Weren’t people peddling this nonsense re: Obama? It’s eerie how similar the two sides are without realizing it.
Which actually makes things easier when democrats regain power (or run) again. No more releasing tax returns. No more divesting. Simple majorities for more stuff. Holding up SC nominations. Publicly cozying up to Iran/whomever. Picking winners and losers in the free market. Slamming Americans and companies on Twitter.
Democrats are watching and learning. We’re not going back to a presidential President.
I disagree with the sentiment that “Garland’s blocking” was in constitutional bounds. The constitution calls for the Senate (as a body) to either confirm or reject a Presidential nominee, please show me where the Senate voted on Garland’s nomination?
The Senate, not the Senate Majority leadership making a unilateral decision to to move forward and to leave the seat vacant for over a year.
(NOTE: I have no problem if the Senate had voted to reject Garland, but they never got the chance to fulfill their constitutional duty because of McConnell’s dereliction of duty.)
.>>>>
1 Like
Another “Corporations are people” clown.
I certainly dont expect them too. But I will call them out when they preach these “codes” when an opponent holds the power and disregards them when they hold the power.
Let’s start here:
“foxnews” isnt even mentioned in the op
start somewhere else…
Stop trolling.
That entire thread is you defending a Fox host from Hogg. You don’t have to say the word “Fox” for that to be the case.
I don’t think I’ve EVER seen you condemn Fox. You say you do and have and will. And you’ve had opportunities. But you balked.
You find Fox to be fair, balanced, objective, and truthful and you can not bring yourself to condemn them. You simply will not do it. You always find a reason to refuse.
yes thanks - fox news host. not “foxnews”
you have no idea how i “find” foxnews. for all you know i hate them. its my choice to call out cnn because so many still astoundingly believe they are objective, given their history, legacy…
if you want to bash fox news have at it. when you do and i defend them against your bashing, or anyone’s then you can point out my defense of them
until then all youre doing is making an issue out of nothing, that i dont also call out what YOU hate
too damn bad. call them out yourself : )
Same thing. Doesn’t matter whether it’s her or Sean or anyone else at Fox-you’d be defending it because FOX.
Yes I do know. Your absolute refusal to EVER condemn them for ANYTHING is all that needs to be stated.
I have done so in the past, and you absolutely refused to comment or engage. That told me all I needed to know about where you stand with Fox and objectivity in the news. You don’t care. You just care about right v left, and my guy v their guy. It’s not about facts with you. It’s about partisanship. Always has been.
Stop pretending you care about fake news, or truth in news, or objectivity, or media bias, then. You don’t care about those things.
As I said before, it’s not about media bias. You only care about holding one “Faction” to account for their bias. The sooner you admit that, the sooner we can all move on. So please, go for it.
geez. these are all your unfounded opinions
youre trying to make a case using the lack of evidence as evidence
and you know how well that does NOT work
Those weren’t opinions.
Your refusal to EVER engage in calling out Fox News’ bias, and your ONLY ever engaging in calling out CNN and left-wing media bias, demonstrates your lack of concern for ALL media bias. It’s not about media bias to you. It’s about left-wing media bias. Just have the integrity to admit that.
that does not demonstrate that. you just think it does and expect it to
you ll need proof. which you wont find
Get on board? I’d rather shove an ice pick in my eye.
I won’t find proof of you holding Fox to the same standard you hold CNN. You are absolutely right-I won’t find that because it doesn’t exist.
you changed your argument, which was that i “defend fox news,” presumably against accusations of bias
you cite no instance of such
you have no idea what standard i hold fox news to.
just because i criticize CNN doesnt mean i have to lay out what i think about other networks.
nor does it prove what i think about other networks
No, the Hogg thread is all that’s needed to prove your fealty to Fox. I didn’t change anything. You whine incessantly about CNN’s media bias, but you don’t care about anyone else’s bias…just what you perceive to be the bias from the left.
Yes I do.
You roundly refuse to condemn Fox. EVER. Can you show a SINGLE post on this new forum of you condemning Fox for anything at all? On the old forum, you refused to. I gave the opportunities. You wagged your finger and said “this thread isn’t about Fox” and you did so on multiple occasions.
I can not cite a single example of you condemning Fox. You don’t even do it now.
Enough of the lies. You don’t condemn Fox. You’ve had a plethora of opportunities over the years, and you refuse to do so. You deflect, cry that “this thread isn’t about Fox” and then refuse to participate in threads about Fox’s bias.
If you’re unwilling to acknowledge the bias from other biased media outlets, then we know exactly where you stand about other networks. You don’t even have to say it. The proof is in the pudding.
sorry. you cant conclude what my position is if i refuse your demands to express a position
thats the kind of crap CNN does
Yes, your refusal to EVER condemn them, and you being afflicted with CNN Derangement Syndrome, demonstrates your position. It LITERALLY does that very thing.
ha good grief
there are many things i haven’t condemned. does that prove my position on them too.
(in acosta’s voice)
“if you dont overtly condemn it, you support it!”
(this actually is acosta’s voice):
“mr president will you stop calling the press the enemy of the people?!”
