• 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!

William Barr told Murdoch to 'muzzle' Fox News Trump critic, Judge Andrew Napolitano, new book says

W_Heisenberg

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
21,350
Reaction score
19,255
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
William Barr told Murdoch to 'muzzle' Fox News Trump critic, new book says | William Barr | The Guardian

The attorney general, William Barr, told Rupert Murdoch to “muzzle” Andrew Napolitano, a prominent Fox News personality who became a critic of Donald Trump, according to a new book about the rightwing TV network.

Barr’s meeting with Murdoch, at the media mogul’s New York home in October 2019, was widely reported at the time, with speculation surrounding its subject. According to Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth, by CNN media reporter Brian Stelter, subjects covered included media consolidation and criminal justice reform.

“But it was also about Judge Andrew Napolitano.”

Stelter’s in-depth look at Fox News, its fortunes under Trump and its links to his White House will be published on Tuesday. The Guardian obtained a copy.

In early 2019 it was reported that Napolitano, a New Jersey superior court judge who joined Fox News in 1998, told friends he had been on Trump’s shortlist for the supreme court. But he broke ranks later in the year, labeling Trump’s approaches to Ukraine, seeking political dirt on rivals, “both criminal and impeachable behavior”.

“The criminal behavior to which Trump has admitted,” Napolitano wrote, in a column dated 3 October, “is much more grave than anything alleged or unearthed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and much of what Mueller revealed was impeachable.”

Citing an unnamed source, Stelter writes that Trump “was so incensed by the judge’s TV broadcasts that he had implored Barr to send Rupert a message in person … about ‘muzzling the judge’. [Trump] wanted the nation’s top law enforcement official to convey just how atrocious Napolitano’s legal analysis had been.”

Folks...

This is what fascism looks like.
 
Traditionally speaking, it's always been the job of AG to protect the President's image by shutting down criticism in the media.
 
The Minister of Justice met with the Minister of Truth again.
 
....The attorney general, William Barr, told Rupert Murdoch to “muzzle” Andrew Napolitano, a prominent Fox News personality who became a critic of Donald Trump, according to a new book about the rightwing TV network.

Barr’s meeting with Murdoch, at the media mogul’s New York home in October 2019, was widely reported at the time, with speculation surrounding its subject. According to Hoax: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth, by CNN media reporter Brian Stelter, subjects covered included media consolidation and criminal justice reform.....

Fox News is bad news.

'HOAX: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth' - by CNN's Brian Seltzer

Rachel Maddow had Stelter as a guest on last night....and he said that most Trump's unhinged ideas, misinformation and distortions come directly from FoxNews hosts.




Hannity has blood on his hands.
 
So who's going to be the first to defend this insult to the First Amendment by saying it isn't a straight violation since the government is not actually punishing anyone for the content of their speech?

That is if we're not going with the "Obama Deep State!", "Hoax!", "Disgruntled Employee!", "Illuminati Thetans from Space!", "RINO!" route.
 
Fox News is bad news.

'HOAX: Donald Trump, Fox News and the Dangerous Distortion of Truth' - by CNN's Brian Seltzer

Rachel Maddow had Stelter as a guest on last night....and he said that most Trump's unhinged ideas, misinformation and distortions come directly from FoxNews hosts.




Hannity has blood on his hands.


I don't care which "tribe" one belongs to, at this point spending 16 minutes of one's life watching the above clip reveals something that both "sides" need to hear.

Thanks for posting this.
 
So who's going to be the first to defend this insult to the First Amendment by saying it isn't a straight violation since the government is not actually punishing anyone for the content of their speech?

That is if we're not going with the "Obama Deep State!", "Hoax!", "Disgruntled Employee!", "Illuminati Thetans from Space!", "RINO!" route.

Crickets.

Maybe at a certain point, even the most thuggish, authoritarian, hateful, fascist supporters of Trump can become embarrassed and ashamed of Trump's administration?
 
Crickets.

Maybe at a certain point, even the most thuggish, authoritarian, hateful, fascist supporters of Trump can become embarrassed and ashamed of Trump's administration?

Or maybe not...

fascism is lodging a complaint with a media company? okay.

Why does it have to be explained to you that what Barr did was terribly wrong? How can you not already know it's wrong?

How is Texas failing to inculcate its residents with the founding values of our country? How can the philosophy that inspired the Framers of the Constitution just simply fly over your head?
 

Folks, this what what a man who looks more like a potato than a human peddles to sell his rag of a book.

Citing an unnamed source, Stelter writes that Trump “was so incensed by the judge’s TV broadcasts that he had implored Barr to send Rupert a message in person … about ‘muzzling the judge’. [Trump] wanted the nation’s top law enforcement official to convey just how atrocious Napolitano’s legal analysis had been.”

:eek:uch:
 
Crickets.

Maybe at a certain point, even the most thuggish, authoritarian, hateful, fascist supporters of Trump can become embarrassed and ashamed of Trump's administration?

I don't know what he'd have to do. Maybe if he tortured babies to death on live TV or something like that, so horrible you can conceive of it intellectually, but not really let yourself intuit it . . .

For that, I think we'd need our own Trump and for that person to do it to them. Except they wouldn't fully get it. It wouldn't be "oh, isn't this what we did?" It'd be "we're going to take such horrible revenge!"

Sadly, the best outcome is probably to wait a few years and let them pretend they never really liked Trump. Just like what happened with most of the birthers.
 
So who's going to be the first to defend this insult to the First Amendment by saying it isn't a straight violation since the government is not actually punishing anyone for the content of their speech?

That is if we're not going with the "Obama Deep State!", "Hoax!", "Disgruntled Employee!", "Illuminati Thetans from Space!", "RINO!" route.

Folks, this what what a man who looks more like a potato than a human peddles to sell his rag of a book.

Too predictable.


Great summary of your post.
 
Crickets.

Maybe at a certain point, even the most thuggish, authoritarian, hateful, fascist supporters of Trump can become embarrassed and ashamed of Trump's administration?

But NOT Bill Barr.
 
Too predictable.



Great summary of your post.

No receipts. Again.
See, you can post a fun emoji once you've shown receipts.

Like I did.
 
Too predictable.



Great summary of your post.

Don't worry, as per standard Trump supporter behavior, Barr will later admit it, and then Acadia will say, "So what?!"
 
Or maybe not...
Why does it have to be explained to you that what Barr did was terribly wrong? How can you not already know it's wrong?
Because considered Nap is still on fox, it clearly wasn't serious enough to be heeded, if it even occurred. No action by government was taken to charge him with the speech he was using. That's not fascism. Being mad at the media is not fascism.
How is Texas failing to inculcate its residents with the founding values of our country? How can the philosophy that inspired the Framers of the Constitution just simply fly over your head?
Take your patronization somewhere else, because it ain't working here. I have absolutely no faith in the media, and I would like proof besides someone's word that this call actually happened.

But, if it did happen, you need to cite what law bans this. Anyone is allowed to complain to the media about what they can do better.

And again...this isn't fascism. Since schools no longer teach you what it is, i can see why some people would grasp at the word like a child, as if it means something.
 
Traditionally speaking, it's always been the job of AG to protect the President's image by shutting down criticism in the media.

Yep, nothing like shutting down unwelcome dissent to demonstrate respect for the Constitution and freedom of expression.
 
I have an unnamed source who has verified that W_Heisenberg kills puppies.

What an awful person.

I don't need any anonymous sources to know you are a racist, white supremacist. That's something you've already admitted.
 
I have an unnamed source who has verified that W_Heisenberg kills puppies.

What an awful person.

I had an unnamed source who brought down a president. Consider this for a moment; people scoffed at Watergate too, just as you are doing now. You know what happened next.
 
Back
Top Bottom