• 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 News legal analyst: Bush should have been indicted (1 Viewer)

How is it a shock? The legal analyst in question is Andrew Napolitano, he is no friend of the neocons. He one of the few people in the media that actually does give a damm about the rights of the people in this country.
 
How is it a shock? The legal analyst in question is Andrew Napolitano, he is no friend of the neocons. He one of the few people in the media that actually does give a damm about the rights of the people in this country.

I am just suprised they let him on Fox News, since they usally get people who are too stupid to make up a good argument.
 
That doesn't shock me a bit. Orielly tore bush a new one many times during his presidency. It's only a shock to those die hard liberals who get their fox news talking points from media matters.
 
Hes been on Fox since Bush took office.

Just haven't been looking at him, or not as noteworthy to me.



That doesn't shock me a bit. Orielly tore bush a new one many times during his presidency. It's only a shock to those die hard liberals who get their fox news talking points from media matters.

AND FAIL during Bush O'Rielly was a shill really for Bush he loved Bush so much. Media Matters usually backs up their claims as well, so stuff it. Mister I don't care about the Constitution O'Rielly
 
Last edited:
Just haven't been looking at him, or not as noteworthy to me.





AND FAIL during Bush O'Rielly was a shill really for Bush he loved Bush so much. Media Matters usually backs up their claims as well, so stuff it. Mister I don't care about the Constitution O'Rielly


I think it's hilarious when people defend fox and trash media matters in the same breath. I watch FNC alot, and many times i'll see that media matters has posted a clip from a show I watched that day. From what i've seen, they never dishonestly distort the comments, the talking heads indict themselves. Napolitano is kind of doing a 180 as of late, he recently quit his radio show with fellow FNC personality Brian Kilmeade.
 
I am totally socked that this is coming from FOX NEWS the total shill of Bush jr. :shock:
Perhaps if you were not so wrapped up in the bigoted "Faux News" rhetoric of the left, this would not be the case.
 
You said:

AND FAIL during Bush O'Rielly was a shill really for Bush he loved Bush so much. Media Matters usually backs up their claims as well, so stuff it. Mister I don't care about the Constitution O'Rielly



*Sigh* here is your proof, this interview is certainly not in the tank with Bush. He's going to remain respectful, but he flat out asked where the WMD's were in Iraq. Not something a hard nosed righty would even touch. He also asked flat out why Bush couldn't control illegal immigration and told him his idea is "with all due respect sir, it ain't workin." Boy, let me tell you, O'rielly is in the tank with Bush. *rolleyes* Stop getting your information from media matters, really, you discredit yourself when you do.

http://www.newshounds.us/2004/09/28/oreillybush_interview_transcript_part_one.php
 
Last edited:
That doesn't shock me a bit. Orielly tore bush a new one many times during his presidency. It's only a shock to those die hard liberals who get their fox news talking points from media matters.

That's like me saying Olbermann tore Obama a new one for the times he's critiqued him. Must be a shock to those die-hard neocon conservatives who get their MSNBC talking points from about 1000 different sites.
 
The fact is I proved that poster wrong. That's all I was trying to do. This thread is not about MSNBC or Olberman. If you want to discuss them, make a new thread. This one is about FNC.
 
Last edited:
The second President Bush, Bush Jr. Son of George, Sr.

Who is Bush, Jr? I know we have a Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., but who is Bush, Jr.?
 
The fact is I proved that poster wrong. That's all I was trying to do. This thread is not about MSNBC or Olberman. If you want to discuss them, make a new thread. This one is about FNC.

And my point is just because O'Reilly spoke up about some issues that didn't side with Bush does not mean he's not a partisan flake and typical Fox GOP shill.
 
I am not surprised by this from FOX News.
What does surprise me is the secondary story where the Judge suggests that the Arizona vs Federal Government case will be decided in favour of the Federal Government, which to my mind would give the Federal Government 'carte blanche' to decide which Laws it will or will not uphold.

I also agree with the Judge that George Bush should have been impeached & indicted.
 
I am just suprised they let him on Fox News, since they usally get people who are too stupid to make up a good argument.

Estrich, Davis, Beckel, Holmes... all know regular Democrats on FOX.

I love the article below... they admit FOX has Libs on, but then cry that they are the wrong Libs... ROTFLOL.

But Fox also has a stable of regular commentators, some under contract to the network, who pop up frequently as representatives of the Democratic or progressive viewpoint. They do not appear to know what they have gotten into. Though these Democrats tell Salon they are doing their best to reach out and sway potential voters...

The real Fox News Democrats - Fox News - Salon.com
 
I am just suprised they let him on Fox News, since they usally get people who are too stupid to make up a good argument.

If you would spend more time actually watching and paying attention to what goes on on FNC, vice going along with the Liberal talking about, you would have already known all this.
 
Fox legal analyst: Bush should have been indicted | Raw Story


I am totally socked that this is coming from FOX NEWS the total shill of Bush jr. :shock:

Unfortunately for the Judge, there is a long history of legal precedence for suspending habeus corpus, and another problem is that Obama has continued all of the Bush policies that the Judge says Bush ought to be indicted for.

So, to argue that Bush ought to be indicted for these actions is to also argue that Obama also should be indicted for the same actions.
 
O'Reilly isn't a Republican. He's specifically quiet about his political leaning and agrees and disagrees evenly with both sides. Actually, he seems more liberal than conservative - my husband doesn't like him for this fact, actually (my husband's a Beck Lover) . . . but he does feel it's ok to torture.

He's also not the typical "Fox News" voice. He's set apart from them and just happens to be on their channel. He'd fit in just fine somewhere else because he doesn't need a V8. He says what's on his mind and that's that.
 
Why would anybody who doesn't watch Fox News, want to watch, never mind pay attention?

If you would spend more time actually watching and paying attention to what goes on on FNC, vice going along with the Liberal talking about, you would have already known all this.
 
It is important - sometimes - to actually know the whole scope of the 24/7 channel you choose to support and choose to loath.

Purely for argument's sake - I don't watch enough 24/7 to really form solid opinions *now* - but I *use* to watch Fox all the time so that's all I can really talk about.
 
Unfortunately for the Judge, there is a long history of legal precedence for suspending habeus corpus, and another problem is that Obama has continued all of the Bush policies that the Judge says Bush ought to be indicted for.

So, to argue that Bush ought to be indicted for these actions is to also argue that Obama also should be indicted for the same actions.

You will not get any argument from me about this.
 
It is important - sometimes - to actually know the whole scope of the 24/7 channel you choose to support and choose to loath.

Purely for argument's sake - I don't watch enough 24/7 to really form solid opinions *now* - but I *use* to watch Fox all the time so that's all I can really talk about.

But you do have your Husband giving you his opinions?
That should help your decision making within your own thought process.
Whoops, perhaps not. ROFLMAO
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom