Jump to content

FOX LIES internal emails SHOW


Recommended Posts

Fox's Murdoch called election fraud claims a 'Trump myth'

 

Quote

Trump allies like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell appeared on Fox News and falsely claimed Dominion software may have manipulated vote counts in favour of Biden. Wild claims about the company's origin story, connecting it to the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, were also made.

Dominion sued Fox News in March 2021 in Delaware state court. Through the discovery process, Dominion has gained access to internal Fox emails and several network hosts and executives have sat for depositions, as has Fox Corp. chair Rupert Murdoch.

The result, according to the plaintiffs in Thursday's filing obtained by CBC News, was that "witness after witness has admitted under oath that they have not seen evidence proving Dominion stole the 2020 Presidential Election or that they do not believe Dominion did."

 

Dominion alleges, citing some of the Fox messages, that the network wanted to keep up with the likes of Newsmax and OANN on the electoral fraud claims in order not to lose viewers to those other two networks.

Dominion says it didn't stand by idly at the time, pointing to "over 3,600 separate communications to Fox with at least a dozen separate and widely circulated fact-check emails — each pointing to verifiable third-party information debunking the claims."

Furthermore, the company said, rulings in other cases establish precedent that publishers can't hide behind the fact the false utterances were made by non-employees.

What do the internal Fox messages say?

Dominion's filing includes dozens of emails and statements in which Murdoch and Fox executives and hosts say that the claims made about Dominion on-air were false.

"Sidney Powell is lying," host Tucker Carlson said to his producer on Nov. 16, 2020, while host Sean Hannity referred to Giuliani as "acting like an insane person" around the same time. 

 

Carlson also lashed out a female Fox reporter who tweeted a fact-check on Trump fraud claims, saying it was "measurably hurting the company" and that she should be fired. The tweet by the reporter was deleted within hours.

Proof Fox hosts care far more about company PROFITS than reporting the TRUTH. That is WHY they deserve the name: FOX LIES.

Of course this is NOT the first time.

Fox News won a court case by 'persuasively' arguing that no 'reasonable viewer' takes Tucker Carlson seriously

Fox lawyers are ON RECORD saying Carlson should NOT BE BELIEVED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

There are a few reports that FOX didn't believe what they were telling their own viewers.

Their viewers are typically low IQ Trumpers with views already solidified by watching that guy on YouTube.

Fox News has to to think of its advertising revenue, so they became the National Enquirer, TV version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Their viewers are typically low IQ Trumpers with views already solidified by watching that guy on YouTube.

Fox News has to to think of its advertising revenue, so they became the National Enquirer, TV version.

I don't think people watch TV very critically in general.  In the 3-network world we had the same ecosystem of information pruned for the viewer.  This seems more egregious because FOX/CNN/MSNBC/et al.  are NOT aligned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't think people watch TV very critically in general.  In the 3-network world we had the same ecosystem of information pruned for the viewer.  This seems more egregious because FOX/CNN/MSNBC/et al.  are NOT aligned.

I guess one has to decide the medium they use for the news.  I can switch back and forth on the internet all day but I still enjoy the BBC news in the evening.  I think CNN/MSNBC etc are heavily biased, but anyone with half a brain can edit it out.  It actually gets funny sometimes. 

Fox news is a joke. (not the funny kind)

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Their viewers are typically low IQ Trumpers with views already solidified by watching that guy on YouTube.

Fox News has to to think of its advertising revenue, so they became the National Enquirer, TV version.

Fox was worried they would lose their viewers to competitors after they honestly reported that Trump lost AZ.

So they switched to even STRONGER service to what their viewers wanted to hear instead of the the truth.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, robosmith said:

Not just reports, actual emails acquired in the depositions for the Dominion lawsuits.

Mark Dice addresses the Dominion angle in this video. It seems that even Dominion execs had serious doubts about their own system. Many Democrats also had misgivings about the integrity of electronic voting, but that was prior to the 2020 election. After it was over, they changed their tune completely.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ironstone said:

Mark Dice addresses the Dominion angle in this video. It seems that even Dominion execs had serious doubts about their own system. Many Democrats also had misgivings about the integrity of electronic voting, but that was prior to the 2020 election. After it was over, they changed their tune completely.

Mark Dice is quite the Wing Nut Straight Style Steel Zinc DIN 315eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Dice

 

 

 

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ironstone said:

Mark Dice addresses the Dominion angle in this video. It seems that even Dominion execs had serious doubts about their own system. Many Democrats also had misgivings about the integrity of electronic voting, but that was prior to the 2020 election. After it was over, they changed their tune completely.

Sure. Fox hosts were "just asking questions." LMAO

And you buy that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Mark Dice is quite the Wing Nut Straight Style Steel Zinc DIN 315eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Dice

 

 

 

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much given the huge left wing bias they have. It's great for a lot of other information, but not political information. Anyone not on the political left is usually deemed to be a far right extremist.

And you failed to address the alleged internal emails from the Dominion executives that admitted their system wasn't secure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, ironstone said:

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much given the huge left wing bias they have. It's great for a lot of other information, but not political information. Anyone not on the political left is usually deemed to be a far right extremist.

And you failed to address the alleged internal emails from the Dominion executives that admitted their system wasn't secure.

Did you really just bring up political bias in response to a post criticising someone like Mark Dice?

Did you not think about it first?

As for the Dominion issue, I'm going to let the courts decide. 

Oh!  They have already.  Is that more of that damn bias again?

I know.  Lets wait for the outcome of the defamation lawsuit.  I'm sure those emails will swing things in Fox News' favour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much given the huge left wing bias they have. It's great for a lot of other information, but not political information. Anyone not on the political left is usually deemed to be a far right extremist.

Given the "huge right wing bias" you have, why should anyone believe ^this OPINION?

You got ANY objective EVIDENCE?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ironstone said:

I wouldn't rely on Wikipedia too much given the huge left wing bias they have. It's great for a lot of other information, but not political information. Anyone not on the political left is usually deemed to be a far right extremist.

And you failed to address the alleged internal emails from the Dominion executives that admitted their system wasn't secure.

“Alleged” internal Dominion emails?

Right now, Fox News is in the middle of a $1.6 Billion lawsuit with Dominion.  Both parties have the right to subpoena this kind of information from the other, specifically electronic email and text message records.  So if these “alleged” emails exist, Fox would have obtained them. But they did not, because they don’t exist. 
 

This guy uses the word “alleged” as a cover for a lie that he made up.  When a person is legitimately accused of a crime, no matter how much evidence exists, he is “alleged” to have committed the crime until he has been convicted. That’s how the media uses the word “alleged.” Not “I just made something up so I’ll call it an allegation”. He’s making that up out of thin air. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, robosmith said:

Given the "huge right wing bias" you have, why should anyone believe ^this OPINION?

You got ANY objective EVIDENCE?

 

Should I ask you about objective evidence for Russian collusion? Never mind, that would be pointless.

If these internal Dominion emails shown on the video are false, then I suppose Dominion can successfully sue Mark Dice.

Electronic voting is not infallible. You won't believe me but many Democrats have also said the same thing(all prior to 2020).

I freely admit to having my biases, just as you clearly have yours.

I even get why you guys would ridicule someone like Mark Dice.  We don't trust sources from the other side.To be fair, I would ridicule Brian Stelter or Whoopi Goldberg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Should I ask you about objective evidence for Russian collusion? Never mind, that would be pointless.

If these internal Dominion emails shown on the video are false, then I suppose Dominion can successfully sue Mark Dice.

Electronic voting is not infallible. You won't believe me but many Democrats have also said the same thing(all prior to 2020).

I freely admit to having my biases, just as you clearly have yours.

I even get why you guys would ridicule someone like Mark Dice.  We don't trust sources from the other side.To be fair, I would ridicule Brian Stelter or Whoopi Goldberg.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, referring to emails Mrs. Clinton had deleted from the private account she had used when she was secretary of state. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rebound said:

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, referring to emails Mrs. Clinton had deleted from the private account she had used when she was secretary of state. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Context is pretty important here and you clearly missed it. If Trump had said this in a private call to Russian leaders that's a different story. This public comment was clearly made in jest.

News organizations push stories that they hope will attract attention and gain viewers or readers. You're crapping all over FOX for this story while ignoring all the other news outlets for falsely pushing Russian collusion even when they knew it wasn't true. One CNN contributor did admit it, to his credit.

CNN's Van Jones Calls Trump-Russia Story 'Nothing Burger,' Newest Project Veritas Video Shows (newsweek.com)

They flogged this story for years. False stories are not rare in the news industry. "Hands up, don't shoot" is another whopper.

As for Dominion, I personally stand with those that had concerns about the security of electronic voting.

Democrats question election results, voting machines - Washington Times

Why do you guys believe it's only acceptable to question election integrity when it suits you?

Suddenly OK To Question Election Integrity After Fake Votes Wrecked NYC Mayor Race (thefederalist.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

Context is pretty important here and you clearly missed it. If Trump had said this in a private call to Russian leaders that's a different story. This public comment was clearly made in jest.

News organizations push stories that they hope will attract attention and gain viewers or readers. You're crapping all over FOX for this story while ignoring all the other news outlets for falsely pushing Russian collusion even when they knew it wasn't true. One CNN contributor did admit it, to his credit.

CNN's Van Jones Calls Trump-Russia Story 'Nothing Burger,' Newest Project Veritas Video Shows (newsweek.com)

They flogged this story for years. False stories are not rare in the news industry. "Hands up, don't shoot" is another whopper.

As for Dominion, I personally stand with those that had concerns about the security of electronic voting.

Democrats question election results, voting machines - Washington Times

Why do you guys believe it's only acceptable to question election integrity when it suits you?

Suddenly OK To Question Election Integrity After Fake Votes Wrecked NYC Mayor Race (thefederalist.com)

Really? It was a joke? 
Let me ask you something: If burglars keep stealing things from you, over and over, and the theft of your property benefits someone… and THEN that person asks the thief to steal more things from you… is that a joke? 
 

See, it was a fact that Russia stole from Hillary Clinton. And it was a fact that the theft benefitted Donald Trump.  That is no joke, and it is not myth; those two things are face.  Donald Trump had hired a bunch of people with ties to the Russian government. And Trump gleefully, repeatedly exploited it.  That put him under suspicion. The fact that Trump was personally, directly and happily taking advantage of Russian espionage activities exempts the “I’m joking” defense.  
 

Let me give you some excellent free legal advice: If you are ever a crime suspect, DO NOT JOKE ABOUT IT.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

Context is pretty important here and you clearly missed it. If Trump had said this in a private call to Russian leaders that's a different story. This public comment was clearly made in jest.

News organizations push stories that they hope will attract attention and gain viewers or readers. You're crapping all over FOX for this story while ignoring all the other news outlets for falsely pushing Russian collusion even when they knew it wasn't true. One CNN contributor did admit it, to his credit.

CNN's Van Jones Calls Trump-Russia Story 'Nothing Burger,' Newest Project Veritas Video Shows (newsweek.com)

They flogged this story for years. False stories are not rare in the news industry. "Hands up, don't shoot" is another whopper.

As for Dominion, I personally stand with those that had concerns about the security of electronic voting.

Democrats question election results, voting machines - Washington Times

Why do you guys believe it's only acceptable to question election integrity when it suits you?

Suddenly OK To Question Election Integrity After Fake Votes Wrecked NYC Mayor Race (thefederalist.com)

I want you to think about how horribly media like Washington Times lies to you.  
 

You cited an article titled: “Democrats question election results, voting machines.”

I read that article. Did you? Because if you read the article, you’d know this: They quoted one single Democrat as saying he does not trust voting machines.  Not a leader or official, just a 34 year old guy. One guy!  WTF? 
 

A reporter can probably find a black person who thinks slavery was great for black people. Headline: “Black People Think Slavery Was Great!” Is that accurate in any way? If they find two black people who think that way, does that make the headline accurate? Absolutely not.  You use these articles to prove your points but the articles themselves are just outright lies. 
 

Somewhere, don’t you have some actual concerns and opinions of your own? Instead of “Rah rah Republicans,” we’d much rather know about what you think. 

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

I want you to think about how horribly media like Washington Times lies to you.  
 

You cited an article titled: “Democrats question election results, voting machines.”

I read that article. Did you? Because if you read the article, you’d know this: They quoted one single Democrat as saying he does not trust voting machines.  Not a leader or official, just a 34 year old guy. One guy!  WTF? 
 

A reporter can probably find a black person who thinks slavery was great for black people. Headline: “Black People Think Slavery Was Great!” Is that accurate in any way? If they find two black people who think that way, does that make the headline accurate? Absolutely not.  You use these articles to prove your points but the articles themselves are just outright lies. 
 

Somewhere, don’t you have some actual concerns and opinions of your own? Instead of “Rah rah Republicans,” we’d much rather know about what you think. 

You clearly didn't watch the link I posted earlier, which showed a number of Democrats raising concerns about electronic voting integrity. They had every right to be voicing their concerns, even though they promptly stopped after the 2020 election. Prior to the 2020 election your side was trying to make the case that electronic voting was vulnerable.

Van Jones was correct in that Russia collusion was a giant nothingburger. He wasn't the only one.

Bret Stephens Is First In Big Media To Admit Russian Collusion Was A 'Hoax' (thefederalist.com)

Pulitzer Prize-winning NY Times journalist admits Russian collusion story was a 'hoax' | The Post Millennial | thepostmillennial.com

But hey! They did get a Pulitzer for it right?

Of course I have opinions of my own. And I have sources I trust more than others. Obviously this bothers you a great deal for some reason. All the arguments you try to make against me and my case also can be applied to you and your trusted sources like The View.

I can't convince you, you cannot convince me. Stalemate. No harm in having a spirited debate however. But even that simple fact that everyone does not fall into line with your narrative really irritates you. I can't help that.

Earlier I used the word "alleged" to describe internal Dominion emails. I should not have used that term as the internal emails from Dominion were obtained in the discovery process of the Dominion/FOX lawsuit. Those Dominion emails in which they admitted their system was full of vulnerabilities were genuine. Mark Dice did debunk this  FOX internal email story.

This was a documentary from HBO. HBO is owned by Warner Media LLC, which also happens to own CNN among others. I did get to see most of this documentary when it aired and it's very interesting. But this documentary wasn't mentioned very much after 2020. Go figure.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, ironstone said:

You clearly didn't watch the link I posted earlier, which showed a number of Democrats raising concerns about electronic voting integrity. They had every right to be voicing their concerns, even though they promptly stopped after the 2020 election. Prior to the 2020 election your side was trying to make the case that electronic voting was vulnerable.

Van Jones was correct in that Russia collusion was a giant nothingburger. He wasn't the only one.

Bret Stephens Is First In Big Media To Admit Russian Collusion Was A 'Hoax' (thefederalist.com)

Pulitzer Prize-winning NY Times journalist admits Russian collusion story was a 'hoax' | The Post Millennial | thepostmillennial.com

But hey! They did get a Pulitzer for it right?

Of course I have opinions of my own. And I have sources I trust more than others. Obviously this bothers you a great deal for some reason. All the arguments you try to make against me and my case also can be applied to you and your trusted sources like The View.

I can't convince you, you cannot convince me. Stalemate. No harm in having a spirited debate however. But even that simple fact that everyone does not fall into line with your narrative really irritates you. I can't help that.

Earlier I used the word "alleged" to describe internal Dominion emails. I should not have used that term as the internal emails from Dominion were obtained in the discovery process of the Dominion/FOX lawsuit. Those Dominion emails in which they admitted their system was full of vulnerabilities were genuine. Mark Dice did debunk this  FOX internal email story.

This was a documentary from HBO. HBO is owned by Warner Media LLC, which also happens to own CNN among others. I did get to see most of this documentary when it aired and it's very interesting. But this documentary wasn't mentioned very much after 2020. Go figure.?

Van Jones is entitled to his opinion. 
I think his opinion is that important issues like jobs and housing are what matter, not whether Trump collided with Russia. 
 

To help you understand: I read fast. I don’t have the patience to listen to an opinionated right-wing windbag prattle on his YouTube Channel for twenty minutes about conspiracy theories and rumors.  When you post a link to the article, “Van Jones said X”, that is something I can follow and verify. 
 

If it’s objective fact, it’s verifiable. That’s why you’ll almost never get me to watch one of the YouTube links you post. It takes forever and it’s rarely objective fact, it’s just a guy talking. 

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ironstone said:

Should I ask you about objective evidence for Russian collusion? Never mind, that would be pointless.

No it would not. I have posted the EVIDENCE FOUND here MANY TIMES.

4 hours ago, ironstone said:

If these internal Dominion emails shown on the video are false, then I suppose Dominion can successfully sue Mark Dice.

The emails to which were referred are FOX's internal emails.

4 hours ago, ironstone said:

Electronic voting is not infallible. You won't believe me but many Democrats have also said the same thing(all prior to 2020).

No one said they are infallible. They are certainly subject to OPERATOR ERROR.

4 hours ago, ironstone said:

I freely admit to having my biases, just as you clearly have yours.

I even get why you guys would ridicule someone like Mark Dice.  We don't trust sources from the other side.To be fair, I would ridicule Brian Stelter or Whoopi Goldberg.

You didn't answer the question. I'll take that as a 'no' you DON'T have objective evidence that Wikipedia has a "huge left wing bias."

Given that it is publicly edited, I believe there is a lot of debate about the content, which you can see if you care to delve into that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...