Another scumbag politician.

[JoeWeber 2,056]

25 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Really dude, what are you talking about?  Do you have any coherent response to the questions I'm asking?

Legitimate questions and concerns from the left and the right about dominion and the integrity of voting systems are different than Powell's accusations.

Try this: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/18/1157972219/fox-news-election-fraud-claims-vs-what-they-knew

You can try to parse things as you will but the reality is that FOX, by and through it's "Stars", fomented the belief amongst it's viewers that election fraud was rampant and the election was stolen by feeding questions and answers to invited guests they knew were lying. 

[billvon 2,075]

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

Really dude, what are you talking about?  Do you have any coherent response to the questions I'm asking?

Yes.  Look at post 1123 for specific answers to your questions.

Quote

Legitimate questions and concerns from the left and the right about dominion and the integrity of voting systems

. . . are something that FOX did not cover.  We are talking about FOX News lying about Dominion in order to improve their ratings; none of their concerns were legitimate, as revealed by their very own emails and texts.  When a news organization lies deliberately and intentionally in order to harm a private company in an attempt to enrich themselves, it is actually a fairly big deal, and one might expect such an action to result in lawsuits.  That has occurred.

I understand that you are trying to change the subject now to get away from talking about the lawsuit agaist FOX.  Good luck with that.

[Coreece 184]

5 hours ago, billvon said:

Yes.  Look at post 1123 for specific answers to your questions.

Ok, I didn't initially see that post and was replying to 1124.  So let's address that now:

 

7 hours ago, billvon said:

9 hours ago, Coreece said:

Then again, it should be very easy to show me at least one example where they actually lied about it. 

Sure.  Here's three:

Bartiromo: "we talked about the Dominion software. I know that there were voting irregularities."

There were irregularities.  We know that there were glitches in Georgia that Bartiromo mentioned - that's not disputed.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/04/georgia-election-machine-glitch-434065

Quote

"Election officials in Georgia still have no explanation for a technological glitch that created voting problems in two Georgia counties on the morning of Nov. 3"

"State election officials and Dominion acknowledge that there was a problem"

"The counties use voting machines made by Dominion, but the electronic poll books that experienced the glitch were made by KnowInk, a subcontractor to Dominion."

"Dominion also would not say what the problem was or answer questions about what the company did to fix the issue."

So acknowledge that, process it, and then I'll move on to the next one. (Pirro)

 

And In case you missed it, I already posted text of her interview with Powell upthread.  I'll post it again:

Quote

 

Sidney Powell was on Maria Bartiromo show making her claims about dominion and "how we have so much evidence I feel like it's coming in through a firehose,"  lmao.  

Then Bartiromo responds:
"Wow, so Sidney, you feel that you'll be able to prove this.  Do you have the software in possession, do you have the hardware in possession, how will you be able to prove this, Sidney?

Sydney: "Well I got lots of way to prove it, but I'm not gonna tell on national TV what all we have. I just can't do that.

Bartiromo: "Ok, but there's a small time frame here,  the elections are supposed to be certified in early December, do you believe that you can present this to the courts and be successful in just a couple of weeks?"

"And then you just get a load of bullshit from Powell.  "oh well, I don't  say anything I can't prove and the evidence it rolling in faster than I can even process," lmao.

Then Powell goes on making comments about how state officials are receiving substantial sums of money and benefits and million dollar packages for buying this software.

Then Bartiromo basically rolls her eyes and immediately follows up with "which government official accepted hundreds of millions of dollars in benefits for their family as they took on this software?

Powell: "If I said hundreds of million of dollars, I misspoke.  we're still collecting the evidence but it's more than one."

Then Bartiromo quickly dismisses it  "Ok, so you can't say who you believe took kickbacks"

 

Where did Bartiromo lie?

[Coreece 184]

7 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Try this: https://www.npr.org/2023/02/18/1157972219/fox-news-election-fraud-claims-vs-what-they-knew

Doesn't it raise questions in your mind why they won't post the full interviews, which really aren't that long?

I mean this is a lawyer for the sitting President of the United States at that time who filed actual lawsuits for voter fraud and somehow it's inappropriate to bring her on national TV and question what evidence she has to support her claims and how she's going to prove it before the election results are certified?  I mean whether she was telling the truth or not, it's national news no matter how you slice and dice it, and the people needed to hear it.

I'm glad they brought her on, so now we have a record of how Powel was lying through her teeth, unless of course she was somehow persuaded not to go through with it and expose the greatest fraud in American history?

I mean Trump and his lawyers need to be held accountable for this, not Fox News.

And I just checked, apparently she's not being disbarred.  How can that be?  It's just not adding up.

Edited February 26 by Coreece

[JoeWeber 2,056]

5 hours ago, Coreece said:

Doesn't it raise questions in your mind why they won't post the full interviews, which really aren't that long?

Not really, but then I was also not one of those kids who checked under the bed or feared the closet.

[kallend 1,488]

6 hours ago, Coreece said:

. . . .

Squirming doesn't become you.

[wmw999 1,866]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Not really, but then I was also not one of those kids who checked under the bed or feared the closet.

I was in seventh grade. And I still look at the wording of Fox and other polarizing newsy organizations to see what they’re slanting. No one can tell ALL the news, one has to select what’s important. And that varies by outlet. Otherwise we’d all be reading Tiger Beat and getting our news from dz.com

Of course, I never watch local/network news, either — it’s full of stories designed to scare you (which attracts viewership). Remember every company’s first priority is making money to serve their investors. A little honesty is only a lagniappe

Wendy P. 

[jakee 1,092]

17 hours ago, Coreece said:

Then again, it should be very easy to show me at least one example where they actually lied about it.  Maybe Lou Dobbs said something?  Not sure. I just know that Fox fired him and canceled his show.  

Yes, Lou Dobbs said something. Several times. Maybe you should look into that before getting too indignant? You’ve spent enough time figuring out what Carlson did or didn’t say, but he’s not even a party to the suit. Dobbs is one of only 3 hosts named by Dominion, but you’re convinced Fox are in the clear even though you’ve no idea what he said?

BTW, yes they did cancel his show. The day after the suit was filed. I don’t know what that tells you, but what it tells me is not good for Fox.

[SkyDekker 993]

21 hours ago, Coreece said:

Then again, it should be very easy to show me at least one example where they actually lied about it.

Do you have to explicitly lie to lie about something? There are lots of ways to introduce innuendo, doubt, imply etc without making specific statements. The infamous "When did you stop beating your wife?" type of questions and comments etc.

 

[billvon 2,075]

17 hours ago, Coreece said:

Where did Bartiromo lie?

When she said that Dominion software was linked to the voting irregularities.

Quote

Doesn't it raise questions in your mind why they won't post the full interviews, which really aren't that long?

Not at all.  News today focuses on five to ten second sound bites.  If they are longer, people tune out.  You can always get the longer interview if you want it.

Quote

And I just checked, apparently she's not being disbarred.  How can that be?  It's just not adding up.

The Chewbacca Defense!  Love it!

You're sort of rolling out all the tropes here.

[Coreece 184]

9 hours ago, jakee said:

You’ve spent enough time figuring out what Carlson did or didn’t say, but he’s not even a party to the suit. Dobbs is one of only 3 hosts named by Dominion, but you’re convinced Fox are in the clear even though you’ve no idea what he said?

It really wasn't that hard to find Tucker calling her out for not having any evidence.  An no, I wasn't fully convinced that Fox was in the clear, which is why I was asking questions.  Who knew that Lou Dobbs was even a thing anymore?  Then it's like oh, well he got fired, wonder what that's about?  But the stuff I saw at that point was just as vague as everything else.  Even Weber posted a link that listed just one question that he asked regarding the ability of these voting systems to be hacked.

But ya, I should've just looked at the original complaints.  One that I saw was just an incomplete redacted mess that was difficult to parse, but I found another one that gives  everything that I was looking/asking for.  It gives a list of exhibits, dates, screenshots, tweets, and complete transcripts in full context.

And yes, Carlson is named at least 67 times and listed in several of the exhibits:

"Fox repeatedly published defamatory falsehoods about Dominion, including by broadcasting and rebroadcasting the defamatory falsehoods of its on-air personalities Maria Bartiromo, Tucker Carlson, Lou Dobbs, Sean Hannity,
Jeanine Pirro, and their chosen guests. . ."

Full Complaint: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint

Fox News Reply: https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Fox-Reply-Dominion.pdf

Thanks for nothing guys

[Coreece 184]

45 minutes ago, billvon said:

Quote

Doesn't it raise questions in your mind why they won't post the full interviews, which really aren't that long?

Not at all. 

Of course not, selective quoting and bad faith are your specialty.

[billvon 2,075]

2 hours ago, Coreece said:

Of course not, selective quoting and bad faith are your specialty.

Do you really not understand how the media works?

No wonder you fall prey to their tricks. 

[jakee 1,092]

6 hours ago, Coreece said:

It really wasn't that hard to find Tucker calling her out for not having any evidence.  An no, I wasn't fully convinced that Fox was in the clear, which is why I was asking questions.  Who knew that Lou Dobbs was even a thing anymore?  Then it's like oh, well he got fired, wonder what that's about? 

Lou Dobbs Hits 40 Consecutive Months As Most-Watched Cable Business Host

 

So again, do you not think you should find out what he said before being so adamant that he’s not important here?

[jakee 1,092]

On 2/26/2023 at 7:42 AM, Coreece said:

I mean this is a lawyer for the sitting President of the United States at that time who filed actual lawsuits for voter fraud and somehow it's inappropriate to bring her on national TV and question what evidence she has to support her claims and how she's going to prove it before the election results are certified?  I mean whether she was telling the truth or not, it's national news no matter how you slice and dice it, and the people needed to hear it.

You can tell people about what someone is saying without giving them a platform to say it.

Anyway, how many times did Fox bring her on TV? How many times did they bring her on again after one of their hosts called her out for lack of evidence? How many times did they bring one of the President elect’s representatives on to national TV to counter her (or any of Fox’s other) allegations that the election was rigged?

[kallend 1,488]

3 hours ago, jakee said:

You can tell people about what someone is saying without giving them a platform to say it.

Anyway, how many times did Fox bring her on TV? How many times did they bring her on again after one of their hosts called her out for lack of evidence? How many times did they bring one of the President elect’s representatives on to national TV to counter her (or any of Fox’s other) allegations that the election was rigged?

Are you requesting actual facts in an argument with Coreeeeece?

That's not the way it works.

[billvon 2,075]

Yes, a state representative actually said this.

"In the case where child abuse is fatal, obviously it’s not good for the child. But it’s actually a benefit to society because there aren’t needs for government services and whatnot over the whole course of that child’s life."

Interesting that that only applies AFTER it has been born.

[SkyDekker 993]

20 hours ago, Coreece said:

It really wasn't that hard to find Tucker calling her out for not having any evidence.  An no, I wasn't fully convinced that Fox was in the clear, which is why I was asking questions.  Who knew that Lou Dobbs was even a thing anymore?  Then it's like oh, well he got fired, wonder what that's about?  But the stuff I saw at that point was just as vague as everything else.  Even Weber posted a link that listed just one question that he asked regarding the ability of these voting systems to be hacked.

But ya, I should've just looked at the original complaints.  One that I saw was just an incomplete redacted mess that was difficult to parse, but I found another one that gives  everything that I was looking/asking for.  It gives a list of exhibits, dates, screenshots, tweets, and complete transcripts in full context.

And yes, Carlson is named at least 67 times and listed in several of the exhibits:

"Fox repeatedly published defamatory falsehoods about Dominion, including by broadcasting and rebroadcasting the defamatory falsehoods of its on-air personalities Maria Bartiromo, Tucker Carlson, Lou Dobbs, Sean Hannity,
Jeanine Pirro, and their chosen guests. . ."

Full Complaint: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint

Fox News Reply: https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Fox-Reply-Dominion.pdf

Thanks for nothing guys

Would it help if the owner of Fox News admitted in a sworn deposition that their hosts endorsed the narrative of a stolen election?

 

Trying to locate the source document, the attached are snippets taken from Twitter.

 

[ryoder 1,178]

5 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Would it help if the owner of Fox News admitted in a sworn deposition that their hosts endorsed the narrative of a stolen election?

 

Trying to locate the source document, the attached are snippets taken from Twitter.

 

I don't think this post came out as intended.

[kallend 1,488]

44 minutes ago, ryoder said:

I don't think this post came out as intended.

 

I don't know about that.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2023/02/27/rupert-murdoch-testimony-fox-dominion/

Rupert Murdoch admitted some Fox News commentators ‘endorsed’ election lies, deposition reveals Testifying in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit brought by a voting technology company, the billionaire media mogul acknowledged that conservative hosts Jeanine Pirro, Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity endorsed claims of a stolen election

[kallend 1,488]

I expect a sematics argument from Coreeeece now about how endorsing a lie is not the same as lying.

[billvon 2,075]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

I expect a sematics argument from Coreeeece now about how endorsing a lie is not the same as lying.

Yep.  For the next few months we will be treated to some fine wordsmithing indeed.  "Well, wasn't REALLY a lie.  It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

[SkyDekker 993]

2 hours ago, ryoder said:

I don't think this post came out as intended.

Why do you think that?

[ryoder 1,178]

31 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Why do you think that?

You reference attachments, but there are only the words "Image".

[wolfriverjoe 1,181]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

I expect a semantics argument from Coreeeece now about how endorsing a lie is not the same as lying.

And that just because they were hosts on a show on Fox, that it wasn't Fox's position or opinion.
Note: It was multiple hosts on multiple shows. 
And NONE of the other shows presented a view that the election was not fraudulent.

So much for 'fair & balanced'.

31 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Why do you think that?

I was wondering the same thing.