecutors are looking at those and I can't say anything more on ongoing investigations," Monaco said in an exclusive interview."

Rut Roh

OS sure to be posting daily updates here...

No chance. Distracted by what is happening in the real world. Troll (by name) someone else.

Interesting that OS doesn't care about Vote Fraud when r's are caught...

Not surprising I guess, they are all white guys doing it so it must be OK?

Election law & the Electoral College are incredibly complicated subjects.
I do not yet know enough (or care enough) to intelligently opine or comment ...but don't let that stop you.
The degree of my knowledge, concern & alarm on this subject will rise or subside as the legal process plays out.
Right now, so far, to me, this is just more political white noise.
Let us know if & when someone is convicted.

You might want to report the guy who has been posting under your account over on the Voting Rights topic!

This is not Voting Rights. It's either fraud or it is not. Who can appoint electors & how.
It has nothing to with who can vote & how. Tweaking the ECA could remove this as a potential future possibility.

I thought you didn't know enough, or care enough, to opine?

I'm not opining. I still don't consider this potential voter fraud. I consider it certification of election results.
It's my understanding that the votes were already cast, counted & certified before the electors were designated.
If that's wrong, the legal process will educate me.
I still don't know if these attempts to designate alternate electors are unlawful & constitute fraud.
I'm still happy to let the legal process work & educate me.
Keep trolling me if you wish, but I won't be taking the bait.

[old salt]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Gaslighting. Somebody wants to make you feel like you're the one who can't follow along.

Plainly the case here. Because as he usually does...he leaves the conversation when he thinks he's being forced into saying something bad about his team. If I was asking this about CNN or MSNBC...he would have given his anger over this lie the very day that it was exposed.

it's really tiring, because he keeps claiming to want to have level headed discussions, and swears it's not about R's and D's. And yet when I put the T-ball on top of the ol' Tee? He walks....instead of simply saying "yeah, what Tucker and Fox have been doing doesn't have a parallel. This hasn't happened in modern big media history. Tucker should be removed immediately".

...you clowns would do well to search back in my post-election posts, say Nov '20 -- Jan '21, & see what I had to say about Trump's post election conduct & my interest in his "stop the steal" claims.

We are talking about FoxNews and Tucker and the crew.

...& as I said, I don't follow FoxNews, & Tucker in particular, on all stories.
I record them on dvr & >>> through what does not interest me.
I'm not going to defend Tucker Carlson on all stories any more than I expect afan to defend everything Rachel Maddow comes up with.
afan expects me to dump on "my team", even when I don't know WT*F they're saying.
He used to do the same thing when El Rushbo would get him all spooled up. He needs someone to argue with.

[a fan]

Here ya go boys. i'll do it for ya. > a year later I was still being trolled for not discussing it.

Not even close to subject at hand. I already gave you the cite for the subject at hand. You just don't care.

And that's fine. But the problem, as everyone knows---especially you-----is that you could give a fig about what our media does.....right up until you perceive that someone you like gets "mistreated". Then you clutch pearls, and pretend to be horrified about the media.

You don't want a discussion here.

You want to complain to us when your team does something bad, and then gets hit for it....and then act like your fellow posters are the problem when we don't care.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Gaslighting. Somebody wants to make you feel like you're the one who can't follow along.

Plainly the case here. Because as he usually does...he leaves the conversation when he thinks he's being forced into saying something bad about his team. If I was asking this about CNN or MSNBC...he would have given his anger over this lie the very day that it was exposed.

it's really tiring, because he keeps claiming to want to have level headed discussions, and swears it's not about R's and D's. And yet when I put the T-ball on top of the ol' Tee? He walks....instead of simply saying "yeah, what Tucker and Fox have been doing doesn't have a parallel. This hasn't happened in modern big media history. Tucker should be removed immediately".

...you clowns would do well to search back in my post-election posts, say Nov '20 -- Jan '21, & see what I had to say about Trump's post election conduct & my interest in his "stop the steal" claims.

We are talking about FoxNews and Tucker and the crew.

...& as I said,[youtube] I don't follow FoxNews, & Tucker in particular, on all stories. [/youtube]
I record them on dvr & >>> through what does not interest me.
I'm not going to defend Tucker Carlson on all stories any more than I expect afan to defend everything Rachel Maddow comes up with.
afan expects me to dump on "my team", even when I don't know WT*F they're saying.
He used to do the same thing when El Rushbo would get him all spooled up. He needs someone to argue with.

Nice out. Who knows what you are sitting at home watching….. You have said that you even go so far as to DVR programs in order to see a broader spectrum of analysis……I guess sometimes. Bye old man.

[old salt]

Nice out. Who knows what you are sitting at home watching….. You have said that you even go so far as to DVR programs in order to see a broader spectrum of analysis……I guess sometimes. Bye old man.

That's how I watch everything, except Navy lax games. I >>> through commercials or news topics which don't hold my interest.
My current favorite news programs are The Day on DW, BBC News America, & France24. 3 x 30 min nightly news shows.
>>>'ing through them is like paging through the old International Herald Tribune.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Nice out. Who knows what you are sitting at home watching….. You have said that you even go so far as to DVR programs in order to see a broader spectrum of analysis……I guess sometimes. Bye old man.

That's how I watch everything, except Navy lax games. I >>> through commercials or news topics which don't hold my interest.
My current favorite news programs are The Day on DW, BBC News America, & France24. 3 x 30 min nightly news shows.
>>>'ing through them is like paging through the old International Herald Tribune.

No…you don’t.

[old salt]

Nice out. Who knows what you are sitting at home watching….. You have said that you even go so far as to DVR programs in order to see a broader spectrum of analysis……I guess sometimes. Bye old man.

That's how I watch everything, except Navy lax games. I >>> through commercials or news topics which don't hold my interest.
My current favorite news programs are The Day on DW, BBC News America, & France24. 3 x 30 min nightly news shows.
>>>'ing through them is like paging through the old International Herald Tribune.

No…you don’t.

What else ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

The filings unearthed communications revealing that the most prominent stars — Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and Laura Ingraham — and highest-ranking executives privately trashed claims of fraud in the 2020 election, despite the network allowing lies about the contest to be promoted on its air.

In one particularly damaging admission revealed in the case last month, Murdoch acknowledged that several Fox News hosts endorsed false claims that the 2020 election was stolen.

“They endorsed,” Murdoch said, referring to Hannity, Jeanine Pirro, Maria Bartiromo, and former host Lou Dobbs.

“Some of our commentators were endorsing it,” he said, when asked about the talk hosts’ on-air positions about the election. “I would have liked us to be stronger in denouncing it, in hindsight,” he added.

In his deposition, Murdoch also acknowledged that it was “wrong” for Carlson to have hosted election conspiracy theorist Mike Lindell on his program following the presidential contest.

Fox has defended the actions of its executives and hosts in its own legal filings countering Dominion’s lawsuit, alleging that its hosts’ on-air assertions about election fraud were taken out of context.

“Dominion’s summary judgment motion is flawed from top to bottom and should be rejected in its entirety,” lawyers for Fox News wrote in a filing last month.

And Fox Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, alleged Dominion “has produced zero evidentiary support for its dubious theory that high-level executives at Fox Corporation ‘chose to publish and broadcast’ or played a ‘direct role in the creation and publication’ of false election lies.”

While the First Amendment sets a high bar for defamation cases brought against media outlets, a protection that was reinforced in the landmark 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan, legal experts have told CNN that Dominion’s case appeared unusually strong.

“It’s a major blow,” renowned First Amendment attorney Floyd Abrams said of Dominion’s evidence presented last month, adding that the “recent revelations certainly put Fox in a more precarious situation” in defending against the lawsuit on First Amendment grounds.

Rebecca Tushnet, the Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law at Harvard Law School, described Dominion’s evidence as a “very strong” case that “clearly lays out the difference between what Fox was saying publicly and what top people at Fox were privately admitting.”

Tushnet said that in her years of practicing and teaching law, she had never seen such damning evidence collected in the pre-trial phase of a defamation suit.

[Farfromgeneva]

I was commenting on the internal debate where they wanted to fire the guys from the decision desk for calling AZ first, thus angering much of their audience. Check my posts, that's what I discussed. I said I didn't know about the lawsuit & I wondered why Fox didn't settle to limit the bad publicity.

So then why would you call for changes at Fox? They didn't do anything wrong in this specific context.

Immaterial I guess.

So you're telling me you are 100% unaware that Tucker Carlson was found, as a part of this lawsuit, to know full well that Trump's claims of election fraud was nonsense....yet he still ran years (years) of segments claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

Ok. Care to comment now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/20 ... -analysis/

After election night, I accepted that Trump had lost. After that, all the stories about the election were white noise to me.
I figured if there was anything to them, they'd prove out, or not. It was not worth my time to follow the details.
By that point, I was so sick of Trump, & the way he lost GA for the GOP, I just wanted him to go away.
I wasn't interested in the details or merits of his claims. I accepted Bill Barr's BS call on them & tuned out.

I wondered about changes at Fox because of the way they went after the decision desk guys for getting it right.

That's all great. You're still dodging the question. And it's clear you're doing this intentionally. This is what you do: you only care about this stuff when your ox is gored. And then turn around and hold everyone else to a higher standard. And you know you do this....but play the "who me?" game when you're caught.

It's really hard to deal with someone that does this, because it's not an honest conversation.

I'll figure it out.

Sums it up.

Small wins for small people. So it goes.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Nice summary by Hannity:

https://twitter.com/BGrueskin/status/16 ... 64/photo/1

[Typical Lax Dad]

Nice summary by Hannity:

https://twitter.com/BGrueskin/status/16 ... 64/photo/1

Precisely why I don’t watch these post evening news political entertainment programs….Fox in particular. It’s not news and when the Network admitted Hannity was not a journalist but a TV personality, I really cut back on Fox. Probably 10 years ago.

[MDlaxfan76]

Who from "the other side" of media has been caught knowingly lying to their viewers for not days, or even weeks...but for years, OS? And to top it off, kept their jobs after getting caught. Got a cite for that?

All the purveyors of the Russia collusion hoax. Even the NYT had a soul searching town hall with their staff, admitting they overplayed the story.

Fox does that every day. "overplay the story". That's not the same thing as knowingly printing a lie.

What lie did the NYTimes print?

Stay tuned on this too. Wait & see what comes out on the Jan 6 video & see how that aligns with MSNBC's coverage of the Jan 6 committee.

I missed this doozy...well, we've now seen what Fox and Carlson did with the 41 hours of video...and we've seen McConnell's and a bunch of other GOP Senators' reaction, the head of the Capitol police's reaction, the reaction of the Brian Sicknick family...

Tell us, which was the "lie"???

Again, only one supposed NEWS organization has admitted to repeatedly, knowingly, lying to its audience...not editorial selection of a story over another, not exaggeration, not hyperbole, but flat out lying, amplifying the lies over and over and over again, while privately telling each other that they knew they were lying, and were doing so for solely monetary reasons.

There's no other situation in the MSM which has come remotely close to this one, including the furthest left commentary from MSNBC.

Yes, OAN and NEWSMAX and Breitbart may be even worse, but they don't have the clout of Fox NEWS.

It ain't everyone....none of the MSM from NYT to WSJ to WAPO to NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, BBC...

[MDlaxfan76]

Who from "the other side" of media has been caught knowingly lying to their viewers for not days, or even weeks...but for years, OS? And to top it off, kept their jobs after getting caught. Got a cite for that?

All the purveyors of the Russia collusion hoax. Even the NYT had a soul searching town hall with their staff, admitting they overplayed the story.

Fox does that every day. "overplay the story". That's not the same thing as knowingly printing a lie.

What lie did the NYTimes print?

Stay tuned on this too. Wait & see what comes out on the Jan 6 video & see how that aligns with MSNBC's coverage of the Jan 6 committee.

You didn't answer my question. What lie----a lie that the NYTimes KNEW was a lie-----did they print.

If you can't answer that question? You have to admit that what Fox did was unprecedented, and Old Salt should act accordingly.

What was the Fox lie ? I thought the story was about their internal, after the fact, debate, about calling AZ for Biden on election night.

No, that factored into their concern about losing audience to OAN and NEWSMAX due to Trump's ire, and thus their justification in promoting the Big Lie, that there was massive election fraud, including specifically the lies about Dominion voting machines. They promoted those lies again and again and again, while privately admitting they knew these were lies. For the money.

They did NOT question the correctness of the AZ call, just its early call....not because they didn't believe it, but because Trump would be mad.

Put money over truth and accuracy.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Who from "the other side" of media has been caught knowingly lying to their viewers for not days, or even weeks...but for years, OS? And to top it off, kept their jobs after getting caught. Got a cite for that?

All the purveyors of the Russia collusion hoax. Even the NYT had a soul searching town hall with their staff, admitting they overplayed the story.

Fox does that every day. "overplay the story". That's not the same thing as knowingly printing a lie.

What lie did the NYTimes print?

Stay tuned on this too. Wait & see what comes out on the Jan 6 video & see how that aligns with MSNBC's coverage of the Jan 6 committee.

You didn't answer my question. What lie----a lie that the NYTimes KNEW was a lie-----did they print.

If you can't answer that question? You have to admit that what Fox did was unprecedented, and Old Salt should act accordingly.

What was the Fox lie ? I thought the story was about their internal, after the fact, debate, about calling AZ for Biden on election night.

No, that factored into their concern about losing audience to OAN and NEWSMAX due to Trump's ire, and thus their justification in promoting the Big Lie, that there was massive election fraud, including specifically the lies about Dominion voting machines. They promoted those lies again and again and again, while privately admitting they knew these were lies. For the money.

They did NOT question the correctness of the AZ call, just its early call....not because they didn't believe it, but because Trump would be mad.

Put money over truth and accuracy.

All of this is about FoxNews calling the election early…. That is why FoxNews is in hot water….he ain’t this dumb.

[Farfromgeneva]

Who from "the other side" of media has been caught knowingly lying to their viewers for not days, or even weeks...but for years, OS? And to top it off, kept their jobs after getting caught. Got a cite for that?

All the purveyors of the Russia collusion hoax. Even the NYT had a soul searching town hall with their staff, admitting they overplayed the story.

Fox does that every day. "overplay the story". That's not the same thing as knowingly printing a lie.

What lie did the NYTimes print?

Stay tuned on this too. Wait & see what comes out on the Jan 6 video & see how that aligns with MSNBC's coverage of the Jan 6 committee.

You didn't answer my question. What lie----a lie that the NYTimes KNEW was a lie-----did they print.

If you can't answer that question? You have to admit that what Fox did was unprecedented, and Old Salt should act accordingly.

What was the Fox lie ? I thought the story was about their internal, after the fact, debate, about calling AZ for Biden on election night.

No, that factored into their concern about losing audience to OAN and NEWSMAX due to Trump's ire, and thus their justification in promoting the Big Lie, that there was massive election fraud, including specifically the lies about Dominion voting machines. They promoted those lies again and again and again, while privately admitting they knew these were lies. For the money.

They did NOT question the correctness of the AZ call, just its early call....not because they didn't believe it, but because Trump would be mad.

Put money over truth and accuracy.

All of this is about FoxNews calling the election early…. That is why FoxNews is in hot water….he ain’t this dumb.

If one wears the mask long enough...

[dislaxxic]

Hundreds of defense attorneys WISH they could call it a "peaceful tourist visit"...

To sustain his false claims that the January 6 Committee released a biased selection of videos, Tucker Carlson has insinuated that only he and the J6C have had access to the video of the attack.

That’s, of course, false. The defense attorneys have had access to most of the same video to which Tucker has claimed exclusive access. In fact, his claims that Jacob Chansley was unfairly treated is an implicit attack on Albert Watkins, Chansley’s defense attorney during the period he pled guilty to facts Tucker ignored, such as that he ignored an officer’s direction to get out of Mike Pence’s seat or that he “considered it a win” that Members of Congress had to “hunker down, put on their gas masks and retreat into their underground bunker.” (Chansley has since retained William Shipley, an even more partisan attorney, one who has sown partisan nonsense about legal cases going at least as far back as the Mike Flynn case.)

Plus, defense attorneys have had access to far more: the other evidence collected as part of the investigation. In responses to two defendants — Ryan Nichols and Shane Jenkins — attempting to delay their trials so they might review the files Tucker has boasted about accessing, DOJ has laid out the evidence available to defense attorneys (this is the version submitted in the Jenkins case).

Just amazing how habitual lying has become the bread and butter of the current version of the GOP...

..

[Seacoaster(1)]

Hundreds of defense attorneys WISH they could call it a "peaceful tourist visit"...

To sustain his false claims that the January 6 Committee released a biased selection of videos, Tucker Carlson has insinuated that only he and the J6C have had access to the video of the attack.

That’s, of course, false. The defense attorneys have had access to most of the same video to which Tucker has claimed exclusive access. In fact, his claims that Jacob Chansley was unfairly treated is an implicit attack on Albert Watkins, Chansley’s defense attorney during the period he pled guilty to facts Tucker ignored, such as that he ignored an officer’s direction to get out of Mike Pence’s seat or that he “considered it a win” that Members of Congress had to “hunker down, put on their gas masks and retreat into their underground bunker.” (Chansley has since retained William Shipley, an even more partisan attorney, one who has sown partisan nonsense about legal cases going at least as far back as the Mike Flynn case.)

Plus, defense attorneys have had access to far more: the other evidence collected as part of the investigation. In responses to two defendants — Ryan Nichols and Shane Jenkins — attempting to delay their trials so they might review the files Tucker has boasted about accessing, DOJ has laid out the evidence available to defense attorneys (this is the version submitted in the Jenkins case).

Just amazing how habitual lying has become the bread and butter of the current version of the GOP...

..

Does Carlson not think that, by now, with hundreds of cases done and others still coursing through the system, no attorney would have sought this in the course of discovery and receipt of Brady information? Complete bullsh*t. There is no purpose other than burnishing the "lying brand" and keeping then grievance quotient happy, watching, and buying pillows. The Carlson show on January 6 has done almost as much damage as the Dominion lies, but this time in only a single segment.

[MDlaxfan76]

Hundreds of defense attorneys WISH they could call it a "peaceful tourist visit"...

To sustain his false claims that the January 6 Committee released a biased selection of videos, Tucker Carlson has insinuated that only he and the J6C have had access to the video of the attack.

That’s, of course, false. The defense attorneys have had access to most of the same video to which Tucker has claimed exclusive access. In fact, his claims that Jacob Chansley was unfairly treated is an implicit attack on Albert Watkins, Chansley’s defense attorney during the period he pled guilty to facts Tucker ignored, such as that he ignored an officer’s direction to get out of Mike Pence’s seat or that he “considered it a win” that Members of Congress had to “hunker down, put on their gas masks and retreat into their underground bunker.” (Chansley has since retained William Shipley, an even more partisan attorney, one who has sown partisan nonsense about legal cases going at least as far back as the Mike Flynn case.)

Plus, defense attorneys have had access to far more: the other evidence collected as part of the investigation. In responses to two defendants — Ryan Nichols and Shane Jenkins — attempting to delay their trials so they might review the files Tucker has boasted about accessing, DOJ has laid out the evidence available to defense attorneys (this is the version submitted in the Jenkins case).

Just amazing how habitual lying has become the bread and butter of the current version of the GOP...

..

Does Carlson not think that, by now, with hundreds of cases done and others still coursing through the system, no attorney would have sought this in the course of discovery and receipt of Brady information? Complete bullsh*t. There is no purpose other than burnishing the "lying brand" and keeping then grievance quotient happy, watching, and buying pillows. The Carlson show on January 6 has done almost as much damage as the Dominion lies, but this time in only a single segment.

Legal folks:

Sicknick family lawsuit? probably not, right?

Any other liability?

Question, can Dominion's suit be broadened to personally include Carlson, Hannity et al who they now have in writing as the key, knowing actors in the defamation?

Are there other suits in progress? Against My Pillow, Sydney, etc?

Any other plaintiffs have sound causes of action now with this discovery material?