Fox News, Joining The Liberal Fake News...

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    51,072
    113
    Mitchell
    People don’t like having their secrets revealed especially when those secrets reveal something untoward. If their behavior is corrupt enough that it needs to be exposed, it’s not a far stretch to suspect that future behavior could extend to retribution against the whistleblower.

    Of course it’s also reasonable to suspect that the real whistle blown in this case is actually below Schiff’s belt. Could be a genuine whistleblower, but is probably just a partisan **********.

    In today's climate, I'm betting that's a pretty safe bet.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,261
    149
    Columbus, OH
    I don't think that's what Jamil is getting at. The whistleblower shown a light on what he believed was wrongdoing, and an investigation ensued. I haven't seen where it is indicated that the whistleblower's complaint is false. In fact, people have stepped forward, and information uncovered confirming his complaint. One may ultimately think that the information uncovered isn't as bad, or can be interpreted in other ways, but that still does no tweaking the initial complaint. So it begs to ask, if the information in the complaint has already been confirmed (albeit differing interpretations aside), why does the whistleblower need to be identified?

    I believe you are failing to consider this could be another instance of using spurious leaked stories to confirm themselves, as in the Steele dossier. The ploy would be for Vindman to convince Ciaramella to take the [STRIKE]fall[/STRIKE] point on the 'anonymous' complaint about the phone call/supposed QPQ, and then Vindman steps forward to corroborate the story. If that is the case, how many sources do you have again?

    After all the underhanded things unequivocally going on, does the possibility that it is all an organized attempt by the deep state to protect itself and damage or destroy the duly elected President of the United States never occur to you?

    I expect you to have trouble with the source, but perhaps not the facts therein

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...l-work-together-on-u-s-policy-towards-ukraine
    Vindman and whistleblower still work together on US policy toward Ukraine
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    29,110
    113
    North Central
    People don’t like having their secrets revealed especially when those secrets reveal something untoward. If their behavior is corrupt enough that it needs to be exposed, it’s not a far stretch to suspect that future behavior could extend to retribution against the whistleblower.

    Of course it’s also reasonable to suspect that the real whistle blown in this case is actually below Schiff’s belt. Could be a genuine whistleblower, but is probably just a partisan **********.


    If the identity is true, there would be significant reasons to want anonymity...
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,261
    149
    Columbus, OH
    If a whistleblower came forward during the IRS scandal investigation with evidence that Obama was involved in covering up evidence would you want the media to report the whistleblower’s identify?

    I think there’s evidence enough to suspect that this whistleblower is politically motivated, and may have colluded with Schiff before filing the complaint. However, the system which protects whistleblowers should remain in place, and even the media should keep it consistent. If the media would protect the identity of whistleblowers from one side they should do it even when on the other.

    This might make sense, if the NYT hadn't already known who the whistleblower was when they ran the first story about this. If the whistleblower wanted anonymity, why did he consult with Schiff before making the complaint that would secure his legal rights? If you participate in a political hit job using 2nd and 3rd hand [STRIKE]innuendo[/STRIKE] 'information' should you be protected from the consequences of your actions? If a less politically charged whistleblower was to allege waste and fraud in a corporation's execution of a government contract, using 2nd hand information, and be conclusively proven wrong; should he/she/it be protected from the wrath of an employer wrongly accused. I get that you would forstall any chilling effect on a persons willingness to whistleblow, but I don't think that consideration should preclude appropriate punishment when you get everything wrong else you fail to exert any chilling effect on mischief
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    29,110
    113
    North Central
    Rush Limbaugh yesterday discussed the number of complaints he is hearing about FOX news having mostly anti-Trumpers on their analysis of the impeachment proceedings. This dovetails right into the original point of this thread, in a few years they will be virtually indistinguishable from the other lamestream news channels. If they fired their evening opinion talent they would be there now...

    RUSH LIMBAUGH: I can’t tell you the number of people who are complaining to me about Fox and their analysis here. And, folks, all I can tell you is there’s nothing new about that. I’d lower my expectations if I were you. If you’re expecting what Fox used to be, you need to shift your perspective.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Rush Limbaugh yesterday discussed the number of complaints he is hearing about FOX news having mostly anti-Trumpers on their analysis of the impeachment proceedings. This dovetails right into the original point of this thread, in a few years they will be virtually indistinguishable from the other lamestream news channels. If they fired their evening opinion talent they would be there now...

    RUSH LIMBAUGH: I can’t tell you the number of people who are complaining to me about Fox and their analysis here. And, folks, all I can tell you is there’s nothing new about that. I’d lower my expectations if I were you. If you’re expecting what Fox used to be, you need to shift your perspective.

    What makes them anti-trumpers? Seriously, at what point do you start thinking, "Hey, there may be something to this"?
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    94   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,183
    113
    Btown Rural
    I disagree. FNC certainly has it's share of nevertrumpers, but they are not the majority. There are plenty of good hard news anchors without the TDS snark of Bret Bahr, Chris Wallace and Cavuto. As a matter of fact, most of the hard news women anchors are pretty solid.

    The women journalists are the real stars of FNC. They report the news as news, without allowing the pundits to flat out lie, as is done on other networks.

    It's very easy to see why long time watchers are complaining though. The attitude exuding from some of the TDS anchors is hard to miss. Folks that supposedly aren't pundits, like Stirewalt, Napolitano, and formerly Shep Smith seem to sound like CNN "reporters."
     
    Last edited:

    Dead Duck

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    53   0   0
    Apr 1, 2011
    14,062
    113
    .
    What makes them anti-trumpers? Seriously, at what point do you start thinking, "Hey, there may be something to this"?


    You have to be able to see things from a completely neutral standpoint before being able to see any bias going on.
    Can't do it, can you? :):
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    29,110
    113
    North Central
    The conversion is continuing. Yes they still have the wildly popular conservative opinion shows at night, but the infection of liberal bias in their news is growing.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    94   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,183
    113
    Btown Rural
    Besides the fact that they are nearly all we have, I think FNC does a decent job.

    Sure, they have a few nevertrumpers in their hard news staff. Those seem to be going by the wayside though, a little at a time.

    FNC's liberal pundits actually do a pretty good job of representing the other side. You may not care for what they say, but it's their job to say it.
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    29,110
    113
    North Central
    Besides the fact that they are nearly all we have, I think FNC does a decent job.

    Sure, they have a few nevertrumpers in their hard news staff. Those seem to be going by the wayside though, a little at a time.

    FNC's liberal pundits actually do a pretty good job of representing the other side. You may not care for what they say, but it's their job to say it.

    Chris Wallace is a straight news guy and a never Trumper. That should not be a correct sentence if he truly is straight news...
     

    Ingomike

    Top Hand
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    29,110
    113
    North Central
    Do his opinions come out when he is doing the news? I don't watch any of it, so I have no clue.

    He explicitly tells you his opinions on other shows so the viewers know, then he grills administration officials and republicans like a prosecutor and does softball interviews with democrats. He is s a known creature of the swamp, however since the changes in management at Fox he is more like his MSM associates...
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,298
    77
    Porter County
    He explicitly tells you his opinions on other shows so the viewers know, then he grills administration officials and republicans like a prosecutor and does softball interviews with democrats. He is s a known creature of the swamp, however since the changes in management at Fox he is more like his MSM associates...
    Ah. It's been years since I last saw him outside of something posted here.

    It is sad how at least pretending to keep your opinions to yourself has gone out of practice with news critters.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    94   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,183
    113
    Btown Rural
    There are a couple of weekend FNC hard news folks that are nevertumpers also. I just catch up on YouTube when they are on unless there is breaking news on.

    Most of the journalists on FNC think the way we do and know where they eat. There are a small handful that think they are smarter than the audience and happily our controversial president has really brought that out in them.
     
    Last edited:

    Dead Duck

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    53   0   0
    Apr 1, 2011
    14,062
    113
    .
    Every time I see a snarky attitude or a flat out never-Trumper opinion I add their name to my TDS list.
    I know there are more I had forgotten to add but I'll eventually get them on the list.



    Here's just the FOX News people list....
    Chris Wallace
    Shepard Smith
    Bret Baier
    Neil Cavuto


    FOX Affiliates...
    Chris Stirewalt
    Andrew Napolitano

    Sometimes they just can't help themselves. :noway:
     
    Top Bottom