TUCKER CARLSON OUT AT FOX NEWS

[herbie]

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

no, that's not what a strawman would be. Sorry.  If it were true then it would be a number of other possible fallacies. but not that one.

So - you were wrong. Again.  Sigh. It's getting so repetitive that you're wrong that it's starting to get boring.

meanwhile-  you're wrong A SECOND time because of course it was entirely related to what you said.

A confused person WOULD say that.

And YOU  ARE CONFUSED enough to believe your STRAWMAN addresses what I wrote.

wiki

Quote

A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion

 

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

No, that's how the law works.

it really isn't. I'm sure you think that's the case but it IS EXTREMELY normal for people to leave or be fired between teh time when an allegation is made and when it finally gets to trial. Doesn't make you look bad at all.

12 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

 

A couple things:

First, what Tucker Carlson believes and what he says live on television have always been very, very different things.  While it's clearly true he didn't like shilling Trump's stolen election claims (and apparently hated him on a personal level), he certainly had no problem lying and promoting bullshit as the central part of his program, and telling people even after his texts about hating Trump became public that he "loves Trump". 

Sure. HE's a performer. Lying is literally their business.

12 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Second, Yahoo sports is evidently not the best place to get this sort of news, failing to mention that the LA Times reporter being referenced highlighted two reasons for the firing:

1) The harrassment/bullying/sexism lawsuit against him (as if that's unusual to FOX corp)

2) Rupert Murdoch was tired of his conspiracy theories, particularly his coverage about the January 6th riot.  

Sure - but neither of those things are the dominion scandal.

[Moonbox]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

it really isn't. I'm sure you think that's the case but it IS EXTREMELY normal for people to leave or be fired between teh time when an allegation is made and when it finally gets to trial. Doesn't make you look bad at all.

Depending on the circumstances, sure, especially if there's some sort of workplace misconduct going on and allegations turn out to have merit.  A suspension and then getting fired could certainly come up. 

On the other hand, in a +$1B libel/slander lawsuit where intent of malice is the legal question behind persistent and prolonged lies broadcasted by an individual and his employer, firing that individual raises troubling questions. 

You could try to frame the (relatively) small potatoes harassment suit against Fox and his show as the reason, but when there's another suit orders of magnitude larger looming overhead, you have to try pretty hard to believe it. 

We could, of course, just accept that it's both - that Rupert Murdoch just got burned for almost $800M, that Tucker Carlson was a big reason for that, and that with another lawsuit looming it was better to cut and run.  That's fine with me.   

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure. HE's a performer. Lying is literally their business.

Evidently it's a problem, because as Fox News and Alex Jones have discovered recently, telling dangerous and/or damaging lies you know aren't true can cost a lot!

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure - but neither of those things are the dominion scandal.

No, but after getting burned for almost a billion, and with other lawsuits on the docket, perhaps good 'ol Rupert finally realized having a lying and toxic sack of shit headlining your news network was no longer a viable strategy going forward.  

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Was true....CBC opened comments after readers complained.

Yeah sure. Actually I bet it was all a conspiracy just to make you look bad. 

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Depending on the circumstances, sure, especially if there's some sort of workplace misconduct going on and allegations turn out to have merit.  A suspension and then getting fired could certainly come up. 

On the other hand, in a +$1B libel/slander lawsuit where intent of malice is the legal question behind persistent and prolonged lies broadcasted by an individual and his employer, firing that individual raises troubling questions. 

You'd never even be able to get that put in as evidence. Sure - to the court of public opinion it would look hinky as hell, but a judge wouldn't care.  For all he knows he got caught banging the pres's wife.

34 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

You could try to frame the (relatively) small potatoes harassment suit against Fox and his show as the reason, but when there's another suit orders of magnitude larger looming overhead, you have to try pretty hard to believe it. 

We could, of course, just accept that it's both - that Rupert Murdoch just got burned for almost $800M, that Tucker Carlson was a big reason for that, and that with another lawsuit looming it was better to cut and run.  That's fine with me.   

Evidently it's a problem, because as Fox News and Alex Jones have discovered recently, telling dangerous and/or damaging lies you know aren't true can cost a lot!

No, but after getting burned for almost a billion, and with other lawsuits on the docket, perhaps good 'ol Rupert finally realized having a lying and toxic sack of shit headlining your news network was no longer a viable strategy going forward.  

Remember - he was the one complaining to Rupert that the reporting was clearly bullshit and they shouldn't be doing it.

but in any case, we'll see what he does now and where it goes from here. That was their most watched person and he had a lot of loyalty and now he's abruptly gone. So Fox may take a bit of a ratings hit.

[Nationalist]

Good bye Tucker. You will be missed.

 

Edited April 25, 2023 by Nationalist

[Zeitgeist]

Tucker Carlson tells it like it is and isn’t afraid to criticize government and media on a range of important topics, such as war in Ukraine.  Even if you disagree with some or many of the things he says, no one can deny that Carlson stands up for and exemplifies free speech.

All we can do is speculate on why he’s out at Fox.  I just hope he resurfaces soon. He’d probably be better off and freer having a podcast or Rumble channel.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[CdnFox]

27 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Tucker Carlson tells it like it is and isn’t afraid to criticize government and media on a range of important topics, such as war in Ukraine.  Even if you disagree with some or many of the things he says, no one can deny that Carlson stands up for and exemplifies free speech.

All we can do is speculate on why he’s out at Fox.  I just hope he resurfaces soon. He’d probably be better off and freer having a podcast or Rumble channel.

Well don lemming (sorry don lemon) was fired so i guess there's an opening at cnn...

[West]

Fox made a mistake. My guess is Carlson ends up with The Daily Wire

[West]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Good bye Tucker. You will be missed.

 

He'll bounce back. Can't keep a good man down 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, West said:

Fox made a mistake. My guess is Carlson ends up with The Daily Wire

That would be a huge score for them but i doubt he'd take the pay cut.

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, West said:

Fox made a mistake. My guess is Carlson ends up with The Daily Wire

A good fit for the Daily Liar.  

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Remember - he was the one complaining to Rupert that the reporting was clearly bullshit and they shouldn't be doing it.

 

That is the exact opposite of truth   He  complained that the news dept wasn’t repeating the stolen election lies that his viewers wanted to hear. 

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, Moonbox said:

No, that's how the law works.  Firing people featured in a lawsuit against you is very, very stinky, and the opposing lawyers would be all over that asking very reasonable questions about why Fox got rid of their most popular host while his personal communication was being used as evidence against them.    

A couple things:

First, what Tucker Carlson believes and what he says live on television have always been very, very different things.  While it's clearly true he didn't like shilling Trump's stolen election claims (and apparently hated him on a personal level), he certainly had no problem lying and promoting bullshit as the central part of his program, and telling people even after his texts about hating Trump became public that he "loves Trump". 

Second, Yahoo sports is evidently not the best place to get this sort of news, failing to mention that the LA Times reporter being referenced highlighted two reasons for the firing:

1) The harrassment/bullying/sexism lawsuit against him (as if that's unusual to FOX corp)

2) Rupert Murdoch was tired of his conspiracy theories, particularly his coverage about the January 6th riot.  

 

 

 

 

 

You are correct. What kind of defendant would fire a key player DURING legal proceedings, creating an eager witness for the plaintiff? Waiting until after was the only reasonable move.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, West said:

He'll bounce back. Can't keep a good man down 

What about a despicable turd like Carlson? Can you keep them down?

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, Hodad said:

What about a despicable turd like Carlson? Can you keep them down?

Lol...you Libbies. You're all so predictable. 

You hate Carlson because he shines a light on you worms and makes you squirm.!

[BeaverFever]

32 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Lol...you Libbies. You're all so predictable. 

You hate Carlson because he shines a light on you worms and makes you squirm.!

Carlson was caught red handed  privately admitting he doesn’t believe the lies he tells you people on the air and that  Republican liars like Sydney Powell are “insane. And yet you still insist on worshipping him. He is the worm in the light and still you can’t help but worship him and still believe in the lies that he’s admitted are lies. 

[Nationalist]

1 minute ago, BeaverFever said:

Carlson was caught red handed  privately admitting he doesn’t believe the lies he tells you people on the air and that  Republican liars like Sydney Powell are “insane. And yet you still insist on worshipping him. He is the worm in the light and still you can’t help but worship him and still believe in the lies that he’s admitted are lies. 

Carlson isn't allowed his own opinions? Sure he is. So is everyone. First instance, I believe you're a young adolescent female.

[Nationalist]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

That would be a huge score for them but i doubt he'd take the pay cut.

Hmm...I wonder.

Tucker has always been willing to go after political BS from both sides. He is both revered and hated for that.

I wonder what would happen if he resurfaced as a presidential candidate?

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

That is the exact opposite of truth   He  complained that the news dept wasn’t repeating the stolen election lies that his viewers wanted to hear. 

Go look at the emails child. He specifically said that the whole thing was rediculous and they shouldn't be doing it. And every media source agreees he was complaining about it - That is WHY it's EVIDENCE! It's proof that fox KNEW that the stories were fake because their reporter SAID so. THat's the whole point of his emails.

Honestly - 30 seconds of research would prevent you from looking this stupid.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Carlson was caught red handed  privately admitting he doesn’t believe the lies he tells you people on the air and that  Republican liars like Sydney Powell are “insane. And yet you still insist on worshipping him. He is the worm in the light and still you can’t help but worship him and still believe in the lies that he’s admitted are lies. 

You literally JUST SAID TO ME THAT THIS WASN"T TRUE.

and then like 2 posts later you claim it's true.

Your lying is getting out of control kiddo. You should at least try to keep your lies the same for the whole thread instead of directly contradicting yourself within 2 posts.

[Moonbox]

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You'd never even be able to get that put in as evidence. Sure - to the court of public opinion it would look hinky as hell, but a judge wouldn't care.  For all he knows he got caught banging the pres's wife.

Public opinion - so what about a jury?  Like the one that decided against Alex Jones?

As for judges, of course they'd care.  It's silly to say they wouldn't.  They're big on common sense, and if it smells like a turd it's probably a turd, and firing the guy makes it smell worse. 

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Remember - he was the one complaining to Rupert that the reporting was clearly bullshit and they shouldn't be doing it.

He was also the one who's texts were made public and embarrassed the network by making it clear they were bullshitting everyone - subsequently offering Dominion the slam-dunk.  Of course the die-hard Trumpies will do the mental gymnastics necessary to somehow cope and rationalize with this, but the reality is that Fox News' most popular host was caught red-handed telling everyone stuff he not only knew wasn't true, but sickened him.  Whatever tiny shred of credibility Tucker Carlson had among serious and even semi-intelligent adults is gone now, and having him remain as your headliner just embarrasses the network further.  

13 hours ago, CdnFox said:

but in any case, we'll see what he does now and where it goes from here. That was their most watched person and he had a lot of loyalty and now he's abruptly gone. So Fox may take a bit of a ratings hit.

There's no doubt Fox News ratings will tank, in my mind. Folks weren't tuning in to Carlson for news anyways.  They were just dumb apes watching him make the ape noises they liked, so if he goes somewhere else, many will undoubtedly follow him.  

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Public opinion - so what about a jury?  Like the one that decided against Alex Jones?

They only get to hear admissible evidence. Juries don't try people based on how they feel, they try them on the law. You often hear things like 'such and such will really influence the jury' but most of the time it has no bearing.

The only way it would be admissible is if there was actual evidence that the firing was for the  express purpose of covering up the truth or somthing,

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

As for judges, of course they'd care.  It's silly to say they wouldn't.  They're big on common sense, and if it smells like a turd it's probably a turd, and firing the guy makes it smell worse. 

They could not care in the slightest and they care nothing for common sense. They focus on the law. And that is DOUBLY true of civil cases.

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

He was also the one who's texts were made public and embarrassed the network by making it clear they were bullshitting everyone - subsequently offering Dominion the slam-dunk. 

Sure - but he doesn't need to be there for the texts to be entered as evidence. They were already uncovered during disclosure.

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Of course the die-hard Trumpies will do the mental gymnastics necessary to somehow cope and rationalize with this, but the reality is that Fox News' most popular host was caught red-handed telling everyone stuff he not only knew wasn't true, but sickened him.  Whatever tiny shred of credibility Tucker Carlson had among serious and even semi-intelligent adults is gone now, and having him remain as your headliner just embarrasses the network further.  

Yeah - nobody cares about that.  Everybody assumes news people lie. If anything people will say 'at least he tried to stand up for his principles and look, they fired him".  Won't hurt him in the long run. But of course it's death for fox in the dominion case.

13 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

There's no doubt Fox News ratings will tank, in my mind. Folks weren't tuning in to Carlson for news anyways.  They were just dumb apes watching him make the ape noises they liked, so if he goes somewhere else, many will undoubtedly follow him.  

Well your puerile attempts at spreading hatred and intolerance aside, i think it's mostly true that people don't watch him because they think he's factual and unbias   Just like people like to watch the 'news comedians' that have become popular.  The new 'infotainment' industry.  He raises just enough true issues to have some credibility but as a judge recently said, a normal person could see from the nature of the show that it was not meant to be taken entirely seriously.

I think fox will indeed take a solid hit from firing him, and i do think he'll pop up somewhere else and do well

[Moonbox]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

They only get to hear admissible evidence. Juries don't try people based on how they feel, they try them on the law. You often hear things like 'such and such will really influence the jury' but most of the time it has no bearing.

There's no reason it wouldn't be inadmissible.  Firing a guy shortly before he's set to testify raises very reasonable  questions.  

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The only way it would be admissible is if there was actual evidence that the firing was for the  express purpose of covering up the truth or somthing,

Not true at all. Circumstantial evidence (or evidence-by-inference) is absolutely admissible and is sometimes enough to win a case by itself.  

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

They could not care in the slightest and they care nothing for common sense. They focus on the law. And that is DOUBLY true of civil cases.

Wrong again, and in a number of ways.  First, the burden of proof is much lower in civil cases, and decisions are made on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt.  Second, the idea that judges don't care about common sense is ridiculous, especially in common-law based on legal opinions.  

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well your puerile attempts at spreading hatred and intolerance aside, i think it's mostly true that people don't watch him because they think he's factual and unbias   Just like people like to watch the 'news comedians' that have become popular.

"My hatred and intolerance."  ?

Tucker Carlson viewers and late night comedy watchers are looking for very, very different things.  While they both certainly have bias, people watching Stephen Colbert don't come out parroting theories about Ukrainian bioweapon labs etc.  Carlson wasn't doing comedy, or satire.  He was a propaganda mouthpiece on what was ostensibly a news channel, telling the dumb apes what they wanted to hear.  

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I think fox will indeed take a solid hit from firing him, and i do think he'll pop up somewhere else and do well

Probably.