Except that auto correct mis-spelled Elly. I mis-spelled the May.Did...did you just use a silly sitcom from the 60s as evidence that a pet raccoon isn’t crazy?
Last edited:
Except that auto correct mis-spelled Elly. I mis-spelled the May.Did...did you just use a silly sitcom from the 60s as evidence that a pet raccoon isn’t crazy?
Cue the businessinsider is fake news and that judge must have been a Clinton appointee who is legislating from the bench posts...Amazing to me that Tucker Carlson has so many viewers and sycophants.
Conmen are popular. News at 11.
Even Fox News knows what he is.
"
Fox News won a court case by 'persuasively' arguing that no 'reasonable viewer' takes Tucker Carlson seriously
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-karen-mcdougal-case-tucker-carlson-2020-9
But Fox News argued that Carlson "cannot be understood to have been stating facts, but instead that he was delivering an opinion using hyperbole for effect," the ruling said.Amazing to me that Tucker Carlson has so many viewers and sycophants.
Conmen are popular. News at 11.
Even Fox News knows what he is.
"
Fox News won a court case by 'persuasively' arguing that no 'reasonable viewer' takes Tucker Carlson seriously
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-karen-mcdougal-case-tucker-carlson-2020-9
Actually I think the judge ruled in favor of Fox and CT. But you are right about the bussinessinsider. Even you recognize that.Cue the businessinsider is fake news and that judge must have been a Clinton appointee who is legislating from the bench posts...
That was faster than expected.But Fox News argued that Carlson "cannot be understood to have been stating facts, but instead that he was delivering an opinion using hyperbole for effect," the ruling said.
US District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil agreed with Fox's premise, adding that the network "persuasively argues" that "given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrivewith an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statements he makes."
Of course a liberal rag would take the facts and twist them around in their headline to mislead their readers. Says Fox argued that CT was delivering an opinion and the judge made the statement that she did. That's her opinion.
I copied from the article that Bio posted. Do you dispute the "facts" contained in the article? The "facts" in the article do not support the headline. That's what liberal rags do.That was faster than expected.
Nope. Just figured someone would call it something like “a liberal rag” my noon. You nailed it faster than I was anticipating.I copied from the article that Bio posted. Do you dispute the "facts" contained in the article?
It is what it is and I've got a few minutes.Nope. Just figured someone would call it something like “a liberal rag” my noon. You nailed it faster than I was anticipating.
And I did edit my post but not before you quoted so just want to give you full opportunity to discredit me.I copied from the article that Bio posted. Do you dispute the "facts" contained in the article? The "facts" in the article do not support the headline. That's what liberal rags do.
Im not discrediting you. Trump trained you well to dismiss anything you don’t agree with as fake news.And I did edit my post but not before you quoted so just want to give you full opportunity to discredit me.
I am just reading the article and what the author wrote. I am not disputing the article itself as I have not and don't chose to go any further in researching it as it is a very insignificant issue to me. What the author writes in his article does not support the headline. He/she is conflating two different statements in their article to come up with a catchy headline for you liberals to get excited about. Like I said............its what liberal rags do. It pays the bills for them.Im not discrediting you. Trump trained you well to dismiss anything you don’t agree with as fake news.
Also, you quoted the ruling. The headline is about what Fox argued. Have you read it’s motion or the transcript of the oral arguments?
I don’t disagree that the headline isn’t perfectly accurate. I disagree that tactic is somehow reserved solely for liberal publications.I am just reading the article and what the author wrote. I am not disputing the article itself as I have not and don't chose to go any further in researching it as it is a very insignificant issue to me. What the author writes in his article does not support the headline. He/she is conflating two different statements in their article to come up with a catchy headline for you liberals to get excited about. Like I said............its what liberal rags do. It pays the bills for them.
What’s funny is I said I didn’t believe or care about the losers suckers story bc it was from anonymous sources. But as usual, facts aren’t really your cup of tea.
But I guess I’m a stupid ass bc you can’t remember what I said so you make whatever you want up. Seems like your brand to make up what others argue, then knock those straw men down. May need to ease up on the bourbon bud.
One quote from that thread from me...
“I said from the very beginning of this story that any story based on anonymous sources isn’t worth paying attention to. I think if your going to make these kind of accusations you have to let Trump challenge the accusers.”
What point are you trying to make here? Businesses hire people based on connections all the time. Most of the emails are from after Biden was VP. And there is not a single thing yet that implicates Joe Biden (the guy running for president) did anything wrong.have you not watched the interview? read the emails? seen the text messages? do you think that any for-profit business would give a shit about the train wreck that is hunter biden if his dad wasn't the 2nd most powerful person in the world?
they published the russian collusion story for 3 yrs despite all 56 witness, under oath, declare there was no evidence of Trump-russia collusion. so they do publish false narrative.Just got tired of dealing with you dumb asses. I stand by what I said about NYT. They don’t purposefully publish false info.
This. There are documented emails from Hunter discussing the Biden cash for influence business deals.yes, except for the computer, emails, and former business partner very publicly distancing himself from the "russian disinformation" claim, we have nothing.
Weird how personal attacks stifle discussions.I’m interested in hearing more from 98 about idiot lawyers.
?Weird how personal attacks stifle discussions.
Bullshit?
paging @BattalionEx, I need a word that means ‘humorous retort to an ironic and unwitting self-deprecating comment’
You’re becoming angry and unhinged. There’s never a well thought out argument anymore, just anger. Reminds me of another former poster. Stay off twitter.?
paging @BattalionEx, I need a word that means ‘humorous retort to an ironic and unwitting self-deprecating comment’
because we care..You’re becoming angry and unhinged. There’s never a well thought out argument anymore, just anger. Reminds me of another former poster. Stay off twitter.
Now that the election is over, the investigation is entering a new phase. Federal prosecutors in Delaware, working with the IRS Criminal Investigation agency and the FBI, are taking overt steps such as issuing subpoenas and seeking interviews, the person with knowledge said.
Activity in the investigation had gone covert in recent months due to Justice Department guidelines prohibiting overt actions that could affect an election, the person said.
OofY’all will believe this no matter what. Blind guy working on computers from people living thousands of miles away who happens to be buddies with the presidents personal idiot lawyer and the computer owners dont ever go retrieve their computers... yeah, all sounds about right. And all published in a tabloid owned by Rupert Murdock.
But whatever. You believe it so you guys can all stroke each other off in your outrage.
LOLJust got tired of dealing with you dumb asses. I stand by what I said about NYT. They don’t purposefully publish false info.
Hmmmmm.........Just got tired of dealing with you dumb asses. I stand by what I said about NYT. They don’t purposefully publish false info.
don’t forget the trump “conspiracy theory” that covid was engineered in a labDamn Trump and his conspiracies....