![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
\m/
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 52
Posts: 99,845
|
Re: Media Bias
Remember the good old days when Fox News freaked out about Obama using a selfie stick? Or when he wore a tan suit? Damn those were some hot scandals.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,701
|
Re: Media Bias
Liberals don't know about Obama scandals because CNN told them everything was fine. They think his worst issue was a selfie stick.
Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,433
|
Re: Media Bias
FOX sure as hell would have ,right?
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
From a Land Down Under
![]() Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: toms river, nj
Age: 54
Posts: 24,147
|
Re: Media Bias
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
From a Land Down Under
![]() Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: toms river, nj
Age: 54
Posts: 24,147
|
Re: Media Bias
Quote:
Oh for God’s sake man. Can’t you just put your political affiliations aside for one post and admit that this motherfucker tried to play tit for tat with military aid? Obama never did anything that rose to that level. And he was hated by the right from the get go. Didn’t have to ooze shit from his piehole to warrant that hate like Trump has. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
From a Land Down Under
![]() Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: toms river, nj
Age: 54
Posts: 24,147
|
Re: Media Bias
Trump is actually doing shit that nobody agrees with. He actually did commit crimes. He has conned and lied his whole life. He does make racist remarks. It isn’t just that all us snowflakes ears are bleeding from his abrasive mouth. We all don’t just dislike the man - not his policies- but the man. It is such a cop out to say oh stop crying because you hate Trump. I don’t really give a fuck about Trump. Never did before 2016 anyway. He is a wreckless fool in way over his head. It IS a danger to democracy when you alienate your allies and cozy up to the dictators in the world.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,433
|
Re: Media Bias
Quote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1QF1D3 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Constitution explains how a president can be removed from office for “high crimes and misdemeanors” by Congress using the impeachment process. But the Constitution is silent on whether a president can face criminal prosecution in court, and the U.S. Supreme Court has not directly addressed the question. The question looms large with Special Counsel Robert Mueller preparing a report on his investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 U.S. election, whether President Donald Trump’s campaign conspired with Moscow and whether Trump unlawfully sought to obstruct the probe. The U.S. Justice Department has a decades-old policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted, indicating that criminal charges against Trump would be unlikely, according to legal experts. Here is an explanation of the rationale behind the Justice Department policy and whether it applies to Mueller. WHAT IS THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY? In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him. “The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination,” the memo stated. The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government. “The indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unconstitutionally undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions,” the memo stated. The 1973 and 2000 memos are binding on Justice Department employees, including Mueller, according to many legal experts. Mueller was appointed in May 2017 by the department’s No. 2 official Rod Rosenstein.
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,701
|
Re: Media Bias
This is a very good analysis piece on Murkowski's reason for voting against witnesses.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/31/polit...rts/index.html Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,433
|
Re: Media Bias
Quote:
![]()
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | ||
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,701
|
Re: Media Bias
Quote:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chi...ent-tiebreaker Quote:
Last edited by CRedskinsRule; 02-01-2020 at 07:23 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,433
|
Re: Media Bias
Quote:
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,701
|
Re: Media Bias
Or, since she knew the position he would take, AND his reasons why, she still didnt want to put Roberts in the position of having to take that action and thus risk polarizing the Supreme Court in the media. Him saying his position on the floor, allowed her to make her vote with an eye to the larger good of not dragging the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court into an immensely political decision.
Consider the headline if her vote makes it 50-50 and Roberts allows the vote to fail. Roberts decision would be blared across the headlines positively and negatively on a partisan basis. Instead her vote kept the partisan headlines focused where they ought to be, On the Senators. Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 35,037
|
Re: Media Bias
Veteran journalist suggesting gerrymandering the senate...
__________________
My pronouns: King/Your ruler He Gets Us |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Gamebreaker
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 14,433
|
Re: Media Bias
LOL, it worked for republicans .
chico , you still don't get it. Everything the republicans have done or are doing is going to come back at them ten fold! Stop the phony outrage . https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...olina-michigan https://www.businessinsider.com/part...mocrats-2017-6 The AP scrutinized the outcomes of all 435 U.S. House races and about 4,700 state House and Assembly seats up for election last year using a new statistical method of calculating partisan advantage. It’s designed to detect cases in which one party may have won, widened or retained its grip on power through political gerrymandering. The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts. Yet the data suggest that even if Democrats had turned out in larger numbers, their chances of substantial legislative gains were limited by gerrymandering. “The outcome was already cooked in, if you will, because of the way the districts were drawn,” said John McGlennon, a longtime professor of government and public policy at the College of William & Mary in Virginia who ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat in the 1980s.
__________________
....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 35,037
|
Re: Media Bias
G1, you can’t gerrymander the senate...the point is this journalist is a moron.
__________________
My pronouns: King/Your ruler He Gets Us |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|