2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[Peter Brown]

According to CNN, "more than 57 million people watched Wednesday’s VP debate across eighteen channels on television. About 37 million people watched the 2016 debate between Pence and Tim Kaine.”

Good news for Pence and Trump since Kamala is the least likable candidate since Hillary Clinton.

[njbill]

That’s exactly what he said. I wrote it down verbatim.

Obviously, my editorialization represents my own opinions.

If you disagree with my interpretation, what do you think he meant?

It was said in reference to a segment that had NOTHING to do with the President.

What are you talking about? Sounds like you didn’t watch it.

He said the country needs new leadership. Who is leading the country right now?

You guys are getting really cranky as November 3 approaches.

[njbill]

That’s exactly what he said. I wrote it down verbatim.

Obviously, my editorialization represents my own opinions.

If you disagree with my interpretation, what do you think he meant?

It was said in reference to a segment that had NOTHING to do with the President.

A Democrat’s interpretation of what Tucker Carlson had to say on anything is akin to asking a mental patient to interpret Orca sounds.

Fox said in court that Tucker's show isn't news. Maroon.

Making the hurdle for Democrats to understand what Tucker says even more impossible than simply a mental patient interpreting Orca sounds...

I'm betting anyone here that foreverlax wasn't aware that this was not the first time this sort of defense had been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC's top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion."

It's called lawyering 101 and it works for both sides. Your attempt to grasp Carlson's lawyers' defense of him is beneath this board's time.

This decision went well beyond the standard “opinion is not libel” legal principle.

The judge didn’t just find that Tucker was expressing his opinion.

What was unusual about this case is that Fox, itself, took the position that so much of what Tucker says is untrue that no reasonable viewer would believe him. I’m not aware that any employer has ever taken a similar position about one of its employees.

https://www.courthousenews.com/nixing-l ... r-carlson/

[wgdsr]

evidently the 2nd debate mod that was lined up... his twitter ask of the mooch was hacked, so says the commission.

there is no way anyone out there can predict what's next. i think trump actually will jump out of a cake down in florida.

would this guy be out of the rotation anyway if there's a debate #2? or would they have pushed mod #3? i'm sure they'll be ironing it out soon, hopefully over zoom.

[Typical Lax Dad]

evidently the 2nd debate mod that was lined up... his twitter ask of the mooch was hacked, so says the commission.

there is no way anyone out there can predict what's next. i think trump actually will jump out of a cake down in florida.

would this guy be out of the rotation anyway if there's a debate #2? or would they have pushed mod #3? i'm sure they'll be ironing it out soon, hopefully over zoom.

[Peter Brown]

evidently the 2nd debate mod that was lined up... his twitter ask of the mooch was hacked, so says the commission.

there is no way anyone out there can predict what's next. i think trump actually will jump out of a cake down in florida.

would this guy be out of the rotation anyway if there's a debate #2? or would they have pushed mod #3? i'm sure they'll be ironing it out soon, hopefully over zoom.

He wasn't hacked.

Steve Scully the moderator for the next debate, deleted a tweet where he appeared to be coordinating with Scaramucci and posted publicly instead of DM. He meant to send a DM.

Our media is beyond repair.

[jhu72]

That’s exactly what he said. I wrote it down verbatim.

Obviously, my editorialization represents my own opinions.

If you disagree with my interpretation, what do you think he meant?

It was said in reference to a segment that had NOTHING to do with the President.

A Democrat’s interpretation of what Tucker Carlson had to say on anything is akin to asking a mental patient to interpret Orca sounds.

Fox said in court that Tucker's show isn't news. Maroon.

Making the hurdle for Democrats to understand what Tucker says even more impossible than simply a mental patient interpreting Orca sounds...

I'm betting anyone here that foreverlax wasn't aware that this was not the first time this sort of defense had been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC's top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion."

It's called lawyering 101 and it works for both sides. Your attempt to grasp Carlson's lawyers' defense of him is beneath this board's time.

This decision went well beyond the standard “opinion is not libel” legal principle.

The judge didn’t just find that Tucker was expressing his opinion.

What was unusual about this case is that Fox, itself, took the position that so much of what Tucker says is untrue that no reasonable viewer would believe him. I’m not aware that any employer has ever taken a similar position about one of its employees.

https://www.courthousenews.com/nixing-l ... r-carlson/

... yup, Faux News' defense was, the non-Faux News world has been right all along.

[Peter Brown]

That’s exactly what he said. I wrote it down verbatim.

Obviously, my editorialization represents my own opinions.

If you disagree with my interpretation, what do you think he meant?

It was said in reference to a segment that had NOTHING to do with the President.

A Democrat’s interpretation of what Tucker Carlson had to say on anything is akin to asking a mental patient to interpret Orca sounds.

Fox said in court that Tucker's show isn't news. Maroon.

Making the hurdle for Democrats to understand what Tucker says even more impossible than simply a mental patient interpreting Orca sounds...

I'm betting anyone here that foreverlax wasn't aware that this was not the first time this sort of defense had been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC's top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion."

It's called lawyering 101 and it works for both sides. Your attempt to grasp Carlson's lawyers' defense of him is beneath this board's time.

This decision went well beyond the standard “opinion is not libel” legal principle.

The judge didn’t just find that Tucker was expressing his opinion.

What was unusual about this case is that Fox, itself, took the position that so much of what Tucker says is untrue that no reasonable viewer would believe him. I’m not aware that any employer has ever taken a similar position about one of its employees.

https://www.courthousenews.com/nixing-l ... r-carlson/

... yup, Faux News' defense was, the non-Faux News world has been right all along.

So much of the most impactful Trump-era “reporting” has been proven fraudulent — Cambridge Analytica, Alfa Bank & the Steele Dossier are just the latest — but media outlets don’t want to know because they profited greatly, sold books, & showered themselves with Pulitzers for it.

Even the Russiagate-friendly NY Times now essentially acknowledges, buried deep in articles, that the Steele Dossier was a fraud. But it goes far beyond that: there was massive abuse of power & disinformation from FBI & CIA as part of the 2016 Russiagate investigation & few care.

[jhu72]

The White House is preparing a $1.8 trillion coronavirus relief offer, its largest proposal to date in the long running negotiations with congressional Democrats, the Wall Street Journal reports.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is expected to discuss a new $1.8 trillion proposal with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi when the two speak Friday.

However, Axios reports that two sources close to Senate leadership said President Trump “is desperate, has zero leverage to push them to support a bill crafted by Pelosi and congressional Republicans aren’t inclined to wrap themselves any tighter to a sinking ship.”

[ggait]

It appears that this news was what set DOPUS off yesterday and got him ranting about needing to indict Obama and Biden and Hillary.

Barr, reportedly, will not deliver a Durham report before election day.

I don't think there's much/anything to fear from Durham, but I am surprised that Barr didn't push it out. Because, well, it is Bill Barr. Perhaps that's a tell that it will be an airball?


https://www.axios.com/barr-durham-repor ... s_politics

[jhu72]

Trump is either surrendering to his electoral fate, or he is really sick. Biden is up 8-14 points in Pennsylvania.

[Peter Brown]

Trump is either surrendering to his electoral fate, or he is really sick. Biden is up 8-14 points in Pennsylvania.

Are you guys going to be okay if/when Trump wins? I really fear for you.

[seacoaster]

https://amp.palmbeachpost.com/amp/58744 ... ssion=true

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://amp.palmbeachpost.com/amp/58744 ... ssion=true

Is that upstate New York?

[holmes435]

https://amp.palmbeachpost.com/amp/58744 ... ssion=true

Is that upstate New York?

Right next to Orange County

[jhu72]

Hallelujah. Maybe some Christians have seen the error of their ways.

[MDlaxfan76]

It appears that this news was what set DOPUS off yesterday and got him ranting about needing to indict Obama and Biden and Hillary.

Barr, reportedly, will not deliver a Durham report before election day.

I don't think there's much/anything to fear from Durham, but I am surprised that Barr didn't push it out. Because, well, it is Bill Barr. Perhaps that's a tell that it will be an airball?


https://www.axios.com/barr-durham-repor ... s_politics

Best guess?
Has Barr read the election leaves and concluded that nothing will save Trump at this point, so time to do some last minute, cosmetic repair to his reputation?

And pushing a report out, breaching all DOJ protocol, that ultimately falls flat, or worse, just isn't worth it?

[RedFromMI]

It appears that this news was what set DOPUS off yesterday and got him ranting about needing to indict Obama and Biden and Hillary.

Barr, reportedly, will not deliver a Durham report before election day.

I don't think there's much/anything to fear from Durham, but I am surprised that Barr didn't push it out. Because, well, it is Bill Barr. Perhaps that's a tell that it will be an airball?


https://www.axios.com/barr-durham-repor ... s_politics

Best guess?
Has Barr read the election leaves and concluded that nothing will save Trump at this point, so time to do some last minute, cosmetic repair to his reputation?

And pushing a report out, breaching all DOJ protocol, that ultimately falls flat, or worse, just isn't worth it?

I think that is only one of the set of reasons. The high profile resignation recently had to hurt - it forces Durham to dot the i's and cross the t's before he could possibly issue any indictments, plus there may not be anything there except something like the guy already charged with modifying documents.

Push something out too fast and loose and the judiciary plus defense counsel will have a field day eviscerating the prosecution.

[wgdsr]

again, to my great surprise, we are once again slaves to polls.

media, supposed prosecution and legislative moves. everybody's on 'em.

they mean everything, they mean nothing. they're dictating everybody's moves.

i have to believe they will help dictate who actually shows up/mails in votes, but we don't get a monte carlo simulation, we only get another one off.

what an election!!!

[6ftstick]

Come On man what could go wrong!

https://gellerreport.com/2020/10/60000- ... inia.html/