Why You Need Trusted News Sources

Recommended Posts


Facebook bans QAnon across its platforms

Key Points
  • Facebook said Tuesday that it is banning all QAnon accounts from its platforms, a significant escalation over its previous action and one of the broadest rules the social media giant has put in place in its history.
  • Facebook said the change is an update on the policy it created in August that initially only removed QAnon accounts that discussed violence, which resulted in the termination of 1,500 pages, groups and profiles.
  • A company spokesperson said the enforcement, which started Tuesday, will “bring to parity what we’ve been doing on other pieces of policy with regard to militarized social movements,” such as militia and terror groups that repeatedly call for violence.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 832
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I’m not defending Trump or his policies, but at least the Potus has open access by the press...he may answer, he may ignore them, he may tell the to F off, but at least he has the guts to be in front

Now we all have to quit quoting him so we never have to see a post from him.

The only Rock I see here is the heads of the people that think a single news source provides anything but biased reporting. most of the american news outlets are owned by a single company with a

Posted Images

So many details about this story are fishy.  Hopefully law enforcement will track down the truth.



Feds examining whether alleged Hunter Biden emails are linked to a foreign intel operation

Federal investigators are examining whether the emails allegedly describing activities by Joe Biden and his son Hunter and found on a laptop at a Delaware repair shop are linked to a foreign intelligence operation, two people familiar with the matter told NBC News.

The FBI seized the laptop and a hard drive through a grand jury subpoena. The subpoena was later published by the New York Post. The bureau has declined to comment.

The Post, a conservative tabloid, has published a series of stories based on emails the newspaper said it obtained from President Donald Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani. The first story highlighted what it called a “smoking gun email” that suggested a meeting between Vice President Biden and a representative of a Ukrainian company that once paid Hunter Biden. The Biden campaign says there is no evidence the meeting happened, and the story was greeted with widespread skepticism.

George Mesires, attorney for Hunter Biden, said in a statement, “We have no idea where this came from, and certainly cannot credit anything that Rudy Giuliani provided to the New York Post, but what I do know for certain is that this purported meeting never happened.”

“The New York Post never asked the Biden campaign about the critical elements of this story,” said Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates. “They certainly never raised that Rudy Giuliani — whose discredited conspiracy theories and alliance with figures connected to Russian intelligence have been widely reported — claimed to have such materials.”

Bates added, “We have reviewed Joe Biden’s official schedules from the time and no meeting, as alleged by the New York Post, ever took place.”

Questions have swirled around the Post’s account of how it obtained the emails and other materials. The newspaper said they were found on a laptop left in a Delaware repair shop in April 2019 and never claimed. The repair shop owner then took it upon himself to access the private material, the Post said.


The Post said the shop owner, who has been identified as Mac Isaac, called the FBI, and also called a Giuliani associate. The shop owner said he believed the laptop was among equipment left by Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, because a sticker on the laptop bore the name of the Beau Biden Foundation, a charity named after his late brother.

“Before turning over the gear, the shop owner says, he made a copy of the hard drive and later gave it to former Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer, Robert Costello,” the Post said. “Steve Bannon, former adviser to President Trump, told The Post about the existence of the hard drive in late September and Giuliani provided The Post with a copy of it on Sunday.”

It remains unclear whether the emails cited by the Post are authentic or have been doctored.

Giuliani, who acknowledged helping bring the material to light, has in the past sought to unearth information damaging to Biden with the help of a man identified by the U.S. government as a Russian intelligence officer.

Questions about the provenance of the emails have led Facebook and Twitter to limit sharing of the story, prompting fierce criticism from Republicans.

In an interview published by the Daily Beast, Issac, the repair shop owner, did not answer key questions.

“Throughout the interview, Mac Isaac switched back and forth from saying he reached out to law enforcement after viewing the files in the laptop to saying that it was actually the FBI that contacted him,” the Beast wrote. NBC News has reached out to Isaac but has not heard back.

The Post published a grand jury subpoena for the laptop and hard drive. The subpoena had been issued by a federal prosecutor who already had the serial numbers of the devices when they were ordered to be handed over in early December 2019, indicating federal law enforcement was aware of the specific devices they want to examine.

“Other material extracted from the computer,” the Post said, “includes a raunchy, 12-minute video that appears to show Hunter, who’s admitted struggling with addiction problems, smoking crack while engaged in a sex act with an unidentified woman, as well as numerous other sexually explicit images.”

Many commentators have said it is hard to believe that Hunter Biden would abandon a Mac laptop full of incriminating information at a repair shop.

Some have speculated that the material could have been hacked from Hunter Biden’s accounts and put on the laptop as a cover story to offer a plausible explanation of how the material became public.

In January, Burisma’s networks were breached by Russian hackers, according to cybersecurity experts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JDunkin said:

The Russians are smart. You put a few truths in there for some credibility and then put in the big lie that gets all the coverage. Their enablers like you peddle the intentional lies for their agenda and gullible victimes are influenced.

You are right, the Russians are smart!

They have been controlling/playing trump and his boys for a long time.

The FBI even briefed him on it and he ignored it.


White House was warned Giuliani was target of Russian intelligence operation to feed misinformation to Trump

U.S. intelligence agencies warned the White House last year that President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani was the target of an influence operation by Russian intelligence, according to four former officials familiar with the matter.


The warnings were based on multiple sources, including intercepted communications, that showed Giuliani was interacting with people tied to Russian intelligence during a December 2019 trip to Ukraine, where he was gathering information that he thought would expose corrupt acts by former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

The intelligence raised concerns that Giuliani was being used to feed Russian misinformation to the president, the former officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information and conversations.

The warnings to the White House, which have not previously been reported, led national security adviser Robert O’Brien to caution Trump in a private conversation that any information Giuliani brought back from Ukraine should be considered contaminated by Russia, one of the former officials said.

The message was, “Do what you want to do, but your friend Rudy has been worked by Russian assets in Ukraine,” this person said. Officials wanted “to protect the president from coming out and saying something stupid,” particularly since he was facing impeachment over his own efforts to strong-arm Ukraine’s president into investigating the Bidens.

But O’Brien emerged from the meeting uncertain whether he had gotten through to the president. Trump had “shrugged his shoulders” at O’Brien’s warning, the former official said, and dismissed concern about his lawyer’s activities by saying, “That’s Rudy.”

Giuliani visited the White House on Dec. 13, shortly after the House Judiciary Committee voted to proceed with articles of impeachment, and he met with Trump at the president’s resort in Florida eight days later.

Officials’ warnings about Giuliani underscore the concern in the U.S. intelligence community that Russia not only is seeking to reprise the disinformation campaign it waged in 2016, but also may now be aided, unwittingly or otherwise, by individuals close to the president. Those warnings have gained fresh urgency in recent days. The information that Giuliani sought in Ukraine is similar to what is contained in emails and other correspondence published this week by the New York Post, which the paper said came from the laptop of Hunter Biden and were provided by Giuliani and Stephen K. Bannon, Trump’s former top political adviser at the White House.

The Washington Post was unable to verify the authenticity of the alleged communications, which concern Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and China.

The former officials said Giuliani was not a target of U.S. surveillance while in Ukraine but was dealing with suspected Russian assets who were, leading to the capture of some of his communications.

Giuliani was interested in acquiring information from his foreign contacts about Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company where Hunter Biden held a board seat, as well as Biden’s activities in Ukraine, China and Romania, two former officials said. Giuliani’s eagerness was so pronounced “that everybody [in the intelligence community who knew about it] was talking about how hard it was going to be to try to get him to stop, to take seriously the idea that he was being used as a conduit for misinformation,” one former official said.

Earlier in 2019, U.S. intelligence also had warned in written materials sent to the White House that Giuliani, in his drive for information about the Bidens, was communicating with Russian assets.

Several senior administration officials “all had a common understanding” that Giuliani was being targeted by the Russians, said the former official who recounted O’Brien’s intervention. That group included Attorney General William P. Barr, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray and White Counsel Pat Cipollone.

Spokespersons for the FBI and the Justice Department declined to comment. A spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence referred inquiries to the White House.

“National Security Advisor O’Brien and White House Counsel Cipollone meet with the President frequently on a variety of matters. Ambassador O’Brien does not comment on sensitive intelligence topics, or on the advice he provides President Trump,” National Security Council spokesman John Ullyot said in a written statement. The national security adviser “can say that the President always treats such briefings with the utmost seriousness. The characterization of the meeting as described in this article is not accurate.”

In a text message on Thursday, Giuliani said that he was never informed that Andriy Derkach, a pro-Russian lawmaker in Ukraine whom he met on Dec. 5 in Kyiv, was a Russian intelligence asset. Giuliani said he “only had secondary information and I was not considering him a witness.” But Giuliani met again with Derkach in New York two months later, hosting him on his podcast, and he has promoted Derkach’s unsubstantiated claims about the Bidens, describing Derkach as “very helpful.”

In September, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned Derkach for allegedly running an “influence campaign” against Joe Biden, calling the Ukrainian “an active Russian agent for over a decade” who has maintained “close connections with Russian intelligence services.”

In August, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence publicly described Derkach as part of a Russian effort to interfere with the 2020 election by smearing Biden. The office of the DNI accused Derkach of “spreading claims about corruption — including through publicizing leaked phone calls — to undermine” Biden and the Democrats.

For some officials, Trump’s willingness to meet with Giuliani despite warnings about Russian influence smacked of the collusion allegations that dogged the president after the 2016 election. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III said he did not find evidence to substantiate a criminal charge of conspiracy against anyone in the Trump campaign. But his investigation documented numerous instances in which Trump associates knowingly sought damaging information from Russian individuals and their proxies about Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential candidate.

Giuliani was not shy about his pursuit of information that might damage Biden, taking a documentary film crew from the right-wing One America News to Ukraine in December when he met with Derkach. At the time, Giuliani claimed that Trump had directed him to share his findings with the Justice Department and Senate Republicans.

Officials’ fears about what Giuliani might tell the president were compounded by Trump’s generally furious reaction to negative intelligence about Russia and its efforts to influence U.S. politics.

“Whenever you talk to the president, no matter what your facts are, if you mention Russia, that’s it — you’ve hit the third rail,” one of the former officials said. Trump has called Russia’s documented campaign of election interference a “hoax” that was drummed up to challenge the legitimacy of his election and undermine his administration.

Trump has relied for years on Giuliani’s counsel. But in recent months, as the president has found himself behind in the polls, the former New York mayor has become an even closer confidant, aides and officials said. Giuliani has visited the White House for debate preparations, given the president tips on his response to the coronavirus pandemic, promoted the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for covid-19 and discussed what political events and rallies he thinks the president should hold.

Giuliani also was a major source of information during the impeachment, when Trump tried to rebut allegations of abuse of power by airing false allegations that Biden, while serving as vice president, had pressed for the removal of a Ukrainian prosecutor to spare his son from being investigated.

During his impeachment trial in the Senate, Trump denied sending Giuliani to Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden, who was then a contender for the Democratic presidential nomination. But after his acquittal, Trump reversed himself, acknowledging in a podcast interview with Geraldo Rivera that he had directed Giuliani to go to Ukraine.

“So when you tell me, why did I use Rudy, and one of the things about Rudy, number one, he was the best prosecutor, you know, one of the best prosecutors, and the best mayor,” Trump said. “But also, other presidents had them. FDR had a lawyer who was practically, you know, was totally involved with government. Eisenhower had a lawyer. They all had lawyers.”

Months earlier, Trump also had told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he should meet with Giuliani.

“Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you,” Trump told Zelensky in a phone call on July 25, 2019, according to a partial transcript released by the White House. “I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great.”

That phone call was the centerpiece of the impeachment case against the president.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JDunkin said:

Hillary is now known to have been the one who started the phony Russia investigation and colluded with Russia via Christopher Steele.

Bottom line, it looks like the Russkies have done us a huge favor by hacking Biden's computer and now revealing the criminal enterprise that the Biden's are. What a surprise after the frauds assured us that the trump family was the criminal enterprise. It will be interesting to see if Hunter's sex video is released to prove some authenticity. Unlike the supposed one of Trump at that hotel in Moscow(which was supposedly of them peeing on a bed that Obama had slept in, if you believe that silliness).

By the way, one need only look at NYC to see the difference between having one of the best mayor's ever(was known as America's Mayor) as compared to the left wing incompetence of de Blasio who has defunded the police resulting in a massive crime increase, encourage behavior that led to the massive deaths from the virus, and is bankrupting the city. It is the left wing thought process.

Vote based policy, ignore the frauds.

Wait for the investigation of the hard drive to be completed.  The biggest problem with Rudi's hard-drive story is the chain of evidence is sketchy as can be, and they have no meta-data on any of the contents.  Also very sketchy.

It will probably be as legitimate as Barr's investigation into 'Obamagate'.


The federal prosecutor Attorney General Bill Barr tapped to investigate whether Obama administration officials improperly requested the unmasking of individuals during the 2016 election has concluded his probe without “finding any substantive wrongdoing,” The Washington Post reported Tuesday

According to the Post, Bash and his team reviewed unmasking practices as well as whether officials at the time improperly leaked information to reporters. Bash reportedly turned over his findings to Barr, whose office chose not to publicly release them. The findings did not rise to the allegations Trump and his allies have made about wrongdoing, according to the report.


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JDunkin said:

Well, I suggest that the sex videos be released to prove that it is legit. Then we can read the rest of the emails.

Are you that desperate too?  There is help for the incel movement you know.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fox News isn't really news.  There is the lawsuit I mentioned the other day where their own lawyers said their content shouldn't be believed, and there's this...


“Everything should calm down a little bit in seven months,” they said.

It was 9 February 2016, when I began my career as a critic of Fox News at Media Matters for America, a not-for-profit progressive research center dedicated to monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the US media.

Most people, eventually including Donald Trump, assumed Hillary Clinton would be elected the 45th president of the United States that November. Most people were wrong about a lot of things.


Nearly four years later, the US political world revolves around the tweets of an erratic Fox News-watching grandpa who just so happens to run the most powerful country on Earth. Like any avid TV viewer, Trump has his favorite stories, and few rival the morning show Fox & Friends, where he spent years making frequent appearances before diving into politics.

Since July 2018, I’ve been one among a lucky few live-tweeting the show along with the president. And after consuming thousands of hours of Rupert Murdoch’s finest drivel, I’ve learned a few things about how America’s No 1 news network is dragging the United States into ruin.

At Fox News, opinion is king – not news

Fox & Friends’ main hosts – Steve Doocy, Ainsley Earhardt and Brian Kilmeade – are a consistent train wreck of shameless hackery, even managing to turn a report about Trump’s $1bn in business losses into a glowing endorsement of his bold, wealthy brilliance.


Officially, Fox & Friends is an opinion show, but the ostensibly separate news side – which also lies daily – pops up a lot.

Ed Henry’s role in the news division is chief national correspondent, but in the opinion division he’s a co-host of the weekend edition of Fox & Friends and occasional guest host of the main weekday show – on which he once led a segment asking whether climate change and “extreme weather” were the same thing (they are not).

Recently, the chief national correspondent reported that the CIA whistleblower had a political bias against Trump; Henry reported this not on one of Fox’s “news” shows, but with the pro-Trump propagandist Sean Hannity.

Later, while guest-hosting Fox & Friends, Henry discussed how “important” it was that his reporting on Hannity was helping Trump distract people from the impeachment inquiry.


Henry’s fellow correspondent Griff Jenkins also sometimes co-hosts Fox & Friends, where he gets to divulge exclusive reporting like his allegation that ethnic studies classes aren’t educational. Rather, he said, “they’re making social justice warriors out of children” – a blood-red culture-warrior attack absurd enough to prompt a chuckle from the guest.

Jenkins often does field reporting on immigration for Fox & Friends, a lowlight of which involved him literally hiding in the bushes along the US-Mexico border to help border patrol detain a migrant family.

After they were caught, a seemingly celebratory chyron read “Illegal admits to knowingly breaking the law”. Jenkins closed his report by discussing a wanted murderer and a known gang member who were caught trying to cross the border. Neither had anything to do with the family he helped arrest.

Fox & Friends’ combination of sloppy news coverage and fierce rightwing opinion is a microcosm of how much Fox values each side of the network.


Take, for example, the legitimate journalist and former chief news anchor Shepard Smith: after he had a dramatic on-air feud with the opinion kingpin Tucker Carlson, both Fox News’ CEO and its president reportedly threatened to take Smith off the air if he criticized Carlson again.

A few weeks later, Smith resigned from the network he had renewed his contract with last year. The sudden end of his 23-year Fox career shows what happens at that network when news and opinion irreconcilably collide. But on Fox & Friends, as with most of the rest of Fox, the “news” knows its place.

Fox News editorially taints other news media outlets

One of the ways Fox News corrodes politics is by influencing the larger conversation; in fact, you may be essentially consuming Fox propaganda without knowing it.

And as the network’s flagship morning show for over 20 years, Fox & Friends often sets the tone for how the network as a whole discusses any given issue. This line from the pastor and Fox contributor Robert Jeffress sums up a lot of Fox’s abortion coverage:


Jeffress’s unhinged comment highlighted a debate you may have heard of about so-called “post-birth” abortion, a procedure disproved by its very name. If the abortion happens after a child is born, then it’s not abortion; it’s murder, which is already very illegal everywhere.

Yet, as Vox’s Anna North recounted, the idea that there’s such a thing as “post-birth” abortion – and that there are people who want it to be – became such a potent meme that the president spoke against it and congressional Republicans made more than 70 attempts to protect abortion “survivors” with legislation.

This abject nonsense spiraled into a mainstream debate because of modest attempts to loosen restrictions on reproductive rights in New York and Virginia. The efforts spurred numerous attacks, including from Trump, who falsely claimed the governor of Virginia had said he “would execute a baby after birth”, and from Fox & Friends commentators, who rabidly declared that “infanticide” and “fourth trimester” abortion were actual progressive policy goals.

This example demonstrates a trend. My colleagues Sharon Kann and Julie Tulbert examined an entire year of evening news abortion coverage on CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News and found that Fox aired 94% of all three networks’ statements about abortion, and Fox was wrong 85% of the time.


This means that when CNN and MSNBC discuss abortion, they are often just responding to Fox News misinformation (while still managing to be wrong 67% and 40% of the time, respectively).

Fox News mainstreams white supremacy

Fox prime time has rightly earned a reputation as a cable TV haven for white supremacy, but, as with all things Fox News, Fox & Friends also plays a prominent role.

In October 2018, Fox News became a wailing siren on immigration, claiming that the US was under “invasion” by undocumented immigrants – specifically, a group of Central American migrants traveling (mostly walking) over 1,000 miles to the US-Mexico border.

In one week, Fox ran nearly eight hours of content on the then distant caravan. Fox & Friends started nearly every morning with anti-immigrant hysteria, eventually suggesting the US take military action to “protect our sovereignty” from families fleeing gang violence and endemic poverty.

The very day after that comment aired on Fox & Friends, a white supremacist murdered 11 Jewish worshippers at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, because he blamed Jews for helping the “invaders” in the caravan.

Caravan hysteria eventually passed, but Fox News’ dangerous and false melodrama about an immigrant “invasion” continued.


Some months later, yet another mass shooter struck – this time murdering 20 in El Paso, to stop the “Hispanic invasion of Texas”. Kilmeade passionately defended using the dangerously hyperbolic term “invasion” just three days later.

Did Fox News inspire two white supremacist mass shootings? Probably not directly. Is it disturbing that America’s number one news network discusses immigration like bloodthirsty white supremacists? Yes.

Fox News ‘is about defending our viewers from the people who hate them’

A Fox News executive reportedly told Vanity Fair that the network’s “power comes from” its viewers, and it must defend them.

That sentiment neatly encapsulates how and why Fox inspires a strong sense of brand loyalty among its viewers – more so than other cable networks. On a number of issues, from recent (false) allegations of anti-conservative censorship on social media to the tried-and-true (and misleading) trope of “Dems are coming for your guns”, Fox News consistently tells viewers that there are hostile groups that want to revoke their rights, undermine their values, and cause them harm.


And having identified Trump, reverentially, as “our president”, Fox staff and guests alike say that any attack on Trump means Fox viewers could be next – a mutation of a longstanding culture of conservative victimhood, amplified bigly by the president himself.

Fox works hard to support these audience relationships, with its efforts spearheaded by its flagship morning show. Fox & Friends regularly airs live episodes with studio audiences, often including law enforcement officers, who receive regular effusive praise on Fox. These episodes provide lucky fans a chance to come to Manhattan, speak their minds, and have their opinions validated by their favorite TV stars.

Breakfast with Friends is a frequently recurring segment in which secondary hosts and correspondents travel to diners across the country, usually shadowing a Trump rally or election debate, to get the pulse of the people.

Strangely, when devoted Fox fans go on Fox to offer their opinions, they typically echo the conservative, pro-Trump line you can find from Fox mainstays. Breakfast with Friends has a similar goal to the live audience shows: offering Fox fans an opportunity to appear on TV and enjoy validation from their favorite personalities over sometimes-absurd amounts of breakfast food.


Fox News is now attempting to expand its footprint in viewers’ minds with the subscription streaming service Fox Nation. Fox Nation offers original documentaries on favorite rightwing media scandals, shares hot takes from opinionistas like Tomi Lahren and Diamond & Silk, and gives some on-air talent a chance to show another side of themselves to the Fox viewer.

For example, Kilmeade has an American history series that calls Andrew “Trail of Tears” Jackson a “hero”; the contributor Rachel Campos-Duffy has a show about motherhood; and Ainsley Earhardt hosts Ainsley’s Bible Study. The aim is to show Fox News superfans what their favorite “Fox News personalities do outside the newsroom”, drawing viewers tighter into the network’s destructive embrace.

Fox News poisons viewers’ minds

People who watch Fox News with an open mind can find themselves sucked into a destructive and alienating lifestyle. The writer Luke O’Neil collected several examples of families, his own included, divided by Fox News’ partisan garbage fire. O’Neil and his mother “have agreed to not talk about politics any more. The cognitive dissonance between this lovely woman finding something appealing in the most xenophobic pundits on TV is too hard for me to reconcile.”

Others told him about no longer visiting their home towns “because my family and friends all have broken Fox brain” or about not sending their children to see their grandparents because, thanks to Fox News, “their toxic anger and resentment is slowly becoming their entire identity”.

I can tell you from personal experience that when I say Fox poisons minds, I’m not being that hyperbolic. While watching Fox & Friends every morning, I struggle to unearth or at least assemble even shadows of fact-based arguments from the unhinged nonsense that is vital to the brand.

It can be so intense on Fox & Friends that I sometimes have what could be called propaganda hangovers – after finishing the show, I feel as though I’m trapped in a fog of disinformation, and my mental processes feel sluggish for a few more minutes.

My strongest bulwark against succumbing is strident opposition. Once you know you’re watching stupid bullshit, sometimes that stupid bullshit becomes must-see TV:

Fox News is ridiculous, stupid, and – when it doesn’t mean to be – hilarious. Most importantly, it’s an extremely influential stream of conservative misinformation. And the president’s favorite show, Fox & Friends, encapsulates the totality of the rotten network’s inherent conflicts and contradictions.

It shows how news and opinion is blurred – but opinion wins – and the lengths the network goes to ensure a devoted audience. Fox is a shameless counterfeit of a news organization, and Fox & Friends leads the fraud bright and early every morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, JDunkin said:

So Fox is the only large media outlet that has bias for Trump, but it is a cable outlet, and a damn popular one I might add.

Tucker Carlson Has Highest-Rated Program In Cable News History

Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson closed out television’s second quarter with one for the record books: his Tucker Carlson Tonight finished the quarter as the highest-rated program in all of cable news for the first time since the show’s launch, delivering an average total audience of 4.331 million viewers. In the process, Carlson broke a record held by his colleague, Sean Hannity, for the highest-rated quarter of any cable news program—ever.


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Tucker Carlson Has Highest-Rated Program In Cable News History

Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson closed out television’s second quarter with one for the record books: his Tucker Carlson Tonight finished the quarter as the highest-rated program in all of cable news for the first time since the show’s launch, delivering an average total audience of 4.331 million viewers. In the process, Carlson broke a record held by his colleague, Sean Hannity, for the highest-rated quarter of any cable news program—ever.


Yes, he may have the highest rated program, however, it says a lot about who watches it when you consider this is whay Fox lawyers said.  It is entertainment, not news.


You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers

Tucker Carlson appears to be made of Teflon. Fox News' top-rated host has been repeatedly accused of anti-immigrant and racist comments, which have cost his political opinion show many of its major advertisers. Yet Carlson endures in his prime-time slot.

Carlson even attacked his own network's chief news anchor on the air, with no real consequences. That anchor, Shepard Smith, quit mid-contract shortly after Carlson went after him.

Now comes the claim that you can't expect to literally believe the words that come out of Carlson's mouth. And that assertion is not coming from Carlson's critics. It's being made by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and by Fox News's own lawyers in defending Carlson against accusations of slander. It worked, by the way.


Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: 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.' "

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JDunkin said:

Classic deicer. No specific discussion about points that Tucker Carlson makes, only a link to court arguments in a lawsuit where the goal is to avoid a monetary payout.

I know deicers style of argument, Twitter style of cancelling the message and always try to avoid personally discussing specifics with thoughtful analysis. Of course there is the idea of ABC bringing in Obama writers to ask softball questions to Biden, and debate moderators that discuss their action plans with virulent anti-Trumpers.




There is nothing to discuss.

Fox lawyers confirmed he is fake news.

So why even engage?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JDunkin said:

Classic cop out by de-icer. Never discuss the argument when it is obvious you would lose the argument, find a way to take out the man. I learned that in grade 2. Intelligent discussion came later.

Please explain how you so easily claim it's a cop out?  I only quoted what Fox News lawyers have said.  Aren't you smart enough to question that?  It wasn't my words.

Again, your psychopathic side comes out. 


noun: psychopath; plural noun: psychopaths
  1. a person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior.
      an unstable and aggressive person.
      "schoolyard psychopaths will gather around a fight to encourage the combatants"
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't need a degree to figure you out.  You tick all the boxes.  In the past, present, and probably future.

Woxof, Defcon, JDunkin, and whoever you will come back as next time will follow the same pattern.


1. Machiavellianism

People high in Machiavellianism are duplicitous, cunning, and manipulative. They place a higher priority than most on power, money, and winning. They easily disregard moral and social rules, and as a result, lie to others and manipulate them with little to no guilt. Think Gordon Gekko from Wall Street or Frank and Claire Underwood from House of Cards.


For people high in this trait, manipulating others is an impulse, like an alcoholic's impulse to drink. Sometimes this manipulation is done to achieve personal gain (e.g., to get a promotion), but other times it is just done for fun, or because they can’t stop themselves (e.g., internet trolling). Depending on type, these people’s tools of the trade are deception, guilt, bullying, feigned weakness, or flattery. Whichever they choose, they regularly wield these tools in an attempt to twist the emotions and behaviors of those around them.


Because such people are master manipulators, they are often charming and well-liked, at least on a superficial level. They may feign interest and compassion for a short time, but that façade wears off quickly, and it becomes clear that they only really care about themselves.

A perfect literary example of this trait is Amy Dunne from Gone Girl, who (spoiler alert) goes to extreme lengths to victimize the men in her life, even if their only sin was not giving her the attention she thought she deserved. Her particular tools of manipulation are sex, lies, guilt, fame, and her well-crafted diary. Even readers get duped by Amy’s lies, and it isn’t until midway through the book that we see her for what she really is — a master manipulator.

article continues after advertisement


2. Lack of Conscience or Empathy

You know that little voice in your head that tells you to return a found wallet or treat others as you want to be treated? People high in psychopathy don’t have that voice, or if they do, its volume is turned down very low. As a result, they lack many of the social emotions that other people take for granted, including guilt, remorse, sympathy, and pity.


It is this lack of a conscience that enables psychopaths to engage in behaviors others may secretly fantasize about, but never actually do. When someone hurts us or makes us mad, we may think, “I want to punch him!” or “I could kill him!” but we would never actually do it. Psychopaths don’t have that brake pedal: If they want to do it, they may actually do it.


This hints at another quality associated with psychopathy — low impulse control. People high in psychopathy can be quick to violence and aggression; may have many casual sex partners; and tend to engage in more risky or dangerous behaviors than others. One of their mantras is “Act first, think later.”


Once again, Flynn crafted an excellent representation of this trait with Amy Dunne. Amy is cold and calculating — almost reptilian in her lack of compassion. She seems to lack any sense of right and wrong, or empathy for what she puts others through. Instead, she has a calculating, pragmatic nature, whether lying to the police or getting rid of a human obstacle. Through her actions and lack of emotions, the reader finally sees Amy as a glacial beauty who lacks even a hint of warmth or humanity under the surface.



3. Narcissism

People high in narcissism are self-centered and have an inflated sense of their qualities and achievements. Any flaws they may have, they refuse to see in themselves and instead may project them onto those around them. For example, a narcissist who secretly worries she isn’t smart enough will accuse those around her of being dumb as a way to boost her own ego.


Narcissists love compliments and lavishly praise anyone who admires or affirms them. The flip side of this coin means that they are extremely sensitive to insults and often respond to criticism with seething rage and retribution. They have what psychologists refer to as “unstable self-esteem.” This means they put themselves on a very high pedestal, but it doesn’t take much to topple them to the ground. What others would perceive as constructive criticism, narcissists see as a declaration of war.


Because of their self-focus, they don’t get along well with others. They have problems sustaining healthy, satisfying relationships, so they tend to seek positions of authority where they can work over, rather than beside, colleagues. Such authority also helps, because narcissists never blame themselves for their problems. It is always someone else’s fault.

article continues after advertisement


There are lots of examples of narcissists in popular literature (and in historical literature), but in my opinion, one that holds true to this description, in a non-obvious and non-stereotypical way, is the character of Annie Wilkes from Misery. Annie doesn’t immediately come off as arrogant or boastful (although her claim to be Paul Sheldon’s “Number One fan” is a hint of her inflated sense of self). But as the book unfolds, we are subjected to her constant complaining about the world and those in it. These rants demonstrate that she does see herself as superior. Everyone else is a “lying ol’ dirty birdy,” and anyone who falls into this category is not worthy of sympathy or even basic human dignity. Annie is an excellent example of how to incorporate narcissism (or any of these three traits) in a character in a way that is subtle and unique, but still clearly present.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just more boxes you tick.



Since the term psychopath is not an official diagnosis, experts refer to the signs described under ASPD. According to Masand, some of the more common signs to be aware of include:

  • socially irresponsible behavior
  • disregarding or violating the rights of others
  • inability to distinguish between right and wrong
  • difficulty with showing remorse or empathy
  • tendency to lie often
  • manipulating and hurting others
  • recurring problems with the law
  • general disregard towards safety and responsibility

Other behaviors that may be signs of ASPD include a tendency to take risks, reckless behavior, and being deceitful with frequent lying.

According to Masand, ASPD can be difficult to treat because the person who needs help doesn’t believe there is a problem with their behavior. As a result, they rarely seek treatment.

Edited by deicer
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JDunkin said:

Watch the video again folks and decide for yourself what is legitimate. Deicer votes for liars and tells others not to vote for somebody because they are a liar.




Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep on saying that, yet you don't really know the definition do you?  While I have put up definitions of being a sociopath and psychopath, and have clearly indicated which of those you fully cover to qualify you for those titles, you fail to show how I fulfill the definition of 'fraud'.  

Let me help you,,,

If you look at this definition, it is not I who satisfies the definition, however you do completely!

How many more identities/personalities/lies are you going to live in your future on this forum?




To save this word, you'll need to log in.

\ ˈfrȯd  \

Definition of fraud


1a: DECEIT, TRICKERYspecifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal rightwas accused of credit card fraud
b: an act of deceiving or misrepresenting : TRICKautomobile insurance frauds
2a: a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : IMPOSTORHe claimed to be a licensed psychologist, but he turned out to be a fraud.also : one who defrauds : CHEAT
b: one that is not what it seems or is represented to beThe UFO picture was proved to be a fraud.
Link to post
Share on other sites

You really don't understand the English language do you?

You are ticking the first, second, third, fourth, definitely fifth, sixth and eighth lines....


Since the term psychopath is not an official diagnosis, experts refer to the signs described under ASPD. According to Masand, some of the more common signs to be aware of include:

  • socially irresponsible behavior
  • disregarding or violating the rights of others
  • inability to distinguish between right and wrong
  • difficulty with showing remorse or empathy
  • tendency to lie often
  • manipulating and hurting others
  • recurring problems with the law
  • general disregard towards safety and responsibility


Link to post
Share on other sites

JDunkin, I guess this means you are officially a minority...


How much do Canadians dislike Donald Trump? A lot.

A new 338Canada/Léger poll shows that from coast to coast Canadians overwhelmingly support Biden over Trump. The only exception is among Conservatives.

By Philippe J. FournierOctober 1, 2020

Trump takes questions during a news briefing at the White House on March 18, 2020 (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Trump takes questions during a news briefing at the White House on March 18, 2020 (Alex Wong/Getty Images)

This November, millions of American voters will flock to the voting booths (or will already have voted by mail) to elect over 400 congressmen and congresswomen, 35 senators and, of course, the next president.

The world will be watching—and holding its breath.

In Canada, we know all too well that this election could have tremendous consequences on the economy and our livelihoods. The relationship between President Donald Trump and the Trudeau government has been lukewarm at best since 2016, and Trump’s sudden and apparently random impositions of tariffs on Canadian steel, aluminum and other resources crucial for Canada’s economy has not been well received north of the border.

And so as we enter the last month of the campaign, what do Canadians think of the U.S. presidential race? If, hypothetically, Canadians could vote for president, how would they vote? We present today the results of an exclusive Léger poll for 338Canada which asked over 1,500 Canadian voters this exact question. Let’s take a look at the national results, and then break them down by region, age, and political allegiance.

To the question: “If you could vote in the U.S. presidential election, would you vote for Joe Biden or Donald Trump?”, a significant majority of Canadians (72 per cent) would support Democratic nominee Joe Biden. Only 14 per cent of respondents would vote for Donald Trump, and another 14 per cent are undecided.


Among decided voters, Biden receives the support of 84 per cent of Canadian voters:


Breaking down these results by geographical and polling region of Canada, we notice very little variations from one region to another, with the notable exception of Alberta:


In Atlantic Canada and Quebec, Biden receives 90 and 89 per cent support, respectively. In Ontario, the province is aligned with the country’s average of 84 to 16 per cent in favour of Joe Biden. In Manitoba and Saskatchewan, Biden leads Trump 82 to 18 per cent, and in British Columbia, the split is 88-12 in favour of Biden. (Naturally, we must use caution with regional sub-samples because the uncertainty is higher.)

In Alberta, one third of decided voters (32 per cent) would prefer Trump over Biden. While this is significantly higher than the country’s average, we must stress that Biden still has twice as much support as Trump in arguably Canada’s most conservative province.

We also notice little contrast in age groups: 88 per cent of the younger demographics (18-34 year olds) support Biden, while that proportion is 78 per cent with 35-54 year olds, and 86 per cent with voters aged 55 and over:


Lastly, Léger’s poll also measured voting intentions in Canada (which had the Liberals rebounding after the Throne Speech last week). When we breakdown the Biden-Trump preference with current party preference in Canada, we see that a vast majority of Liberal, NDP, Bloc, and Green voters would support Joe Biden if they could.

For the Conservatives, the race would be much closer:


Indeed, only 6 per cent of NDP voters and 7 per cent of Liberals would support Trump given the chance. This is not especially surprising, but it certainly confirms the deep polarization around the perceptions of Donald Trump.

As for the Conservatives, 41 per cent of CPC voters would support Trump over Biden, a significantly higher proportion than any other major party. While it is not surprising to measure higher support for a Republican candidate from the supporters of the main right-of-centre party in Canada, this proportion is such that it simply cannot be ignored by new CPC leader Erin O’Toole.

(Bloc and Green voters support Biden in similar 90-10 per cent proportions, but, since the sample of BQ and Green voters were both small—under 120 respondents apiece—we caution against drawing conclusions from these numbers.)

Is there such political osmosis across the border between the Conservatives in Canada and the Republicans in the United States? According to this poll, the pro-Trump conservatives have been growing in numbers within the party, and this could partly explain why Erin O’Toole chose to run his “True Blue” campaign of courting social conservatives to win over the party’s leadership.

This will be a major challenge for O’Toole: Will he actually manage to convince centrist and Red Tory voters to join pro-Trump conservatives under the same banner before the next federal election? The CPC might very well be a big-tent party, but how much can one stretch its fabric before it snaps?

After last year’s federal election, many observers believed that, to win back a majority of seats in the House of Commons, the Conservative Party of Canada would have to regain the centre of the Canadian political spectrum. This poll indicates that not only is it not happening, but many of the party’s supporters are going in the exact opposite direction.

For the full report from Léger, follow this link. The details of the Trump/Biden question are on page 5. The poll was on the field from September 25 to 27, 2020 and collected data from a representative sample of 1,514 Canadians over the age of 18. The data was then analyzed and weighted according to gender, age, mother tongue, region, education level and the presence of children in households in order to render a representative sample of the general population. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JDunkin said:

A new report on the suspension of New Yorker staff writer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin claims the legal pundit was masturbating during a Zoom call with colleagues."

And more....from the BBC...



New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin exposes himself in Zoom call


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.