• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Fox News limited coverage of the raid of Trump’s lawyer’s office

tecoyah said:
It has always been the case that the use of multiple sources are recommended when building a truth. There are however certain sources that can be dismissed when doing so...The National Enquirer comes to mind and Fox is getting there.
Click to expand...


Actually I think as far as politics go, the enquierer is more legitimate of the two...
 
Media_Truth said:
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/12/17224088/fox-news-fbi-raid-cohen-stormy-daniels

On Monday, the FBI raided the offices of President Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen, seizing documents and records related to the $130,000 payment Cohen made to porn actress Stormy Daniels, as well as other matters.

The article goes on to explain how FOX's coverage of this news was light years lower than the other networks. And when they did cover the story, they didn't address the central issue of HUSH money.

This regarding Tucker Carlson:

Then he tried to paint the raid as a mere sex scandal that the FBI wants to use to unravel the Trump presidency.
Click to expand...
So quantity of coverage is the most important thing, not the quality of that coverage? Personally, I don't really care what an opinion show talks about. They cater specifically to their target audience and that's about it. I don't watch any of them.

I think if Vox were being more honest, they would talk about the actual news coverage and not try to oversimplify it it to the percentage of coverage. Looks like they're more interested in pushing an agenda.
 
Casca XV said:
not really, there is still a lot of criticism of Trump on FOX, while there is not criticism of the Deep State on CNN, MSNBC, etc.
Click to expand...
Perhaps this is because the "deep state" here is a partisan red herring, whereas Trump's follies are reality?

That's my take on it.

Edit: Sorry. When I linked into this from the front page, I assumed this was a new thread and yours was a recent post. My bad.
 
Moon said:
So quantity of coverage is the most important thing, not the quality of that coverage? Personally, I don't really care what an opinion show talks about. They cater specifically to their target audience and that's about it. I don't watch any of them.

I think if Vox were being more honest, they would talk about the actual news coverage and not try to oversimplify it it to the percentage of coverage. Looks like they're more interested in pushing an agenda.
Click to expand...

Actually, they also mentioned the quality of coverage, pointing out that FOX didn't mention the "Hush" money, but painted the picture, only as a sexual fling. The "Hush" money is the disturbing part of the story.
 
Media_Truth said:
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/12/17224088/fox-news-fbi-raid-cohen-stormy-daniels

On Monday, the FBI raided the offices of President Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen, seizing documents and records related to the $130,000 payment Cohen made to porn actress Stormy Daniels, as well as other matters.

The article goes on to explain how FOX's coverage of this news was light years lower than the other networks. And when they did cover the story, they didn't address the central issue of HUSH money.

This regarding Tucker Carlson:

Then he tried to paint the raid as a mere sex scandal that the FBI wants to use to unravel the Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

Fox isn't news. They should be forced to change their name to Fox RNC.
 
Media_Truth said:
Actually, they also mentioned the quality of coverage, pointing out that FOX didn't mention the "Hush" money, but painted the picture, only as a sexual fling. The "Hush" money is the disturbing part of the story.
Click to expand...
That wasn't the focus of the article, the amount of time was what they were mostly concerned with.
 
code1211 said:
Is that how justice in this country works? You are guilty until proven innocent?

There he is, boys! Let's git him.

When you think like a member of a mob, do you actually dream about lynching your victim or just like to join in the mindless repetition of chants?

I would assume that this guy is paid pretty well. I would further assume that he is at liberty to "run his department".

Stormy entered into a contract including offer, acceptance and consideration. She's in deep do-do.

What we know is that Trump did not sign the contract. Do you have some private insight that you are holding secret from all other people on Earth that reveals the inner workings of this whole deal supporting your fantasy?
Click to expand...



I feel kinda bad for you, just keep grasping at straw after straw and continually come back empty handed.

Well I suppose that will happen when you fall for a con artists lies, and for some reason do not see you have been massively ripped off.
 
Media_Truth said:
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/12/17224088/fox-news-fbi-raid-cohen-stormy-daniels

On Monday, the FBI raided the offices of President Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen, seizing documents and records related to the $130,000 payment Cohen made to porn actress Stormy Daniels, as well as other matters.

The article goes on to explain how FOX's coverage of this news was light years lower than the other networks. And when they did cover the story, they didn't address the central issue of HUSH money.

This regarding Tucker Carlson:

Then he tried to paint the raid as a mere sex scandal that the FBI wants to use to unravel the Trump presidency.
Click to expand...

Media_Truth said:
This regarding Tucker Carlson:

Then he tried to paint the raid as a mere sex scandal that the FBI wants to use to unravel the Trump presidency.
Click to expand...
You know, it's one thing when a so-called random "Tom, Dick or Harry" intimates conspiracy theories are afoot. It's wholly another when a person who's regarded as a news reporter/anchor alludes to or articulates as much. Truly, doing so verges on being seditious, IMO.
 
Chomsky said:
Perhaps this is because the "deep state" here is a partisan red herring, whereas Trump's follies are reality?

That's my take on it.

Edit: Sorry. When I linked into this from the front page, I assumed this was a new thread and yours was a recent post. My bad.
Click to expand...

Deep state a red harring? Yet everyone from Rand Paul to Obama himself and most recently Comey admit it exsists.

The Deep State is the Leftist Totalitarian Bureaucratic Federal Government Establishment.

It's trying to destroy Trump because he is an outsider and the first President since Reagan who is reducing the power of the Federal Government.
 
GDViking said:
I feel kinda bad for you, just keep grasping at straw after straw and continually come back empty handed.

Well I suppose that will happen when you fall for a con artists lies, and for some reason do not see you have been massively ripped off.
Click to expand...

Ripped off? My 401K is up about 66% since election day. I'll take that kind of a "rip-off" any day of the week.

After all of this investigation, the only things that have been turned up about Trump is that he does everything differently than the ineffectual and feckless predecessors.

The way he talks, the way he negotiates, the goals he sets, the procedures he follows and the idiots that oppose him.

Right now, Comey is making a fool of himself. McCabe is about to be indicted. Strzok and Page are headed for jail.

My personal wealth is increasing, the Korean Peninsula is about to be re-unified and de-nuclearized, unemployment for all minorities and women is already at or approaching record lows and the economics of every person in the country is on a rocket ride straight up.

GDP increasing, personal opportunity improving, wage rates up, home values up and all we need to do is stand back and let Trump work.

In the mean time, ol' GDViking just can't grasp that everything around him is getting better so he sits and cries. What is it that you're perceiving that is making you so miserable?
 
code1211 said:
Ripped off? My 401K is up about 66% since election day. I'll take that kind of a "rip-off" any day of the week.

After all of this investigation, the only things that have been turned up about Trump is that he does everything differently than the ineffectual and feckless predecessors.

The way he talks, the way he negotiates, the goals he sets, the procedures he follows and the idiots that oppose him.

Right now, Comey is making a fool of himself. McCabe is about to be indicted. Strzok and Page are headed for jail.

My personal wealth is increasing, the Korean Peninsula is about to be re-unified and de-nuclearized, unemployment for all minorities and women is already at or approaching record lows and the economics of every person in the country is on a rocket ride straight up.

GDP increasing, personal opportunity improving, wage rates up, home values up and all we need to do is stand back and let Trump work.

In the mean time, ol' GDViking just can't grasp that everything around him is getting better so he sits and cries. What is it that you're perceiving that is making you so miserable?
Click to expand...

Thank you Obama! After cleaning up the Bush mess, you also set the table for the next guy. But he will quickly screw things up - case in point:

US monthly budget deficit largest in 6 years

New Treasury Department numbers show that the US government racked up a $215 billion deficit in February -- the largest monthly deficit in six years.
 
Media_Truth said:
Thank you Obama! After cleaning up the Bush mess, you also set the table for the next guy. But he will quickly screw things up - case in point:

US monthly budget deficit largest in 6 years

New Treasury Department numbers show that the US government racked up a $215 billion deficit in February -- the largest monthly deficit in six years.
Click to expand...

I don't think one month is a good measure. January was the biggest surplus ever in any January. February seem to have swung the other way.

Obama "set the table"?

The table may have been set, but there was a pretty large, unpaid bill still laying on it when the new guy sat down. Military was gutted and the perpetual wars continued.

We don't have a very good record as a country over the last 17 years regarding our fiscal outcomes. Under Dem or Rep Presidents, the debt just seems to keep going up. Debt's been doubling every 8 years.

With our political parties swapping the White House, the Senate and the House, you'd almost start to think that the lying thieves that govern us are pretty much going to continue to cheat and steal regardless of party affiliation.

Is there really any difference in outcomes between one party and the other?

The most recent unbudgeted spending compromise was an embarrassment as has been every spending arrangement since the first time I ever heard the term "Base Line Budgeting".

I wonder if we'll ever get an actual budget passed by the lying thieves again. It would be a refreshing change from our recent history.

Forget about a "Balanced Budget Amendment". How about just a "Budget Amendment". How about throwing out the idea of "Base Line Budgeting"?
 
code1211 said:
I don't think one month is a good measure. January was the biggest surplus ever in any January. February seem to have swung the other way.

Obama "set the table"?

The table may have been set, but there was a pretty large, unpaid bill still laying on it when the new guy sat down. Military was gutted and the perpetual wars continued.

We don't have a very good record as a country over the last 17 years regarding our fiscal outcomes. Under Dem or Rep Presidents, the debt just seems to keep going up. Debt's been doubling every 8 years.

With our political parties swapping the White House, the Senate and the House, you'd almost start to think that the lying thieves that govern us are pretty much going to continue to cheat and steal regardless of party affiliation.

Is there really any difference in outcomes between one party and the other?

The most recent unbudgeted spending compromise was an embarrassment as has been every spending arrangement since the first time I ever heard the term "Base Line Budgeting".

I wonder if we'll ever get an actual budget passed by the lying thieves again. It would be a refreshing change from our recent history.

Forget about a "Balanced Budget Amendment". How about just a "Budget Amendment". How about throwing out the idea of "Base Line Budgeting"?
Click to expand...

Let's see - 17 years. Yes, that would go back to Clinton/Gore. They did a great job, and created a Budget Surplus. The deficit shrunk substantially, under Obama, although I think he could have done more, in his last 4 years. Republicans have been pathetic with the budget, and yet they scream the loudest about untettered spending. They are pathetic - all talk. You mention February 2018. March 2018 was worse. Giving billionaires huge tax breaks does nothing to help our deficit.
us_deficit_history.png
 
Media_Truth said:
Let's see - 17 years. Yes, that would go back to Clinton/Gore. They did a great job, and created a Budget Surplus. The deficit shrunk substantially, under Obama, although I think he could have done more, in his last 4 years. Republicans have been pathetic with the budget, and yet they scream the loudest about untettered spending. They are pathetic - all talk. You mention February 2018. March 2018 was worse. Giving billionaires huge tax breaks does nothing to help our deficit.
View attachment 67232347
Click to expand...

The dual lessons we should have learned from the Clinton years are that allowing entrepreneurs to work without crippling regulation is the thing that will create a boom AND that allowing them to work without effective controls will create a problem. Finding a balance is the key.

In the .com boom times leading up to the Y2K that never happened, there was expansion of various industries operating with no regulation because those in that sector were creating new stuff faster than it could be regulated.

One of the great comedy shows of this year was watching the US Senate try to figure out how to pronounce the words written on the notes made by their aides to question Zuckerberg. The frightening part of this is that our Senators possess this same degree of knowledge on most things they consider.

The free flow of money into the financial markets was let loose finally by the final repeal of Glass-Steagall ending the last of the Great Depression protections from the Financial elites. The results are obvious if not predictable.

Clinton's credit or blame for either or both of the these financial impacts seem to be about the same: He was there to watch it, just like the rest of us.

Following the confluence of good financial fortune in the years 1995 through 2000, things got shakier and both of Clinton's successors were hit by the head winds that resulted and their own incompetence.

I read somewhere that Clinton used the same approach to building a great economy that Eisenhower used in the 50's and did what he did: Petty much nothing at all. Sorry, I don't recall the source. Seems pretty accurate, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom