Bucking NDA, ex-Fox News reporter plans to tell Congress about outlet's role in Trump hush money sto

[tres borrachos]

Correction, he has been a Democrat, a Republican, and an Independent throughout the course of his life. He was a Republican in the late 80s, and throughout the 90s. He was an Independent for a couple years after that, then became a Democrat for a decade, then an Independent again, then back to Republican in 2012. Like most other things in his life, he changes Party affiliation at the drop of a hat. He has contradicted his own statements many times over the last 4 decades when it comes to his personal stances on many issues.

I honestly think he simply says things that he thinks people (or at least certain people, whichever group he is trying to gain favor with at the time) want to hear about his positions.

You're right, rogue. The man has no stances and principles. He just blows with the wind, making him even more dangerous.

 

[Athanasius68]

I suggest you read the OP again and you'll understand what is being discussed and debated. I'll give you a big hint. It has nothing to do with the serial adulterer you worship paying off his porn stars. The smart people knew he was an adulterer, and we are not surprised that he bribed them into silence. The thread is about Fox News burying the story. You know - like you Trump fans always accuse the other MSM outlets of doing when it comes to someone that Trump no longer supports (like Clinton) and tells you that you are also not to support that person.

The story was refuted:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BhAB&usg=AOvVaw1SfH5k4MSapcowngFudkUr&ampcf=1

 

[Deuce]

So much for freedom of the press. :lamo

Um Fox News is not being charged with a crime.

 

[tres borrachos]

The story was refuted:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1SfH5k4MSapcowngFudkUr&cf=1

That link doesn't refute the story. What the hell?

Where does it mention her testimony to Congress?

And this is simply the author's assumption anyway that she did it because of the lawsuit.

Just days after the WSJ story, Fox’s earlier role in not publishing made its way to the press. Perhaps coincidentally it occurred at the same time Diana Falzone was suing the company for gender and disability discrimination. After I had left the company, Falzone was removed from on-camera work, which was essentially a demotion. She sued, claiming that management believed her recent revelation of endometriosis “detracted from her sex appeal and made her less desirable,” with no mention of a Stormy Daniels or any other story.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

And isn't that a fittingly Trumpian behavior?

It seems like most of the hardcore Trumpers are trying to convince themselves that ALL Trump hatred is strictly a liberal knee jerk reaction. It isn't.

I didn't like Tricky Dick, but it was nothing like this.
Even during Watergate, I wasn't screeching for impeachment.
Believe it or not, I didn't think anything would come of it, and even if something did, I figured Nixon would power through it, vow to do penance, rehabilitate his staff and finish his term.
As the investigation progressed and the hearings took shape, I still figured Richard Nixon was going to figure out a way to shake it off, and then he would be chastened and would try to do better.
Honest to God, his resignation came as a shock to me, I never really saw it coming.
I had a friend who had an "IMPEACHMENT WITH HONOR" bumper sticker on his van but I was all, "Yeah right, never gonna happen" about it. It made me laugh but that was about the extent of it.



I remember feeling as though Ronald Reagan was perhaps too powerful to be impeached, that the general consensus was that he was untouchable. Even during Iran-Contra, I was convinced that he was impervious, so thoughts of impeachment or some other means of removal from office seemed impossible, it never even entered my mind.

I despised George W. Bush, but it was nothing like this.
I poked fun at those guys, but I don't remember ever being willing to do anything it took to get them removed from office.
None of them SCARED ME the way that Trump does.
And by "scared" I mean I am scared for what might happen to this country, what might happen to the actual mechanism of government, the actual democratic mechanisms that make our constitutional republic function, the actual Constitution itself.

I never ever believed that Nixon or Reagan or Dubya would ever push the big red button, but I am convinced that with Trump, it's a distinct possibility unless someone on his staff sacrifices their life to stop him.

I never ever believed that any of those three would ever try to set off a civil war, but I am convinced that Donald Trump is going to try to do exactly that...because he has already said he would, VERBATIM.

It's not a knee jerk reaction, your guy says things that are about as unhinged as it can get, short of a Saddam Hussein or a Kim Jong Un or a Duterte, and you CHEER when he says that stuff.
Who ARE you people?

And that's where we come to the meat of the matter: It's not even Trump. In the end, it's YOU people.
Who are you, where did you come from, how can you possibly support the stuff he says and still claim to respect the Constitution or claim that you love your country? You love "a country" but it can't possibly be this one because the stuff you cheer about sounds like it comes from somewhere else.

Trump will either resign, be impeached, finish his only term or be reelected and then, no matter which it is...then comes the question as to whether or not he will leave power without setting off a monster conflagration, but in the end, if that happens, it will be YOU people who are responsible for that action.

And if that happens, trust me, justice will find you and you will be dealt with, because even after Trump is long gone, the problem remains, because Trump is only the symptom.
If you follow him down that dark road, the rest of us will be waiting for you at the end of that dark road.
So will our children, so will our children's children.
It definitely will not go the way you think it will.

 

[Athanasius68]

That link doesn't refute the story. What the hell?

Where does it mention her testimony to Congress?

And this is simply the author's assumption anyway that she did it because of the lawsuit.

Just days after the WSJ story, Fox’s earlier role in not publishing made its way to the press. Perhaps coincidentally it occurred at the same time Diana Falzone was suing the company for gender and disability discrimination. After I had left the company, Falzone was removed from on-camera work, which was essentially a demotion. She sued, claiming that management believed her recent revelation of endometriosis “detracted from her sex appeal and made her less desirable,” with no mention of a Stormy Daniels or any other story.

The story, as indicated, was about Fox news burying the story.

 

[tres borrachos]

The story, as indicated, was about Fox news burying the story.

And he can testify to Congress too. And tell them she's lying.

The story has not been debunked. Yet. Maybe it will. But it hasn't.

 

[Athanasius68]

And he can testify to Congress too. And tell them she's lying.

The story has not been debunked. Yet. Maybe it will. But it hasn't.

Congress doesn't need to place its stamp of approval on testimony to make such a determination. Nor does testimony to Congress ratify anything.
Neither need to be "lying."

 

[Athanasius68]

It seems like most of the hardcore Trumpers are trying to convince themselves that ALL Trump hatred is strictly a liberal knee jerk reaction. It isn't.

I didn't like Tricky Dick, but it was nothing like this.
Even during Watergate, I wasn't screeching for impeachment.
Believe it or not, I didn't think anything would come of it, and even if something did, I figured Nixon would power through it, vow to do penance, rehabilitate his staff and finish his term.
As the investigation progressed and the hearings took shape, I still figured Richard Nixon was going to figure out a way to shake it off, and then he would be chastened and would try to do better.
Honest to God, his resignation came as a shock to me, I never really saw it coming.
I had a friend who had an "IMPEACHMENT WITH HONOR" bumper sticker on his van but I was all, "Yeah right, never gonna happen" about it. It made me laugh but that was about the extent of it.

View attachment 67252759

I remember feeling as though Ronald Reagan was perhaps too powerful to be impeached, that the general consensus was that he was untouchable. Even during Iran-Contra, I was convinced that he was impervious, so thoughts of impeachment or some other means of removal from office seemed impossible, it never even entered my mind.

I despised George W. Bush, but it was nothing like this.
I poked fun at those guys, but I don't remember ever being willing to do anything it took to get them removed from office.
None of them SCARED ME the way that Trump does.
And by "scared" I mean I am scared for what might happen to this country, what might happen to the actual mechanism of government, the actual democratic mechanisms that make our constitutional republic function, the actual Constitution itself.

I never ever believed that Nixon or Reagan or Dubya would ever push the big red button, but I am convinced that with Trump, it's a distinct possibility unless someone on his staff sacrifices their life to stop him.

I never ever believed that any of those three would ever try to set off a civil war, but I am convinced that Donald Trump is going to try to do exactly that...because he has already said he would, VERBATIM.

It's not a knee jerk reaction, your guy says things that are about as unhinged as it can get, short of a Saddam Hussein or a Kim Jong Un or a Duterte, and you CHEER when he says that stuff.
Who ARE you people?

And that's where we come to the meat of the matter: It's not even Trump. In the end, it's YOU people.
Who are you, where did you come from, how can you possibly support the stuff he says and still claim to respect the Constitution or claim that you love your country? You love "a country" but it can't possibly be this one because the stuff you cheer about sounds like it comes from somewhere else.

Trump will either resign, be impeached, finish his only term or be reelected and then, no matter which it is...then comes the question as to whether or not he will leave power without setting off a monster conflagration, but in the end, if that happens, it will be YOU people who are responsible for that action.

And if that happens, trust me, justice will find you and you will be dealt with, because even after Trump is long gone, the problem remains, because Trump is only the symptom.
If you follow him down that dark road, the rest of us will be waiting for you at the end of that dark road.
So will our children, so will our children's children.
It definitely will not go the way you think it will.

There was paranoia about Reagan pressing the red button as well.
And Reagan was sending troops places. Trump is withdrawing them.

The thing is, its not November 2016 anymore. Trump is about 60% of his way through his term. It doesn't really work to throw out hysteria what he 'might do' during his presidency.

 

[tres borrachos]

Congress doesn't need to place its stamp of approval on testimony to make such a determination. Nor does testimony to Congress ratify anything.
Neither need to be "lying."

So you admit that the story has not been debunked, as you claimed.

Based on one person's assumption of the coincidence of timing, you make a statement that is untrue.

 

[Irwin Corey]

So much for freedom of the press. :lamo

Faux News deserves “freedom of the press”, but any outlet Donald calls fake news should have their license pulled by the pResident.

 

[Athanasius68]

So you admit that the story has not been debunked, as you claimed.

Based on one person's assumption of the coincidence of timing, you make a statement that is untrue.

The guy who 'covered it up' said such a claim is nonsense. That's The link.

 

[tres borrachos]

The guy who 'covered it up' said such a claim is nonsense. That's The link.

Yes, a guy said something. The one who would be "guilty" of the cover up. So that's that right?

You always believe everyone who makes a claim, I assume.

 

[Athanasius68]

Yes, a guy said something. The one who would be "guilty" of the cover up. So that's that right?

You always believe everyone who makes a claim, I assume.

I do not assume everyone is lying.

 

[tres borrachos]

I do not assume everyone is lying.

When they say what you want them to say.

So you take everyone at his word, right? Then Michael Cohen was telling the truth about what Trump did. Right?

 

[Athanasius68]

When they say what you want them to say.

So you take everyone at his word, right? Then Michael Cohen was telling the truth about what Trump did. Right?

Beats me. Cohen is a convicted perjurer, after all.

As far as the OP, the producer stated what happened. Our is eminently reasonable.

 

[dixon01767]

LOL!!

So now the Dems are going to go after Fox News?

If there were any doubt in anyone's mind that this House nonsense has nothing to do with crimes or justice...rather is just politically motivated misuse of government power and taxpayer resources...this Fox News nonsense should put those doubts to rest.

Really. ESPECIALLY considering that when FOX declined to put out the story, Stormy was denying that she had an affair with the President. No doubt Elijah thinks they should of reported it anyway.

 

[Napoleon]

[h=2][/h][h=1]Bucking NDA, ex-Fox News reporter plans to tell Congress about outlet's role in Trump hush money story[/h]Bucking NDA, ex-Fox News reporter plans to tell Congress about outlet's role in Trump hush money story


House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings asked reporter Diana Falzone to talk with investigators and provide documents.

A former Fox News employee plans to tell Congress about allegations that the outlet tried to stop her from reporting on the Stormy Daniels controversy during the 2016 election, citing an exception to a nondisclosure agreement she signed.


On Thursday, House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings formally requested that the reporter, Diana Falzone, talk with committee investigators and provide documents related to her attempts to report on Daniels’ allegations that Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's former longtime lawyer, paid her hush money after an alleged affair with Trump in 2006.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(mine)

How much of an effect on the election the withholding of information regarding hush money payments may never be known. But the fact that Fox News knew it would do some damage to Trump's chances of being elected was obviously politically motivated. Fox wanted to help Trump win at any cost. It's the responsibility of democratic journalism to report facts. This isn't Russia where the press is just an arm of Putin, this is still America with a free press. Let's hope it remains that way.

The answer is probably none. People have known at least since the 80s that Trump is a serial philanderer. I mean, it was no secret that his current wife was once the other woman.

 

[Kreton]

Well this should be interesting to watch! Not that everyone doesn't know how dishonest Fox has been in carrying Trump's water and covering/lying for him. But it will be interesting to hear a reporter talk about it.

It will be interesting for many Americans but Trump supporters won't care. They haven't cared about anything else and let's be honest here, this doesn't even crack the top 200 of immoral, illegal, dishonest, or disgusting things that have taken place by Trump and his inner circle since his inauguration.

 

[eohrnberger]

I had one of the best teachers, YOU.
Like I said, you appear to be good at dishing it out but...

Hey, if the shoe fits . . . .

Oh Heaven forbid that I object to the despicable, contrived and dishonest, disingenuous, political narrative and political agenda pushing political propaganda media crap that's broadcast day after day after day after day by the major media networks.

It's not toeing the liberal / progressive party and ideological line.

The latest dishonesty and gaslighting from them is this bull**** blaming of others for what a self proclaimed 'Eco Terrorist' socialist, piece of human debris, who shot up peaceful Muslims practicing their religion; may he rot in hell for eternity for what he did.

The truth is that there is not a single sane person that support what this shooter did, and there are no other people responsible other than the person who planned and pulled the trigger.

All the rest of the leftists' narratives, push talking points is just so much lying, something they specialize in.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Hey, if the shoe fits . . . .

Oh Heaven forbid that I object to the despicable, contrived and dishonest, disingenuous, political narrative and political agenda pushing political propaganda media crap that's broadcast day after day after day after day by the major media networks.

It's not toeing the liberal / progressive party and ideological line.

The latest dishonesty and gaslighting from them is this bull**** blaming of others for what a self proclaimed 'Eco Terrorist' socialist, piece of human debris, who shot up peaceful Muslims practicing their religion; may he rot in hell for eternity for what he did.

The truth is that there is not a single sane person that support what this shooter did, and there are no other people responsible other than the person who planned and pulled the trigger.

All the rest of the leftists' narratives, push talking points is just so much lying, something they specialize in.

The voices in your head are disturbing.

 

[eohrnberger]

Obviously you still have no idea what this thread is about. Not surprising. You come here to defend the lifelong Democrat you adore so much.

I suggest you read the OP again and you'll understand what is being discussed and debated. I'll give you a big hint. It has nothing to do with the serial adulterer you worship paying off his porn stars. The smart people knew he was an adulterer, and we are not surprised that he bribed them into silence. The thread is about Fox News burying the story. You know - like you Trump fans always accuse the other MSM outlets of doing when it comes to someone that Trump no longer supports (like Clinton) and tells you that you are also not to support that person.

Here's a hint, Tres. I worship no one (well, not quite true. There's a case to be made for my wife ) and I adore no political figure (yea, reserved for my wife again, I'm afraid).

 

[eohrnberger]

The voices in your head are disturbing.

You've obviously not watched the Sunday talk shows. Literally verbatim, bull**** accusations connecting the NZ extremist leftist shooter to anything other than that.

It was almost as if it was scripted and issued to them. As if the JournoList was back once again.

 

[tres borrachos]

Here's a hint, Tres. I worship no one (well, not quite true. There's a case to be made for my wife ) and I adore no political figure (yea, reserved for my wife again, I'm afraid).

You should tell that to the people who describe any opposition to Trump as "hatred". Because according to your fellow Trump Fans, any of us - even lifelong Republicans like me - "hate" the man because we oppose him. You're the first one yet who seems to understand you can't attribute strong emotions to someone you don't know.

Everyone who knew Trump knew he was a pig. Everyone knew he was probably bribing his scores into silence. But this, if true, is not good for Fox. You would agree with that I assume? Did you like it when CNN was covering for the Clintons? I didn't. And because I'm no hypocrite, I'll call Fox out when they do it, if they did it here. Time will tell.

 

[tres borrachos]

It will be interesting for many Americans but Trump supporters won't care. They haven't cared about anything else and let's be honest here, this doesn't even crack the top 200 of immoral, illegal, dishonest, or disgusting things that have taken place by Trump and his inner circle since his inauguration.

Trump could shoot someone in broad daylight, and they'd cheer his accuracy.