October 27, 20204 yr 39 minutes ago, barho said: We're a week out. Still waiting on this "bombshell". well t.v. ratings are far more important than the truth, so you have to wait until tonight when tucker plays the tapes in prime time.
October 27, 20204 yr 47 minutes ago, barho said: We're a week out. Still waiting on this "bombshell". They are waiting till over half the country have already voted to build suspense.
October 27, 20204 yr Clearly, the only reason Rudy held it for months was that he was checking the material. Or maybe there really was a lot of child porn on it and he's been watching? If there was child porn, you'd think LE might act.
October 27, 20204 yr This is what this "bombshell" looks like in reality: LOL -- Rudy and the Trump team are such weak clowns.
October 27, 20204 yr Quote The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' " "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes." "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable." McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC, No. 1:2019cv11161 - Document 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2019cv11161/527808/39/ I have tried twice to paste this article and half way i get strikethrough.... not sure why. Must be a hidden macro.
October 27, 20204 yr 42 minutes ago, Smokesdawg said: McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC, No. 1:2019cv11161 - Document 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2019cv11161/527808/39/ I have tried twice to paste this article and half way i get strikethrough.... not sure why. Must be a hidden macro. "Nuh uh." Dick Trumpbot
October 27, 20204 yr 44 minutes ago, Smokesdawg said: Quote The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' " "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes." "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable." McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC, No. 1:2019cv11161 - Document 39 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2019cv11161/527808/39/ I have tried twice to paste this article and half way i get strikethrough.... not sure why. Must be a hidden macro. paste as plain text
October 27, 20204 yr Quote Fox News again moved to dismiss. The motion argues that when read in context, Mr. Carlson’s statements "cannot reasonably be interpreted as facts” and that the Amended Complaint fails to allege actual malice.
October 27, 20204 yr On 10/24/2020 at 9:55 PM, Jsvand12 said: Has there ever been a fall from grace as dramatic as Rudy’s? I think I read a post like that a couple of days ago
October 27, 20204 yr 6 hours ago, Alpha_TATEr said: well t.v. ratings are far more important than the truth, so you have to wait until tonight when tucker plays the tapes in prime time. Truth and Tucker should never be in the same sentence
October 27, 20204 yr 1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Is ish real yet? They are waiting for 70 million more people to vote to unleash the real explosive stuff
October 28, 20204 yr Exactly, I was all ready for another four or five pages after a 45 minute interview by Tucker. Well known as one of the hardest hitting interviewers on television. oof.
October 28, 20204 yr 1 minute ago, Toty said: I just wanted throw a hypothetical but plausible scenario out there for you folks to chew on (not taking sides, I have no targ in this hunt). Let's say that there is something to this story AND that the media is doing their best to keep a lid on the worst parts of it until after the election. Then let's say that the facts and rumors as they stand aren't enough to move the electoral needle and Biden goes on to win. Afterward, previously "suppressed" facts make their way to the surface and an investigation ensues. Biden is forced to resign and um, good morning Madame President. To quote Happy Gilmore, "Talk about your all time backfires." Why is it a backfire? I thought we are all under the impression that Harris will be president regardless. Is @Kz! ok? I need more breaking news. We only have 6 days left.
October 28, 20204 yr Author Holy ish, that family is crooked. This was better than expected. More please.
October 28, 20204 yr Author Democrats are threatening to kill him to silence him. That's how damaging this is.
October 28, 20204 yr 2 minutes ago, Kz! said: Holy ish, that family is crooked. This was better than expected. More please. I'm not sure we know enough about Bobulinski's family to make that judgement just yet.
October 28, 20204 yr Democrats then: No man is above the law and anonymous sources and claims without supporting documentation are good enough for impeachment. Democrats now: Ignore these claims against Joe Biden, and emails, texts, recordings, and witness statements are not evidence.
October 28, 20204 yr 1 minute ago, Kz! said: Democrats are threatening to kill him to silence him. That's how damaging this is. Probably Bernie supporters. Those Fers are armed and have no conscience.
October 28, 20204 yr Author 4 minutes ago, Toastrel said: Probably Bernie supporters. Those Fers are armed and have no conscience. Are you still salty about your faceplant in the conservative thread. It'll be OK, man.
Create an account or sign in to comment