It's on every news station over here, except for Fox.
- In evidence presented on Monday by Dominion, Murdoch admitted that he knew hosts and guests on Fox News were endorsing lies from then-President Donald Trump, and that he chose not to take action to stop it. For its part, Fox Corp. is arguing that the parent company and its top executives are wrongly being held responsible for reporting on comments made by a sitting president.
only on fox, in fact they wanted their fact checkers fired.the many fact checkers who suddenly went dormant over the last year or so
That is a false equivalency, and a deflection. That's like saying that we know Joe robbed a bank, but look at all the other crooks, they may have robbed a bank too , so Joe is really not that bad. When I was young, network News was a public service, not a profit center, and frankly, then you could trust the news. I agree that each network has its biases, but I think Fox went over the line by lying when they knew it was a lie. And from court filings. that is irrefutable. Plus, the "Proof" of the Big Lie was a woman who time traveled in the wind, or something, and voter fraud was revealed to her. There was no fraud. 60 cases were thrown out of court. But the real proof , and the solution to the mystery of the Sphinx, is in Hunter Biden,s laptop. I feel like I am living in Munich in 1933.Of course you are correct, but CNN msnbc ABC and all the other acronyms are not immune to the same criticism. It's the nature of politics. It's reminds me of the many fact checkers who suddenly went dormant over the last year or so.![]()
That is all I'm trying to understand. Most news sites I visit, read as :but I think Fox went over the line by lying when they knew it was a lie.
sourceIn the heat of the moment, right after Election Day 2020, media magnate Rupert Murdoch knew that the hosts on his prized Fox News Channel were endorsing lies from then-President Donald Trump about election fraud.
I don't know. I just thought when there's a doubt, there may be a possibility.Where is the proof that there was fraud?,
I think you answered all my question. If he admitted it, I'm convinced.Rupert admitted it in court. And, as I said, 60 times lawyers went to court with claims that there was corruption in the election.
Take your COVID mask off your eyes. There is lots of proof. You just have to actually look at it. If you refuse to look at it, then you are believing the lying media who has exhibited no proof. They just repeat the mantra that Trump is lying and we're supposed to believe them.Where is the proof that there was fraud?, There is none.
My first words were "of course you are correct" referring to Fox lieing to their viewers, then I went on to point out other hypocrisy.That is a false equivalency, and a deflection. That's like saying that we know Joe robbed a bank, but look at all the other crooks, they may have robbed a bank too , so Joe is really not that bad. When I was young, network News was a public service, not a profit center, and frankly, then you could trust the news. I agree that each network has its biases, but I think Fox went over the line by lying when they knew it was a lie. And from court filings. that is irrefutable. Plus, the "Proof" of the Big Lie was a woman who time traveled in the wind, or something, and voter fraud was revealed to her. There was no fraud. 60 cases were thrown out of court. But the real proof , and the solution to the mystery of the Sphinx, is in Hunter Biden,s laptop. I feel like I am living in Munich in 1933.
I guess you didn't see the GPS trails or the same person on video going back to the drop box multiple times during the night. OK, we didn't see the ballots he was depositing. Does that mean someone back at the DNC wasn't filling out ballots illegally for him to deposit? How many did he fill out himself? Why was each trip to deposit multiple ballots? Where was he getting the ballots from given the GPS tracking had him going back to the DNC headquarters?2000 Mules is not proof, it's speculation
2000 Mules is not proof, it's speculation, and probably made by a person of a particular political leaning.