Trump picks Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court

It doesn’t. I’m oft to point it out as well. I just don’t have a weird obsession with it like you do.

Not hate-I find them to be equally as disreputable as CNN. I can say those words. You can’t. You can’t call out Fox, but every time you accuse me of being unable to condemn CNN, I have no problem condemning them. Every time you have a chance to condemn Fox, you either tuck tail and run, or just avoid the topic. I know-I’ve tagged you in a few.

As I’ve said before, I have the ability to call out CNN’s bias. You defend Fox’s.

You’re not refuting anything I’ve said-to the contrary, you’re confirming it.

1 Like

Not as far as i’m aware.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-07-10/supreme-court-brett-kavanaugh-doesn-t-give-president-trump-cover

Everybody, look it’s a Mole! lol

Everybody, look it’s a Troll! lol

2 Likes

please show where i “defend” fox news

People act like there’s some unspoken principle that’s broken when one side of the political spectrum acts in such a way as to move forward their vision in the political sphere. It’s utter nonsense. Both Garland’s blocking and the change of rules to allow Gorsuch to be seated were within Constitutional bounds. Why any of you expect that either side will jeopardize it’s ideology to play nice according to an arbitrary code is beyond me

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.