Faux News Spews; I Need Booze

[Cartmann99]

Looks like those wrestlers are about to undergo a character assassination.

 

 

 

[AmazonGrace]

Locker room talk alert:

 

This sounds like a confession he knew and heard all about it, after saying he knew nothing.

[GreyhoundFan]

"Fox News lets President Trump lie on live television, for hours and hours"

Spoiler

If you’ve tuned in to Fox News on the wrong night in recent weeks, you’ll see President Trump ad-libbing it before a crowd of approving red-hatters in some boisterous arena. It looks like some random night from the early months of the 2016 campaign — complete with the nonsensical and offensive remarks, the slams on the media and so on.

The debate about airing those rallies is pretty much the same, as well. “I am inside the machine looking out and wondering what the hell we’re all doing,” said Vox.com editor at large Ezra Klein in a chat with Brian Stelter on CNN’s “Reliable Sources.” “So I do want to ask the question. One, what are we crowding out when we give these — when we let him decide what we cover every time he does a rally, right? What are we crowding out? What would have happened in another administration?”

The answer to that last question, as always: something far more normal.

Data from Media Matters — a chief critic of Fox News — reflects an imbalance among the top-three cable-news outlets in live coverage of recent Trump rallies:

 

Those dollar-value numbers are based on live rally coverage from April 28 through July 5, with Fox News tallying nearly eight hours, MSNBC eight minutes and CNN zero. What an inversion from two years ago: CNN provided so much live coverage of Trump rallies during the presidential campaign that it took heat for tipping the scales in his favor. The prolific live coverage prompted a mea culpa from CNN Worldwide President Jeff Zucker. “If we made any mistake last year, it’s that we probably did put too many of his campaign rallies in those early months and let them run,” Zucker said at Harvard in fall 2016.

That lesson has quite clearly gotten through to CNN producers, who won’t dare touch these rallies live — though the network, obviously, covers stuff that happens at these gatherings. Fox News has its reasons for the live focus, which the network articulated to the Associated Press: “The president makes news whenever he speaks, and in this nonstop news cycle, there are constant headlines for President Trump to react to.” Before recent rallies, noted Fox News to the AP, Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his retirement, and the president reversed course on the separation of migrant families at the southern border. To broaden the argument, Fox News covers Trump rallies because Trump is the president; what he says matters, even and especially when it’s meandering and repetitious pablum.

For most presidents, such a rationale might just work. In the case of Trump, though, it collapses under the stress of mendacity. The Post’s Fact Checker has observed an intensification of false and misleading claims from the president. As Washington correspondent for the Toronto Star Daniel Dale wrote on June 26: “The frequency of U.S. President Donald Trump’s dishonesty had steadily accelerated since late last year. Then, last week, it skyrocketed.” After just one rally in North Dakota, three PolitiFact researchers spent 1,300 words reviewing eight dubious Trump statements. The New York Times counted 18 inaccurate claims from the Montana rally last week. According to The Post, Trump clocked in with 35 false or misleading claims at a May rally in Nashville.

Poppycock at such a volume is simply too much for live television. It’s impossible to refute all the lies and misstatements as they’re uttered, and no one will stay tuned as anchors and correspondents plow through all the refutations after the fact. For some reason or other though, these considerations don’t appear too troublesome for the prime-time lineup at Fox News.

 

[AmazonGrace]

It may sound like a nutter on infowars but it's a congressperson

 

[AmazonGrace]

Faux interviewing their supreme leader

[JMarie]

"This is a historic day in so many ways.  Disgraced anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok, he was in the hot seat, and tonight we are just finally beginning to expose the biggest corruption, bias, dereliction at some of the highest levels, sadly, of the FBI and Department of Justice.  In other words, everything we have been telling you on this show is true, and the saddest part is that we are only about 15% into this abuse of power and the biggest corruption scandal in history."

And so begins Hannity's latest rambling (live from London!) about Peter Strzok, who Hannity calls incredibly smug, arrogant, and narcissistic 

Several clips of the hearing follow, with Republican congressmen questioning Strzok's emails.  Why don't we have Democrat congressmen question some of Trump's emails (or maybe all of his emails??).  One of the clips was about a text describing the "smell" of Trump support in a Southern Virginia Wall-Mart, so of course Hannity used the phrase "smelly Trump supporters" several times throughout the show.*

Mark Meadows (NC) says that much of what Strzok said "are not supported by evidence, so they could be potentially false testimony." Matt Gaetz (FL) called the hearing a "five hour catbath."  Trey Gowdy (SC) thinks Strzok is "the only person in America who doesn't think he was biased.  He's the only person in America that does not understand who incredibly detrimental those texts are to any kind of serious investigation" (again, let's look at Trump's texts and tweets).

Sara Carter also scored a free trip to London, and of course agreed with everything Hannity said.  Gregg Jarrett also agreed wholeheartedly, and also plugged his new book (because they always have a new book out).

Hannity tells Jim Jordan (UT) the "the lies, the smears against you, um, are obviously a political attack."  By this time I am way too tired to listen to Jordan, but I have no doubt he agrees 100% with whatever Hannity's pushing.

* I swear that if I had a drink every time he said the word smelly, there's no way I'd be able to walk by the end of his show.

key words and phrases: abuse of power, Fusion GPS, deep state, FISA, bleachbit, corruption, dossier, two-tiered justice system

[GreyhoundFan]

"President Trump anoints Fox News state TV"

Spoiler

President Trump’s penchant for diminishing the fourth estate didn’t wither on British soil. “Fake news,” he riffed at various points during a joint news conference with British Prime Minister Theresa May — the better to shout down all the accurate reporting about his unhinged behavior and pronouncements about the United States and its most pivotal allies in the world.

Kristen Welker of NBC News asked the president if his fractious relationship with NATO allies provided the “upper hand” to Russian President Vladimir Putin for the upcoming summit in Helsinki. “See, that’s such dishonest reporting — of course it happens to be NBC, which is possibly worse than CNN,” Trump said. Then he boasted about his exploits with the NATO countries.

The slight aimed at CNN provided a toehold for CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta, who has jostled with the president and his emissaries in the past. He waited for a lull in the proceedings, and this exchange proceeded:

ACOSTA: Mr. President, since you attacked CNN, can I ask you a question?

TRUMP: John Roberts, go ahead.

ACOSTA: Can I ask you a question?

TRUMP: No, no. John Roberts, go ahead. CNN is fake news. I don’t take questions from CNN.

ACOSTA: Take a question …

TRUMP: John Roberts of Fox, let’s go to a real network.

ACOSTA: Well, we’re a real network, too, sir.

Fox News White House correspondent John Roberts then said, “Thank you, Mr. President” — essentially validating the president’s hostile, baseless, authoritarian, gratuitous slam on a group of peers. The group dynamic wasn’t lost on White House-covering veterans in the news media. CNN’s Jake Tapper:

Back in 2009, Tapper pressed then-Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs about its conclusion that Fox News was “not a news organization.” The Erik Wemple Blog has asked Fox News whether it would consider having its White House correspondent insist that the president answers a question for CNN before proceeding with its own question for the president. We are awaiting a response.

At a July 5 meeting of the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA), White House reporters expressed support for just this sort of collective action, especially in the context of White House briefings. “If you’ve asked a question and there’s an immediate redirect, and I get the next question, maybe I say, ‘I appreciate the opportunity but I’d actually like to yield to my colleague,’ ” said outgoing WHCA President Margaret Talev. Others in attendance nodded at the sentiment.

The notion, however, hasn’t quite taken root. Roberts asked a reasonable question about whether U.S.-Russia relations could improve so long as Putin continues occupying Crimea. “I think I’d have a very good relationship with President Putin if we spent time together,” responded Trump, dodging the point. Roberts pressed on the Crimea matter, and Trump responded that Putin wouldn’t have taken this hostile measure if Trump had been in power at the time.

The news conference went on from there. Let the record reflect that it wasn’t just Roberts who looked past Trump’s unacceptable treatment of CNN. Reuters correspondent Jeff Mason and at least one other journalist who asked later questions did as well. Via a Fox News spokeswoman, Roberts issued this statement:

In today’s press conference, I paused while my colleague from CNN went back and forth with President Trump over a question. When it became clear that the president wasn’t going to entertain a question from him, I proceeded with my question, as did my fellow colleagues in the press corps. I know Kristen Welker of NBC. She is honest as the day is long. For the President to call her dishonest is unfair. I also used to work at CNN. There are some fine journalists who work there and risk their lives to report on stories around the world. To issue a blanket condemnation of the network as ‘fake news’ is also unfair.

So Fox News got its opportunity to press the president. Yet it shouldn’t be pleased about the circumstances. What Trump was doing here — dissing CNN in deference to Fox News — was as close as a leader in a proud democracy can come to anointing an outlet state news. And many hours on the Fox News schedule — “Hannity” and “Fox & Friends” chief among them — surely sound and feel as if their funding is coming from the state treasury.

Yet Roberts, Shepard Smith, Bill Hemmer, Bret Baier, Ed Henry and other hosts and reporters on the non-commentary side of Fox News have performed genuine oversight of the Trump administration. Do they want to play any passive, quasi-collusive role in Trump’s attempt to mold an official U.S. news outlet? It’s time for cable-news outlets to put aside their long-macerating tensions and resentments — and face down the bigger threat coming from the White House.

A coda here on Trump telling reporters, “I don’t take questions from CNN.” That’s a lie. On Thursday, he had this exchange:

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN: Thank you, sir. Jeremy Diamond with CNN. How are you?

TRUMP: Hi, Jeremy.

JEREMY DIAMOND: Quick question with regards to Germany and the comments that you made yesterday. Do you feel like given the threats that you made about potentially leaving NATO, about insulting Germany’s sovereignty, it appears, by suggesting that they’re totally controlled by Russia — do you feel like that’s an effective way to conduct diplomacy? And secondly, would you be able to be a little bit more specific about the commitments that you secured today with regards to increasing the financial commitment? Is there an updated timeline? Are there specific countries you could cite? Because a majority of them were already planning to meet that 2 percent threshold by 2024.

TRUMP: No, many of them — in fact, Germany was going to be in the year 2028 or ’30. Yeah, I think it’s a very effective way to deal, but I didn’t deal exactly the way you said. I have great respect for Germany. My father is from Germany. Both of my parents are from the E.U., despite the fact they don’t treat us well on trade.

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[AmazonGrace]

 The symptoms of Lou Dobbs disease include incessant delusions and terminal constipation

[fraurosena]

17 hours ago, JMarie said:

the saddest part is that we are only about 15% into this abuse of power and the biggest corruption scandal in history."

Holy Rufus prancing on velvet cloven hoofs!

For once, Hannity spoke the truth... 

[AmazonGrace]

How was she allowed on air? 

 

[fraurosena]

A pity he didn't have the guts to say this to the presidunce at the time that it happened.

 

[Smoochie]

26 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

A pity he didn't have the guts to say this to the presidunce at the time that it happened.

 

The former VJ from Canada has been Foxified ... so sad ... way to NOT stand up for your colleagues, until it's convenient for you!

[JMarie]

10 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

How was she allowed on air? 

 

She's from the Wall Street Journal -- isn't that fake news???

[Cartmann99]

20 hours ago, JMarie said:

She's from the Wall Street Journal -- isn't that fake news???

The editorial page of the WSJ is full of Trumphumpers, but the rest of the paper is okay. Someone forgot to tell the intern to be sure to get one of the folks from the editorial page, instead of the news part.

Someone at Faux got in big trouble for this.

[Cartmann99]

Hannity is getting a haircut and a manicure for this one. No way is he going to let Putin steal his man away from him:

 

[Cartmann99]

Just a reminder that Kim and Jr. are dating, and she was rumored to be under consideration for a Trump administration job a while back.

 

[Cartmann99]

 

[AmazonGrace]

Wait until Hannity

[AmazonGrace]

Not the best performance but in the top ten, surely? 

[AmazonGrace]

Yeah the Russians might have meddled but on the other hand some voters are brown 

 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[JMarie]

21 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Just a reminder that Kim and Jr. are dating, and she was rumored to be under consideration for a Trump administration job a while back.

 

Anyone else think she might conveniently get pregnant by Junior, therefore enjoying eighteen years of generous child support?  Oh wait, she's 49.  Little chance of "accidental" pregnancy there, and no job in Trump's administration.  So why is she dating him again?

[Smoochie]

3 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Excuse my language, but, what a fucking idiot!

[Destiny]

10 minutes ago, Smoochie said:

Excuse my language, but, what a fucking idiot!

You are free to say fuck all you want around here. Gods know if we weren't, I would have been booted the fuck out of here ages ago. LOL