• 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!

Fox Caught in Another Lie

iguanaman said:
What I said was included in the Mueller report AND the bipartisan Senate report. Mueller was looking for crimes not collusion and said that Mr. One and done was NOT exonerated.
Click to expand...
Collusion is a crime.
 
Dayton3 said:
Regardless of the literal truth of the claim by FoxNews, I have no doubt that the Biden Admin. would happily be willing to drastically limit red meat consumption by Americans if they could get away with it.
Click to expand...
What a sad sour grapes post. Just face it, Fox was WRONG.
 
Overitall said:
Collusion is a crime.
Click to expand...
No it is not..

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines collusion as "secret cooperation for an illegal or dishonest purpose," but Webster's New World College Dictionary calls it "a secret agreement for fraudulent or illegal purpose; conspiracy." According to Black's Law Dictionary, collusion is "a deceitful agreement or compact between two or more persons, for the one party to bring an action against the other for some evil purpose, as to defraud a third party of his right."
Definitions offered by the latter two sources suggest illegal acts, but Merriam-Webster's definition is vaguer (i.e. simply being dishonest is not necessarily a crime). However, despite its "legalistic" tone, the term collusion has no specific legal meaning in criminal law; there's no such criminal charge called "collusion," nor does the term necessarily signal a criminal offense.
https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-charges/is-collusion-a-crime.html
 
Hari Seldon said:
Far out like inciting a riot and pressuring an elected official "to find him votes". You got it alright. The guy was and is a malignant narcissist scumbag piece of shit grifter.
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean every accusation made about him was true.
 
Dayton3 said:
I'm not obligated to prove a negative. If you knew anything about debate you would already know that.
Click to expand...
It is not "proving a negative" It is proving that what you claimed as fact is not just off the top of your head. Taking a page from the one term mistake is not a debate tactic. He's a terrible debater.
 
iguanaman said:
No it is not..

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines collusion as "secret cooperation for an illegal or dishonest purpose," but Webster's New World College Dictionary calls it "a secret agreement for fraudulent or illegal purpose; conspiracy." According to Black's Law Dictionary, collusion is "a deceitful agreement or compact between two or more persons, for the one party to bring an action against the other for some evil purpose, as to defraud a third party of his right."
Definitions offered by the latter two sources suggest illegal acts, but Merriam-Webster's definition is vaguer (i.e. simply being dishonest is not necessarily a crime). However, despite its "legalistic" tone, the term collusion has no specific legal meaning in criminal law; there's no such criminal charge called "collusion," nor does the term necessarily signal a criminal offense.
https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-charges/is-collusion-a-crime.html
Click to expand...
www.justsecurity.org

Campaign Finance Law: When "Collusion" with a Foreign Government Becomes a Crime - Just Security

Commentary on Russian intervention in the 2016 elections has included one confidently expressed and perhaps growing view: that there may be a scandal there, but no conceivable crime. It is claimed that the Trump campaign could wink and nod at Russian hacking, and derive the full benefit, but...
www.justsecurity.org www.justsecurity.org
Commentary on Russian intervention in the 2016 elections has included one confidently expressed and perhaps growing view: that there may be a scandal there, but no conceivable crime.

This view is flawed. It fails to consider the potential campaign finance violations, as suggested by the facts so far known, under existing law. These violations are criminally enforceable.
Click to expand...
On the surface there was a possibility a crime was committed. That was part of the Mueller investigation. As well as the investigation of the FBI. The FBI does not investigate non-criminal matters.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–2019)
 
OH, the Republican base loves it's red meat, that is why the Republicans keep tossing them red meat:

maxresdefault.jpg
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Hold it Fox lied????? In other news the Sun is going to rise in the East tomorrow....
Click to expand...
Have you noticed, when someone on CNN or NBC makes a mistake, despite apologizing, the Right go completely nuts?
But when Fox makes a mistake, and apologizes, the Right say "good on Fox, the right thing to do."

Double standard and hypocrisy doesn't even come close.

rolling-on-the-floor-laughing_1f923.png
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Have you noticed, when someone on CNN or NBC makes a mistake, despite apologizing, the Right go completely nuts?
But when Fox makes a mistake, and apologizes, the Right say "good on Fox, the right thing to do."

Double standard and hypocrisy doesn't even come close.

View attachment 67330693
Click to expand...
First of all, how many on the “Right” even watch CNN or NBC? Secondly, how many times have either corrected their false reports? If you could cite examples I for one would say good for them. It’s expected.
 
That is the idea. Often, this is why it is done.

They know you can never make people stop believing once they say it.

Watch, it will pop up many times here now.
Click to expand...
Dayton3 said:
Regardless of the literal truth of the claim by FoxNews, I have no doubt that the Biden Admin. would happily be willing to drastically limit red meat consumption by Americans if they could get away with it.
Click to expand...
Well that didn't take long!
 
Overitall said:
First of all, how many on the “Right” even watch CNN or NBC? Secondly, how many times have either corrected their false reports? If you could cite examples I for one would say good for them. It’s expected.
Click to expand...
The media outlets on the Left HAVE made mistakes from time to time, every a Canadian outlet makes mistakes.
The belief that: #1 - only the Left make mistakes in reporting and #2 - that it proves they can NOT be trusted, are both canards.

I am not going to play scorecard games, which outlet lied the most often or made the most mistakes, because Fox would lose on that count, and badly.
AND if I pointed out Fact Checkers who keep tabs on these things, I would be told by the Righties that the Fact Checkers are phony or fake.

Neither her nor there, my comment was strictly on the hypocrisy.
Never mind the endless dribble of misinformation coming from Fox, they should be applauded for admitting a mistake when they get caught making one.
BUT when the odd mistake is made by the dreaded MSM, we hear the rallying cry "they can't be trusted!'
 
Dayton3 said:
Regardless of the literal truth of the claim by FoxNews, I have no doubt that the Biden Admin. would happily be willing to drastically limit red meat consumption by Americans if they could get away with it.
Click to expand...
And what makes you say that? About 500,000 prior lies and hyperbole by conservative media.
 
Overitall said:
Reporters have been known to get it wrong. Retracting a report when they get it wrong is expected. That is the kind of reporter you should take seriously. But of course we’re talking about a Fox News reporter and none of them are to be taken seriously just on that basis alone, right?
Click to expand...
True, but what kind of idiot believes for a second that Biden would propose limiting meat intake to 4 pounds a year? Someone who doesn't deserve to be called a journalist.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
The media outlets on the Left HAVE made mistakes from time to time, every a Canadian outlet makes mistakes.
The belief that: #1 - only the Left make mistakes in reporting and #2 - that it proves they can NOT be trusted, are both canards.

I am not going to play scorecard games, which outlet lied the most often or made the most mistakes, because Fox would lose on that count, and badly.
AND if I pointed out Fact Checkers who keep tabs on these things, I would be told by the Righties that the Fact Checkers are phony or fake.

Neither her nor there, my comment was strictly on the hypocrisy.
Never mind the endless dribble of misinformation coming from Fox, they should be applauded for admitting a mistake when they get caught making one.
BUT when the odd mistake is made by the dreaded MSM, we hear the rallying cry "they can't be trusted!'
Click to expand...
Absent supporting evidence for a claim you’re left with a perception. You’re allowed that, but being a debate board I would think you would want to back up your perception with factual evidence.
 
Dayton3 said:
Regardless of the literal truth of the claim by FoxNews, I have no doubt that the Biden Admin. would happily be willing to drastically limit red meat consumption by Americans if they could get away with it.
Click to expand...
We have no doubt you would believe it. No hamburgers for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom