While Fox News host Sean Hannity amplified claims about the 2020 election being rife with fraud, privately, it seems, he knew the allegations were bogus.
Testifying under oath as part of a deposition in a case brought by voting equipment company Dominion Voting Systems, Hannity said, "I did not believe it for one second," when asked about the claims of fraud, which continue to be made by former President Donald Trump, despite any evidence to support them.
Hannity reportedly wasn't the only Fox News personality not to believe the false claims about the election. "Many of the highest-ranking Fox people have admitted under oath that they never believed the Dominion lies," Dominion lawyer Stephen Shackelford told The New York Times, specifically naming Tucker Carlson and Meade Cooper, who oversees prime-time programming for the network.
You can't expect Wondy to worry about beams in his and his side's eye when the other side has a guy's that's-not-even-a-part-of-the-government laptop shaped mote that needs constant attention in theirs.
I didn't see the exact questions listed here that Hannity was asked, or listed here his exact answers in deposition. All I see in this hit piece (PEOPLE magazine, liberal media), the allegation that Hannity doesn't believe the evidence of election fraud. That would be in contradiction of what I've seen Hannity say on air regularly, and I don't buy the allegation about Hannity saying this.
There absolutely is evidence of fraudulent mail-in ballots (from Democrats), tens of thousands of dead people voting in every state (as Democrats), people coming in from out of state and voting illegally (as Democrats), people registered as fake voters with unverifiable fraudulent addresses (all voting Democrat), and dozens of other ways. And six battleground states where Trump was ahead until about 3AM, and then suddenly when the Republican vote observers were tricked into going home, and there were only Democrats counting votes, there was a sudden mysterious surge of Biden votes from 3AM onward, suddenly 96% to 100% for Biden. And piles of votes arriving in trucks in Detroit (captured on video) and in Atlanta (captured on video), where a surge in Biden votes coincided with these deceptions.
Specifically related to Dominion Voting Systems machines, despite Democrat assurances that Dominion machines are secure, I've watched CNN news reports from 2019 (re-broadcast by OAN in 2021) , showing where CNN reporters rented a convention room and invited dozens of hackers to break into and manipulate Dominion machines, and ALL of them could hack the Dominion machines in less than an hour. The machines are not reliable or safe from election fraud. PERIOD. That is proven and reported, even by CNN.
In testimony I've posted in other topics, former U.S. Army Col. Phil Waldron gave testimony in multiple state House and Senate hearings in the two months after the Nov 2020 election, saying he was contracted by the state of Texas to evaluate whether Dominion Voting Systems machines were safe in elections. Upon investigating, Waldron was deeply alarmed when he evaluated Dominion machines, and recommended that Texas not use them, which Texas did not. Col. Waldron further warned other states who ignored his warnings, and also reported his findings to the FBI, DHS, and the Federal Elections Commission, all of which he said ignored his warnings, and seemed to actually want to allow a fraudulent election to occur !
Other white-collar-crime cyber-security experts also testified to similar findings in the months after the elections, and that their similar warnings went unheeded by Federal and state agencies.
Further --as I've cited repeatedly-- DEMOCRAT senators Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar, and Ron Wyden, along with a Democrat house member, all wrote an open letter to the Senate saying in 2019 that Dominion Voting Systems machines were not safe, and were a threat to free and fair elections. Two of those three were Democrat presidential candidates. Are >>>THEY<<< tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists?!?
So the concerns of election hacking and questionable election integrity are absolutely not limited to Trump supporters. Polls I've previously cited show that across the board, 51% of all voters say they think the election was fraudulent, roughly 80% of Republicans, roughly 50% of Independent voters, and almost 30% of even Democrats.
Further, multiple experts have said that despite allegations that Dominion machines are safe and secure and cannot be remotely hacked, these machines have a built-in modem, that ABSOLUTELY CAN be hacked, from anywhere in the U.S., and anywhere in the world.
FACT. Absolute fact. Confirmed by multiple news agencies, House and Senate members of both parties, and by a number of tech security experts. FACT.
Facts I've cited and sourced in any number of other topics here over the last 2 years.
None of that is factual, you absolute braindead ghoul. He lost. She lost. You lost your mind because you suck at national rejection and hate elections your side doesn't win. Cry harder, crybaby.
A Rasmussen Reports poll released earlier this week showed that a majority of likely voters think cheating affected the 2020 presidential election. What's more, this number has increased not only with all voters, but Democrats, Independents, and Republicans. According to results from October, 56 percent of all likely voters believe that "it is likely that cheating affected the outcome of the 2020 presidential election," including 41 percent who say it's "very likely."
“How likely is it that cheating affected the outcome of the 2020 presidential election?"
Majority, Likely: April 2021 - 51% ... Oct 2021 - 56%
DEM: Now 32% - Was 30% IND: Now 54% - Was 51% GOP: Now 84% - Was 74% All Voters: 56% - Was 51% https://t.co/KJoK8ZDCSG — Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) October 14, 2021
Originally Posted by Wonder Boy (in a made-up quote, because that's all Iggy's got)
I totally think polls are wrong unless they support what I want them to say.
Yeah, we know...
I've made my opinion clear about polls for 20 years here: They measure PERCEPTION, not fact. They are mostly a survey of the uninformed, and as I've often said, it's nice when polls agree with my opinion. But it is a measure of widespread perception, not fact.
But regardless, there it is. A majority perceive the 2020 election to have been fraudulent. And not just Republicans, but a large slice of Independents and Democrats as well. A majority of the American public. And the perception of a fraudulent 2020 election is increasing, not decreasing.
But Iggy... what if it isn't just a perception? What if they're RIGHT? And a majority agree with me, not you.
Originally Posted by Wonder Boy (in a made-up quote, because that's all Iggy's got)
I totally think polls are wrong unless they support what I want them to say.
Yeah, we know...
I've made my opinion clear about polls for 220 years here: They measure PERCEPTION, not fact. They are mostly a survey of the uninformed, and as I've often said, it's nice when polls agree with my opinion. But it is a measure of widespread perception, not fact.
But regardless, there it is. A majority percieve the 2020 election to have been fraudulent. And not just Republicans, but a large slice of Independents and Democrats as well. A majority of the American public. And they perception of a fraudulent 2020 election is increasing, not decreasing.
But Iggy... what if it isn't just a perception? What if they're RIGHT? And a majority agree with me, not you.
What if people you call mostly uninformed are right?!? Do you you even fucking hear yourself, ghoul?
Originally Posted by Wonder Boy (in a made-up quote, because that's all Iggy's got)
I totally think polls are wrong unless they support what I want them to say.
Yeah, we know...
I've made my opinion clear about polls for 220 years here: They measure PERCEPTION, not fact. They are mostly a survey of the uninformed, and as I've often said, it's nice when polls agree with my opinion. But it is a measure of widespread perception, not fact.
But regardless, there it is. A majority percieve the 2020 election to have been fraudulent. And not just Republicans, but a large slice of Independents and Democrats as well. A majority of the American public. And they perception of a fraudulent 2020 election is increasing, not decreasing.
But Iggy... what if it isn't just a perception? What if they're RIGHT? And a majority agree with me, not you.
What if people you call mostly uninformed are right?!? Do you you even fucking hear yourself, ghoul?
What people? What are you even talking about? You are stacking stereotype on top of stereotype, of hypothetical imaginary people, to try and manufacture a demographic that agrees with you. My opinion is based on sourced facts, whereas you just make shit up out of thin air. I've cited extensive sources for everything I've said. As much as a poll can be considered "fact", the polls show a widespread nationwide majority of 56% have a perception of Nov 2020 election fraud, a decisive majority overwhelmingly agree with me. That's in addition to the more quantifiable election irregularities I've cited for 2 years regarding the Nov 2020 election fraud, regarding fraudulent ballots, rigging Dominion voting machines, Democrats tricking Republican vote observers to leave so they could rig ballots all night in multiple states, at which point till then Trump had been winning in all 6 contested battleground states, but suddenly with only Democrats present, there was a statistically improbable if not impossible spike in votes for Biden. Clear election fraud.
What? You mouth vomit and forget what you just said, ghoul. You called polls a survey of the mostly uninformed. You then said what if those uninformed (presumably people unless Rasmussen has sunk to polling monkeys at the zoo) were right. Again, this is why no one takes you seriously, ghoul.
What? You mouth vomit and forget what you just said, ghoul. You called polls a survey of the mostly uninformed. You then said what if those uninformed (presumably people unless Rasmussen has sunk to polling monkeys at the zoo) were right. Again, this is why no one takes you seriously, ghoul.
I guess the new word this week is "ghoul", whatever significance you think it has. You can't even make coherent sense, it's more of you basically saying
Originally Posted by Iggy
Nyah nyah nyah, You're a poopy-face. Fuck you, fuck your mother, asshat, doofus, etc., etc.
There's really nothing worth my time to respond to here. You're just an infant. A really vulgar unpleasant infant, but an infant nonetheless.
I called polls a survey of the uninformed then said what if the people I just called mostly uninformed were right. This stupidity embarrassed me so I, too, will play the illiterate rube and claim that plain English is incoherent.
I called polls a survey of the uninformed then said what if the people I just called mostly uninformed were right. This stupidity embarrassed me so I, too, will play the illiterate rube and claim that plain English is incoherent.
Originally Posted by Iggy
I have no factual or logical response, so I'll just make shit up, and pretend like WB said it !
Yes, yes, that much is obvious.
I said that whether I agree with polls or not they are quite often a survey of the uninformed. And that they are largely a survey of PERCEPTION rather than fact. That's wherher I agree with polls or not. And in this case, the poll agrees with me. The percepttion is, overwhelmingly, that the 2020 election was rigged. Not just Trump supporters, not just Republicans or conservatives, or "rubes" (which in Planet-Iggy-speak is basically anyone he doesn't like, or who he wants to stereotype as stupid, despite that these allegedly stupid people can out-debate him). No, it ALSO includes a huge slice of Independents and Democrats who perceive the election as rigged. NOT just Trump supporters.
So, dipshit, you can't spin it as just Trump supporters or Republicans who think the election was rigged, because it clearly includes a lot of others across the center and Democrat/Left who see it that way. And again, a majority. So you can't dismissively portray it as a fringe, it clearly crosses the mainstream, the majority. And when the view that the 2020 election was rigged has become a solid majority, you have to consider that they're right. And that you the unhinged guy with a lot of weird ideas, might actually be wrong.
And, this is why you fail to impress anyone with your "facts." You took a generic poll about cheating and implied that respondents only think the cheating went one way. Remember that blowhard claiming voter suppression in Georgia? People who agree with her on that would also claim cheating took place to suppress the poor/minority vote. That too would "taint Biden's victory." You don't want to see that though so you ignore a rather obvious explanation to a vapid and meaningless poll. It doesn't change that Trump lost and it's time to move on from him.
Sean Hannity Admits He Didn’t Believe Dominion Voter-Fraud Claims ‘for a Second’
National Review is not exactly part of the liberal media...
Not "liberal" maybe, but certainly establishment-Republican, and rabidly anti-Trump.
So...what's a source that you will believe? I don't see FUX News carrying the story anytime soon.
This farce reminds me of that other shithead, Alex Jones. He spouted off all kinds of paranoid rants until he had to testify in court about his bullshit, and then he sang a completely different tune.
I'm not a fan of Alex Jones, JLA. But as I said in prior posts and cited a linked an interview with Jones' lawyer, I thought he was railroaded, and a partisan judge egregiously prevented exculpatory evidence in his favor from being presented.
I mostly listen to Fox News and Newsmax these days, occasionally OAN. The New York Post, Rebel News, American Greatness, Daily Caller, The Federalist, Human Events.com, The Blaze, Lifezette, MRC.org, The Intercept, DailySignal, Substack, Judicial Watch and others.
On social media I read news and politics/history stuff on Youtube, Rumble, Vimeo and other sites. Many of which I've posted here, with the context in my comments of what I buy or don't buy in the coverage. News in the U.S. is very U.S.-centric, with very little coverage of places outside the U.S., even of Canada. To watch BBC or DW news is to see a much higher ratio of world coverage. But it should never be forgotten that European news is at least as liberal dominated and partisan as the 80% liberal-biased U.S. news. Some of which both G-man and myself have posted and linked examples of here, over many years.
With discretion, I occasionally even believe what I read in the New York Times, Washington Post, Politico and so forth. But on a case by case basis, I often stop reading and laugh when they quote anonymous sources, particularly news about Trump. Most liberal media can immediately be dismissed because of loaded language, that MRC.org, Bernard Goldberg or Sharyl Attkisson have detailed many examples of. When covering the Nov 2020 election for example, liberal media sources can't just report views of both sides, they HAVE to portray Trump or anyone citing evidence of election fraud or questionable events as "liars" or "unsubstantiated" or "Right wing extremist". Even a Harvard study (that I linked at the time) of media in Trump's first year showed a 93% bias of the mainstream media against Trump. During Trump's soviet-style impeachment show trial by only Democrats in Jan 2020, MRC.org reported that the media at that point had 100% negative coverage (!) of Trump and his lawyers (that I linked at the time). Hey, no liberal media bias, none whatsoever.
CNN I used to watch until about 2009 when their shameless bias became unbearable. That's when they pushed Lou Dobbs out, a guy who was one of the the founding anchors at CNN since 1981 ! And CNN has quantifiably worsened, to the point that almost no one is watching it now. Except for Iggy, who feeds at the nipple, and believes every word.
Both CNN and MSNBC are unintentional comedy gold, without the slightest pretense of objective journalism or facts, just hysterical made-up insulting comparisons. "Trump is a baby, Trump is an infant. Trump is Hitler!" In the coverage of the Kevin McCarthy multiple-votes for speaker, CNN and MSNBC have pundits saying the holdout Republicans (Gaetz, Donalds, Good, Boehbert, etc.) are "like people setting off a grenade", or creating a "hostage situation", or "personally disliking" Kevin McCarthy in an irrational vendetta. Or "terrorists" ! These dissenting conservative Republicans aren't even covered as having a valid basis for opposing McCarthy as speaker, a perspective of holding out for better practices in the new House, such as demanding a bill be offered to members at least 72 hours before a vote, so they can ACTUALLY READ IT. These Representatives (and millions of Republican voters) have valid reasons in 20 years of Rep. Kevin McCarthy's actions not to trust him.
No, in truth (that CNN and MSNBC and even some on Fox news don't cover), these holdout Republicans are making demands that McCarthy, McConnell and other RINO Senate and House members TO REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUENTS WHO VOTED FOR THEM, and cite past examples of "swampy" things McCarthy has done that make him untrustworthy as the prospective Republican Speaker, and are making demands to hold him accountable. These House GOP dissenters could be wrong, but I lean toward thinking further negotiation to press Kevin McCarthy and the Republican establishment to fully represent their voters in future legislation is good.
They are demanding changes in the rules to make sure House conservatives truly represent the people who voted for them, and not just cave in and betray their voters by, say, 18 Senators and 9 House members voting with the Democrats to pass a $1.7 trillion "Omnibus" bill that should have never passed in Dec 2022, the week of Christmas, when the public wasn't looking. Against the interests of the Republican voters in the districts of the 18 RINO Republican Senators and 9 RINO Republican House members who betrayed their voters to pass this nightmare, that includes 87,000 more IRS agents, while that legislation left our Southern border unsecured and wide open. Actually had specific language that prevented using any funds in the bill be diverted to actually securing the border.
Would that the media would fully report both sides of the issue. Even if they are liberal reporters, they should at least have the journalistic integrity and standards to report all sides, instead of rabidly editorializing and suppressing one side, acting as propagandists for the Democrats who are trying to create an authoritarian one-party system.
Fox settles for nearly 800 million and admits to false statements regarding 2020 election to avoid trial. That thud you heard was the hope of others sued by Dominion like Pillow guy, Just for Men Drip, and Kraken Lady hitting the floor. Larger lawsuit by Smartmatic still moving forward as more damning evidence seemingly appears.
You know most of that is true about the people you've shown support for here too, right? Replace news with narrative and "both sides" quickly look interchangeable.
Fox settles for nearly 800 million and admits to false statements regarding 2020 election to avoid trial. That thud you heard was the hope of others sued by Dominion like Pillow guy, Just for Men Drip, and Kraken Lady hitting the floor. Larger lawsuit by Smartmatic still moving forward as more damning evidence seemingly appears.
Even decades-long liberal professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Fox News should not have settled and could have won the case. But then Fox News would have been subject to Dominion lawyers' discovery, and forced to reveal Fox's executive communications on a number of other internal issues, that would have remained a minor embarassment to Fox News leadership for years to come. So they settled, for $780 million.
In full perspective, Fox News corporation is worth about $ 20 billion, so that settlement is less than 5% of Fox's total net worth.
It's still not revealed why they fired Tucker Carlson, by far their highest rated and watched anchor. And firing Carlson cost Fox's executive leadership a further $ 1 billion decline in their stock value in the last week, and still falling. The problem with Fox is not this settlement, the problem with Fox is their betrayal of their conservative audience, and their clear bias against Trump in their news coverage (or selective omission), whose speeches and rallies they don't even cover since 2020, that is eroding Fox's audience trust and viewership, far beyond their settling the Dominion case.
Iggy, are you stupid enough and unhinged enough to believe that Fox News, by settling the case, really believes their coverage was false reporting? Or are you capable of realizing they settled just to make the case go away, in a case they could have eventually won?
It's a combination of (1) cost/benefit analysis, to settle rather than spend millions more in litigation, and (2) the fact that Rupert Murdoch's sons are hard-left idealogues who want to turn Fox News into another CNN. From what I've been able to observe, Rupert Murdoch had a falling out with Trump because he tried to control Trump and extort favors out of Trump in exchange for favorable coverage in 2016, and Trump refused to be controlled. So Murdoch turned on Trump, on election night 2020, and especially after Jan 6 2021.
AGAIN: It has been PROVEN that the FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop since Dec 2019, and verified the information on it by Feb or March 2020 at the latest (as sourced and reported by John Solomon, JustTheNews). So all the 51 intelligence officials who alleged the Hunter Biden laptop was "Russian disinformaton" are the liars, the election WAS rigged, irregardless of Fox's settlement with Dominion (a case they could have eventually won, but chose to settle).
AGAIN: It has ALSO been proven that the "Russia Dossier" during the 2016 election was false, that the only Russia collusion was by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, who paid millions to Russian agents for the disinformation in it to slander Trump, that even James Comey to Donald Trump on Jan 5 2017 said the Russia Dossier is "salacious and unverifiable". Another Democrat attempt to rig the 2016 election, just as they did in the 2020 and 2022 elections.
AGAIN: It is ALSO proven that the fraudulent Russia Dossier was used to file **FOUR** illegal FISA warrants to spy on Carter Page's phone and online communications, and by FBI surveillance authorized by that, being able to go "two contacts deep" on two layers of everyone he communicated with, and everyone in the second layer of contacts communicated with, to SPY ON THE ENTIRE TRUMP CAMPAIGN for 6 months up through the 2016 election. And then another 6 months FBI/FISA surveillance on the inaugurated TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IN THE WHITE HOUSE ! Further, FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith was convicted of falsifying evidence about Carter Page (Page had been cooperating and sharing information for years with the FBI about the Russians, but Clinesmith changed a CIA document, to make the document say the exact opposite, in a falsified letter alleging that Carter Page had NOT cooperated and shared information with the FBI, when in the original unaltered letter it said Carter Page *DID* cooperate and stare information with the CIA, and therefore was a proven patriot and not a Russian collaborator. ) The Clinesmith-altered document submitted to a FISA judge to illegally obtain FISA warrants to spy on Carter Page, and through him surveil the Trump campaign (6 months) and the Trump presidency (a second 6 months of FISA surveillance by the FBI). All of which was done by submitting false evidence for the FISA warrant to a FISA court judge. In an FBI Democrat-Bolshevik attempt to rig the 2016 election.
AGAIN: It is ALSO proven via the "Twitter Files" that Elon Musk and several journalists revealed, that FBI and other intelligence agencies KNEW the Hunter Biden laptop information was absolutely true (knew from Dec 2019 right up though the Nov 2020 election) , but used their power as Democrat-Bolsheviks to suppress the truth and suppress information about the Hunter Biden laptop information that proved the Bidens were treasonously receiving millions of dollars for years from Russia, from Ukraine, from China, to compromise the national security of the United States. Former FBI executive James Baker (in Oct-Nov 2020 an executive for Twitter, but still a Democrat-Bolshevik spy in that position for the FBI) used his position to silence and suppress information from the New York Post that in every poll says 15% of Democrats, if they knew then what they know now, would **NOT** have voted in Nov 2020 for Joe Biden.
Morrell and Blinken are PROVEN, by Morrell's own admission, to have rigged the election. Just because the minor part where Dominion Voting Systems has managed to intimidate witnesses and prevent evidence from that portion of the 2020 election rigging from being fully proven, does NOT prove that the election wasn't rigged. Quite the contrary, there is abundant evidence it WAS rigged, on multiple fronts.
Despite the unhinged Democrat/leftist hatred of Iggy and millions of other Democrats who try to brainwash themselves otherwise. The facts are right there in your face. Period. The End.
by Jerry Dunleavy, Justice Department Reporter, April 20, 2023
A former top CIA official who helped write and sign the infamous October 2020 Hunter Biden laptop letter baselessly claiming Russian involvement has testified a phone call with now-Secretary of State Antony Blinken “triggered” its creation.
Mike Morell, a former acting CIA director under President Barack Obama, said in a recent transcribed interview with congressional investigators that, before his Oct. 17 phone call with Blinken, he had no intention to write the Oct. 19 Hunter Biden laptop letter. He testified “yes” and “absolutely” when asked if the call with Blinken, who was then a top adviser for Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign, was what “triggered that intent in you.”
Morell also testified that one of the two reasons he helped put the letter together was to help Joe Biden defeat former President Donald Trump.
These revelations came in a letter obtained by the Washington Examiner that was sent to Blinken on Thursday by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Mike Turner (R-OH), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
The news comes one day after an IRS agent alleged that the Justice Department investigation into Hunter Biden has been infected by “politics” and “preferential treatment.”
The October 2020 laptop letter contributed to the baseless narrative that the Hunter Biden laptop stories were nothing but a product of Russian disinformation. This line was happily seized upon by Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and spread by some of the laptop letter signers. Hunter Biden himself later tried to falsely claim the intelligence community concluded his laptop was some sort of Kremlin smear campaign.
Jordan and Turner told Blinken that Morell revealed the secretary of state had “played a role in the inception of this statement while serving as a Biden campaign advisor” and that “according to Morell, although your outreach was couched as simply gathering Morell’s reaction to the New York Post story, it set in motion the events that led to the issuance of the public statement.”
The congressmen wrote that, the same day of the Blinken-Morell call, Blinken “also emailed Morell an article” published in USA Today the same day that alleged the FBI was examining whether the Hunter Biden laptop was part of a “disinformation campaign.” Jordan and Turner told Blinken that “the very bottom of the email you sent to Morell included the signature block of Andrew Bates, then-director of rapid response for the Biden campaign.” Bates is now a deputy press secretary in the Biden White House.
oe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign quickly dismissed the laptop story as a Russian disinformation operation. After the New York Post published emails belonging to his son, Joe Biden called the story “garbage” and part of a “Russian plan” during an October 2020 debate with Trump.
Former senior CIA operations officer Marc Polymeropoulos said in 2020 that he and Morell helped put the letter together.
The congressional letter said Morell received a call from then-Biden campaign chairman Steve Ricchetti after the Oct. 22 presidential debate to thank him for writing the statement. Richetti is now a counselor to Joe Biden. Morell said, “Steve thanked me for putting the statement out.”
The phone call to Morell had come from Jeremy Bash, another Hunter Biden laptop letter signer, who then got Richetti on the line. Bash, a former chief of staff at the CIA and Pentagon, was picked by Joe Biden to be part of the president’s Intelligence Advisory Board last year. Bash himself had suggested on TV in October 2020 that the laptop story was “Russian disinformation.”
Joe Biden said during the October 2020 debate with Trump, “There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plan. They have said this is, has all the — four, five former heads of the CIA. Both parties say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage.”
He was referring to a Politico report about the letter in an article titled “Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say.” The title was a bit misleading because the letter never directly called the story Russian “disinformation.”
Although the October 2020 letter hedged a bit at various times, it did repeatedly contend there was Russian involvement with the laptop stories, arguing that “if we are right, this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election” and expressing “our view that the Russians are involved in the Hunter Biden email issue.” The letter claimed the laptop saga “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” and that “our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.”
Another key letter signatory was Nick Shapiro, a former deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to Obama CIA Director John Brennan, who also signed the letter. Politico has said Shapiro provided them with the letter, and Shapiro said at the time, “The real power here ... is the number of former, working-level IC officers who want the American people to know that once again the Russians are interfering.”
Jordan and Turner said Morell "also explained that the Biden campaign helped to strategize about the public release of the statement.” Morell “testified that he sent an email telling Nick Shapiro … that the Biden campaign wanted the statement to go to a particular reporter at the Washington Post first and that he should send the statement to the campaign when he sent the letter to the reporter.”
Jordan originally sent letters to many of the 51 former intelligence officials in April last year, but those requests were largely ignored. He followed up with demands for information from a dozen of the ex-spy officials in February and March of this year.
Jordan and Turner told the signatories this year that the letter “falsely implied the New York Post’s reporting about Hunter Biden was the product of Russian disinformation.”
Morell also testified that there were “two intents” behind writing the laptop letter.
“One intent was to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue,” Morell said. “And, two, it was to help Vice President Biden.”
Jordan asked Morell, “You wanted to help the vice president why?” Morell replied, “Because I wanted him to win the election.”
Morell had hosted his Intelligence Matters podcast with CBS News since May 2018. The most recent episode is listed as March 29 this year. A source familiar said Morell’s House interview was on April 4. CBS News senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge tweeted Thursday that Morell no longer works for the outlet.
Konstantinos "Gus" Dimitrelos, a cyber forensics expert and former Secret Service agent, conducted an examination of the laptop for the Washington Examiner last year, concluding that “there is a 100% certainty that Robert Hunter Biden was the only person responsible for the activity on this hard drive and all of its stored data” and that “the hard drive is authentic.”
Feel free to tell me, precisely, what part of that DOESN'T qualify as evidence of election fraud.
And plently more evidence and witnesses, over the last 2 years.
Wow. Rob Schmitt on Newsmax last night night reported that Tucker Carlson's average audience nightly while on Fox News was between 3 million and 3.5 million viewers a night.
And in the same 8pm time-slot, Brian Kilmeade on Fox as his replacement averages 1.3 million. That is a huge exodus away from Fox, viewers clearly not sticking around after Fox's abrupt firing of Tucker Carlson. Viewership on Newsmax is up an average of 175% across the board in the first week since Tucker Carlson's firing. It's clear that it's not just anger about Tucker Carlson being fired, but a loss of trust in those remaining at Fox News. In particular distrust in Fox's executive leadership, Suzanne Smith, the Murdochs, and Paul Ryan.
It began with the firing of Roger Ailes in 2016, and the gradual takeover of Rubert Murdoch's sons, particularly Lachlan Murdoch, who are ultra-Left, and have been pushing behind the scenes to turn Fox into another CNN. The hiring of RINO Paul Ryan to Fox's board of directors was suspect, and Ryan's push to hire Donna Brazile as a commentator on The Five and other Fox shows was the first move that infuriated me. I read an article in 2016, pointing out that despite Fox's audience (certainly including me) overwhelmingly supported Trump's 2016 campaign for president, but during 2016 the majority of opinions on Fox News, both anchors and interviewed pundit guests, were overwhelmingly never-Trumpers (such as Shepard Smith, Neil Cavuto, Jonah Goldberg, Guy Benson, etc.). That was the beginning of the period where I still watched Fox News, but with cautious skepticism, that they were on a number of issues not being as fair and balanced as they used to be, and drifting into unchallenged deceitful leftist narrative.
Fox, in 2016, for the first time would let Democrat propagandists Like Donna Brazile, Juan Williams, Chris Hahn, Richard Fowler and others rant their obviously lying talking points completely unchallenged, whereas they used to break in and point out where these Bolsheviks were undisputably factually wrong. For the first time, Fox anchors would let them go with "Okay, that's your opinion". NO, it is the job of the anchor to point out where the guest's "facts" are quantifiably untrue, and then present the true facts.
The great breaking point in trust was in Nov 2020, when Fox was the first network to declare Biden "won" the presidency on election night (actually, they officially declared it electorally on Saturday a few days after the election, but from election night Tuesday, Fox News already projected Biden was the winner, though still undecided. The very first network to do so. )
Then in the weeks after the election, Fox News hosts like Brian Kilmeade, and even for a few nights Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, were pushing their viewers to "just accept" that Biden was the winner. They openly aided a rigged election, by propping up the narrative, and for the first time were on the vanguard of selling that election narrative. No doubt with executive pressure on them to do so. That, Nov 2020, is when I first abandoned Fox News for several months. And even then my loyalty to Fox News was still strong enough that I would still give them a chance every night. But when they would avoid the truly meaningful issues, avoid the election fraud issue, after 60 seconds of this each night , I'd flip over to Newsmax or OAN, where they WERE discussing the actual vital issues. Fox lost a huge share of their viewership in those first 6 months, and only when they started exploring the truly meaningful and important issues did I, and millions of other viewers, again begin to watch Fox News again.
But since Jan 2021, I've noticed that Fox News *NEVER* covers Trump speeches or rallies. Never even shows highlights or summaries, or the slightest mention of his speeches. Especially noticeable since Trump announced in Nov 2022, and immediately became by far the leading GOP candidate for 2024. And no mention of Trump, no coverage by Fox of Trump's speeches or core campaign issues. For all that time, you have to leave Fox to see Trump's speeches, go to Newsmax, or OAN, or Rumble.com .
You can't even find Trump's speeches using Google or DuckDuckgo.com, they are algorithm-ed out, invisible in online searches. The only way to see them is to watch them live on those channels (OAN, NEwsmax, or Rumble.com) or go directly to their websites to search for Trump's videotaped speeches there. And since Nov 2020, Fox News has joined George Orwell's liberal media in locking out access to the truth on a wide array of other issues.
For example, regarding January 6th for the most part, at least in the early months after those protests, propagandized by Democrats and the media as an "insurrection". Tucker Carlson went from selling that narrative in the early months, to becoming one of the most powerful proponents for revealing the truth, that what rioting there was on January 6th was done by FBI agents and an Antifa/John Earle Sullivan group, and a handful of dupes who stole a speaking podium, or propped their feet up on a desk in Nancy Pelosi's office (a pose suggested and photographed by two undercover FBI agents). The FBI and Antifa instigators, despite photos to identify them, were never identified and arrested. But the PEACEFUL protesters, virtually all the 1,300 arrested, Trump supporter business owners, real estate agents and grandmas, cancer patents, remain in federal prison in inhuman conditions, held without trial for over 2 years now, FOR WHAT? While the real plotters of January 6th violence, false-flag undercover FBI agents stoking violence such as Ray Epps and others clearly photographed and easily identifiable (if FBI wanted to identify them), go unpunished. All except a few on Fox News avoid mentioning these things. Tucker Carlson developed the courage to use his visibility to do so, and was removed for it.
Likewise, for a long time Fox mostly didn't challenge the Covid-19 lockdown narrative and vaccines. It was only after Fox's audience was abandoning them in the first 6 months after Jan 2021 that they began to challenge that narrative, with guests like reporter Alex Berenson, MRNA vaccine technology inventor Robert Malone, and Dr. Scott Atlas, among other prominent virologists and researchers. But again, it took Fox a while to break away from the mainstream media narrative, and to earn back and regain lost viewers' trust.
And Tucker Carlson had his mojo back by the time Russia began the Ukraine invasion. Carlson was the only anchor in the media I observed, for a very long time, who challenged the narrative that we had a duty to pour unlimited resources into Ukraine and risk a nuclear war with Russia. Tucker Carlson is portrayed by Democrats, by the mainstream media, and by a number of RINO war-rhetoric Republicans as a stooge of Russia for his opposition to escalating war in Ukraine. But all Tucker Carlson does is (rightly) point out that Biden began pushing for NATO membership for Ukraine, and weeks after, THAT was when Russia invaded. THAT was Russia's clearly stated red line, a Russian security risk and humiliation that Russia has said, for at least 20 years, they would never tolerate and would go to total war to prevent. All this could have been avoided, if Democrat-Bolshevik chaos as enacted by the Biden puppet regime, were not the intended goal.
Tucker Carlson also pointed out that every day Russia was calling the White House, for a year, and Biden and his puppetmasters never returned their calls to potentially negotiate a solution. At many points over the last 12-plus months, the cities levelled, the hundreds of thousands dead on both sides, could have been avoided, lessened, or ended. With Tucker Carlson off the air, there is very little visibility left to those making that argument for negotiation and peace. Trump has said he could end the war in days if he were re-elected in 2024, and likewise negotiate to prevent war against China, North Korea and Iran.
In one program, Tucker Carlson talked about how many in Ukraine's government were traveling to Switzerland, pulling up in brand new Farrari's to real estate offices, to pay cash for castles that were previously being bought by Russian oligarchs. How? By siphoning off billions in U.S. foreign aid from the Biden administration, because there is no oversight and it is there for the taking, in a Ukraine that, before the war started, was one of the top 10 most corrupt governments of the 200 nations on earth. No Republican, not even Tucker Carlson, is saying don't militarily aid the Ukrainians to defend themselves, but only just to have reasonable oversight, and not make it a slush fund to enrich corrupt officials. And likewise, even tanks, planes, artillery and ammunition, without oversight, will just be sold on the black market for cash, and put those weapons in a position to hurt a lot of innocent people, or even (like those left in Afghanistan) be ultimately used on U.S. military forces and civilians.
I would love LOVE to see Tucker Carlson hired by Newsmax and put in the same time-slot as his former 8PM show on Fox News, to further move the exodus of viewers away from Fox, and to Newsmax. Hannity, Judge Jeanine Pirro, Maria Bartiromo, Laura Ingraham, and other ACTUAL conservatives still there should realize their days at Fox News are numbered, as Rupert Murdoch's 2 sons prepare to turn it into another CNN. The writing is on the wall, they should be contemplating where to move to as soon as their contracts end, before they too are abruptly one day soon shown the door.
I could quote the same numbers from every Newsmax program aired today. But it's interesting to see it from a Megyn Kelly podcast. And also to hear it discussed with Melissa Francis, who was one of my favorites onFBN and Fox until she, like Tucker Carlson, was abruptly disappeared with no notice or explanation.
The bottom line is, Fox News made a gigantic mistake, and within months pretty much their entire conservative audience will be switching their loyalty to Newsmax. The only surprise is how rapidly, from Monday to Friday, this has already happened.
I'm surprised not to hear Bill O'Reilly's opinion anywhere on what happened with Tucker Carlson and Fox. The difference is, Fox replaced O'Reilly with an even more conservative and articulate Tucker Carlson. Whereas now, Fox is already trying to cancel Donald Trump and the Trump conservative audience, and replace Carlson with establishment conservative pablum. And the audience that was loyal for 25 years just isn't having it. Did they think we wouldn't notice? Buck Sexton said he thinks Fox will be forced to bring Tucker Carlson back in the 8PM slot. Another alternative is for Newsmax to move heaven and earth to get Tucker Carlson to take the 8PM hour on Newsmax, that would really accellerate the exodus over to Newsmax. I prefer the latter scenario, rather than let Fox continue to deceive its audience that it is still a conservative channel, but in truth secretly undermining conservatives. Better a clean break to Newsmax, by boith Tucker and his audience. And Lachlan Murdoch, Suzanne Smith, and Paul Ryan can take all the blame for destroying Foc News they deserve. And fry in hell.
“The truth is, we really have a record to be proud of: vaccinated the nation, transformed the economy, earned historic legislative victories and midterm results. But the job isn’t finished, I mean, it is finished for Tucker Carlson,” Biden said as the D.C. crowd gasped.
Quote
Biden later roasted Fox News personalities and the network’s recent $787.5 million defamation lawsuit settlement with Dominion Voting Systems, an agreement that included a statement from Fox on its “commitment to the highest journalistic standards.”
“It’s great that cable news networks are here tonight, MSNBC owned by NBCUniversal, Fox News owned by Dominion Voting Systems,” he said.
Quote
“Last year, your favorite Fox News reporters were able to attend because they were fully vaccinated and boosted. This year, with that $787.5 million settlement, they’re here because they couldn’t say no to a free meal. And hell, I’d call Fox honest, fair and truthful. But then I could be sued for defamation.”
Earlier this week, Fox News displayed a graphic at the end of Fox News Tonight that called President Joe Biden a “wannabe dictator”. Former network host Tucker Carlson has lambasted the network for its walk-back of the opinion.
After the arrest and arraignment of Donald Trump Tuesday, the former president was about to begin a speech to supporters. Simultaneously, Joe Biden was scheduled to speak. The network showed both figures, before a Fox News Alert that read “Wannabe Dictator Speaks at the White House After Having His Political Rival Arrested”. It was quickly taken down before Hannity began.
During the latest edition of Tucker on Twitter, the former Fox News host claimed the producer — now identified as Alexander McCaskill — has departed the company over the incident, before taking aim at his former employer.
“Those words were up for less than 30 seconds, but the effect was immediate. Inside Fox, the women who run the network panicked,” said Carlson. “First, they scolded the producer who put the banner on the screen. Less than 24 hours after that, he resigned. He’d been at Fox for more than a decade. He was considered one of the most capable people in the building. He offered to stay for the customary two weeks, but Fox told him to clear out his desk and leave immediately.
“Then the company issued a public apology for the 27-second long ‘wannabe dictator’ line. ‘The chyron was taken down immediately,’ Fox’s PR department said and then added ominously, it was ‘addressed’. That was all true, but it was not enough to save Fox News from the ensuing scandal.”
Carlson continued by alleging a double standard in coverage of the current President.
“If some cable news producer had called Joe Biden a genius or accused him of being secretly Sudanese, would anyone be yelling about it? Would Fox News have apologized for it? Probably not. But calling Joe Biden a wannabe dictator, that stung,” concluded Carlson.
The anger from Carlson towards his former network comes after he was reportedly given a cease and desist letter from Fox News in an attempt to end his Tucker on Twitter series. Fox News contends it holds the rights to Carlson’s video projects, while he alleges his social media activities are protected under the First Amendment.
It's like Fox's executives are running house ads saying, "You shouldn't be watching us, you really should be changing the channel to Newsmax."
“Literally that’s what you’re arguing for. The great [former Republican Gov.] Sam Brownback’s Kansas policy? It was a debacle — no economic growth. Seventy-one percent of the GDP in America are [in] blue counties,” Newsom added, saying that economically successful states like California were “subsidizing” those that employed Hannity’s favored policies.”
71% of GDP compared to 29% red counties that voted for Trump. Let that sink in.
I see Alex Jones is trying to get out of paying money to the Sandy Hook people he owes them for lying about their dead children. He’s really gotten fat sucking on the conservative/conspiracy media tit!
Last edited by Matter-eater Man; 2023-12-164:23 PM.
I posted a video before that detailed how Alex Jones didn't get a fair trial, due to a judge that both prevented him and his lawyer from presenting exculpatory evidence, but the same judge allowed irrelevant but highly inflammaory statements to be admitted by the prosecution, to prejudice the jury.
You don't have to like or be a fan of Alex Jones. I've made clear my own opinion of Jones over the last 20 years or so. But there's a huge difference between cheering on Alex Jones being convicted because he actually committed a crime, and wanting him convicted just because you don't like the guy, or just because it defames him and serves a Democrat/Leftist narrative.
You ever think of the parents that lost their kids in that shooting? I do. On top of their grief of having their kids slaughtered they have had to deal with Mr. Jones selling a cruel false narrative. He’s far right so of course you paint him as a victim, never mind the awful lies he spewed.
You ever think of the parents that lost their kids in that shooting? I do. On top of their grief of having their kids slaughtered they have had to deal with Mr. Jones selling a cruel false narrative. He’s far right so of course you paint him as a victim, never mind the awful lies he spewed.
As I pointed out before, in interviews here of Alex Jones, and previously an inerview of his defense lawyer, Jones wanted to play in court taped recordings of his radio show, to PROVE that he was critical of these conspiracy theories, that he was DISMISSIVE of these conspiracy theories, that OTHER radio shows and media introduced these ideas, before he himself ever discussed them, and Alex Jones merely responded to them on his show, and not favorably.
But a partisan judge refused to permit these recordings of exculpatory evidence in Alex Jones' favor, and further let in inflammatory irrelevant testimony that emotionally manipulated and tainted the jury against him, despite his innocence.
BOCA RATON, Fla. – Newsmax Inc. (NYSE:NMAX) announced today that the Company's subsidiary, Newsmax Broadcasting, LLC, has filed a major federal antitrust lawsuit against Fox Corporation and Fox News Network, LLC (collectively, "Fox") in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
The suit, led by prominent antitrust litigators at Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C., accuses Fox of engaging in an extensive and unlawful campaign to block competition in the market for right-leaning pay television news, including Newsmax. [See Newsmax Complaint Against Fox]
Newsmax's action seeks damages under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the Florida Antitrust Act, and the Florida Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Under federal law, any damages awarded in this case will be trebled – meaning Fox faces significant financial liability if Newsmax prevails.
The complaint alleges that Fox has abused its dominance in the right-leaning pay TV news market for years by coercing distributors into unfair carriage agreements designed to exclude or marginalize competitors like Newsmax.
Fox News, described in the complaint as a "must-have" channel for distributors, leverages its market power to impose restrictions that harm consumers, stifle competition, and drive up costs across the pay TV ecosystem.
Among the exclusionary tactics detailed in the complaint:
No-Carry Provisions: Fox conditions access to Fox News on agreements by distributors not to carry or to restrict competing right-leaning news channels. Financial Penalties: If distributors carry Newsmax, Fox forces them to also carry low-demand channels like Fox Business or Fox Sports 2 in their most widely viewed tiers - triggering potentially tens of millions in extra fees. Confidential Drag-Down Provisions: These clauses penalize distributors for placing Newsmax in basic packages by requiring simultaneous promotion of Fox less popular channels. Intimidation Campaigns: Fox has allegedly pressured its guests to not appear on Newsmax, as well as has run online smear campaigns and hired private investigators targeting Newsmax executives to damage the Company's credibility. The result, the complaint asserts, is that Fox has deliberately blocked Newsmax's growth in critical distribution platforms such as Hulu, Sling, Fubo, and other major platforms.
Internal Fox communications cited in the complaint reveal that senior executives and talent saw Newsmax as a competitive threat following the 2020 election.
Texts, emails and memoranda show Fox leaders acknowledging that Newsmax's growing audience could "drastically change the landscape" of cable news, including:
Then-Fox host Tucker Carlson warned that "an alternative like Newsmax could be devastating to us." Fox News President Jay Wallace told CEO Suzanne Scott that Fox was on "war footing" over Newsmax's rise. Fox Chairman Rupert Murdoch instructed Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott that Newsmax "should be watched" as a result of press stories about the network. Other executives tracked Newsmax's bookings and content, openly strategizing about ways to contain the new competitor.
HARM TO COMPETITION AND CONSUMERS
The lawsuit alleges that Fox's exclusionary conduct has had far-reaching consequence:
Higher Prices: By blocking competition, Fox has extracted supracompetitive carriage fees – charging distributors nearly $2.20 per subscriber per month, double CNN's fees and six times MSNBC's. These inflated costs have been or likely will be passed on to consumers. Reduced Consumer Choice: Millions of right-leaning viewers who want an alternative have been denied access to Newsmax on affordable basic packages, leaving Fox as the only viable option. Delayed Growth of Newsmax: Fox's practices have prevented Newsmax from reaching critical mass with distributors, advertisers, and audiences, costing the Company hundreds of millions in lost carriage fees and advertising revenue. "Fox has sought to protect and expand its monopoly power in the right-leaning pay TV news market by engaging in a suite of anticompetitive behaviors," the complaint states, adding Fox's unlawful and exclusionary conduct "has harmed not just Newsmax and other competitors," but also "consumers and competition itself."
Newsmax is represented by Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, P.L.L.C., and Sperling Kenny Nachwalter, LLC, two of the nation's premier antitrust litigation firms.
Both firms have extensive experience taking on monopolistic conduct and have successfully litigated complex cases involving dominant players in telecommunication media, pharmaceuticals, and technology.
"Fox's behavior represents a textbook abuse of monopoly power," said Michael J. Guzman, lead counsel for Newsmax at Kellogg Hansen. "The law is clear: competition, not coercion, should decide what news channels Americans can watch. By leveraging its must-have status, Fox has blocked new voices, suppressed consumer choice, and extracted excess profits."
"Fox may have profited from exclusionary contracts and intimidation tactics for years, but those days are over," Christopher Ruddy, Newsmax CEO, said.
"This lawsuit is about restoring fairness to the market and ensuring that Americans have real choice in the news they watch. If we prevail, Fox's damages could be tripled under federal law – an outcome that would send a powerful message to any company that thinks it can monopolize public discourse."
The complaint underscores that Fox's conduct harms not just Newsmax, but the competitive process itself.
By keeping rivals off affordable distribution packages, Fox has denied millions of Americans the diversity of viewpoints that a healthy marketplace of ideas requires.
"American democracy depends on a vibrant and competitive media landscape," Ruddy added.
"Fox has acted as a gatekeeper, silencing emerging voices and overcharging consumers. Our lawsuit seeks not only justice for Newsmax, but also to protect the rights of viewers who deserve choice and fair pricing."
Newsmax is asking the federal court to:
Declare Fox's conduct unlawful under federal and state antitrust laws. Award monetary damages as permitted by law. Enjoin Fox from continuing exclusionary contracts and monopolistic practices. Order equitable relief to restore competition in right-leaning pay TV news. See Newsmax Complaint Against Fox
See Newsmax Share Information
ABOUT NEWSMAX
Newsmax Inc. is listed on the NYSE (NMAX) and operates, through Newsmax Broadcasting LLC, one of the nation's leading news outlets, the Newsmax channel. The fourth highest-rated network is carried on all major pay TV providers. Newsmax's media properties reach more than 40 million Americans regularly through Newsmax TV, the Newsmax App, its popular website Newsmax.com, and publications such as Newsmax Magazine. Through its social media accounts, Newsmax reaches 20 million combined followers. Reuters Institute says Newsmax is one of the top U.S. news brands and Forbes has called Newsmax "a news powerhouse."
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This communication contains forward-looking statements. From time to time, we or our representatives may make forward-looking statements orally or in writing. We base these forward-looking statements on our expectations and projections about future events, which we derive from the information currently available to us. Forward-looking statements can be identified by those that are not historical in nature. The forward-looking statements discussed in this communication and other statements made from time to time by us or our representatives, may not occur, and actual events and results may differ materially and are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions about us Newsmax does not guarantee future results, performance or achievements. Moreover neither we nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any of these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as predictions of future events. We are under no duty to update any of these forward-looking statements after the date of this communication to conform our prior statements to actual results or revised expectations, and we do not intend to do so. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include various factors, including but not limited to the timeline or outcome relating to litigation against Fox, our ability to change the direction of Newsmax, our ability to keep pace with new technology and changing market needs, the competitive environment of our business changes in domestic and global general economic and macro-economic conditions and/or uncertainties and factors set forth in the sections entitled "Risk Factors" in Newsmax's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024, Newsmax's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2025, and other filings Newsmax makes with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Nothing in this communication should be regarded as a representation by any person that the forward-looking statements set forth herein will be achieved or that any of the contemplated results of such forward-looking statements will be achieved. Undue reliance should not be placed on forward looking statements in this communication, which speak only as of the date they are made and are qualified in their entirety by reference to the cautionary statements herein.
Like many Fox news viewers, I felt deeply betrayed in Nov 2020 when Fox News was the first network to bizarrely and prematurely call the election for Joe Biden.
And then virtually all of Fox's anchors were part of a propaganda campaign to convince its viewers to "just accept that Biden won." Which enraged us, because we saw the clear evidence that the election was rigged, and further evidence of a rigged 2020 election ("Twittergate", the fake "51 intelligence officials letter" orchestrated by Antony Blinkin, millions of faked mail-in ballots, "2000 Mules", RIGGED by Mollie Hemingway) continued to be revealed over the last 4 years since.
And like millions of other Fox viewers up till Nov 2020, it was prior to then unthinkable that I would lose confidence in Fox News and look for another alternative network that I could trust. And because of their own deception, Fox's ratings over the next year in 2020-2021 dropped by half.
There were clearly many conservatives on Fox who resisted Fox executives' push to undermine Trump, to propagandize that Trump lost the 2020 election. But a few resisted management and refused to push that narraive. Lou Dobbs, Maria Bartiromo among them. In particular I recall Sean Hannity, who in the opening minutes of his show one night seemed angry, like he'd just had a fierce argument with a Fox executive before going on air. Hannity angrily said: "I don't know how much longer we can, but as long as I'm able to, I'll continue to give you the facts on what is occurring."
Clearly, Fox News management has some kind of a grudge against Trump, and tried to fully cut Trump loose and undermine him when it was even the slightest bit plausible after the Nov 2020 election, and forced their anchors and reporters and guests to prop up that narrative as well. But a few to their great credit resisted propping up that narrative.
That Fox betrayal drove me (and millions of others) to increasingly check out Newsmax and One America News.
And just when I was starting to regain trust in Fox, they fired Tucker Carlson with no explanation. And in over two years since, there has STILL never been been an explanation given why they fired Carlson. But it was the moment he exclusively revealed the opening salvo of the 40,000 hours of Jan 6h Capitol security video, ha immediately triggered release of most of the Jaqn 6th prisoners (i.e., revealing THE UNDISPUTABLE FACTS, vs, the previous Democra narrative for over 2 and a half years). And when Tucker Carlson was fired Monday morning, he was on Monday night going o interview the Capitol police chief who resigned after Jan 6th. Someone was deeply aafraid of the truyh, and silenced Carlson, at leas on Fox. (He later interviewed the Capitol police chief a few months later on his podcast.)
The point being, if Fox had not undermined their own credibility with all these bad decisions and deceptions, me and millions of others would have continued to have 100% confidence that Fox is fair and balanced (or at least, more fair and balanced than their competitor networks). The ONLY reason we went looking elsewhere at Newsmax and other channels is because Fox through their own self-destructive actions like this, put into question their own credibility.
Multiple reports I've seen have speculated that Rupert Murdoch gave a lot of coverage to Trump in 2016, and he wanted some kind of control or payback from Trump as reward for that coverage, and Trump refused to be Murdoch's pawn, and that is why Fox News and other Rupert-owned media are less friendly to Trump now, at Murdoch's order. But since Fox's core audience is obviously very pro-Trump, Fox pushed the boundaries of negative Trump coverage in 2020-2021 and lost half their audience, and only became more pro-Trump again to some extent because they don't want to lose the market share they managed to get back.
There's also the fact that Rupert Murdoch is now 93, and since leveraging Roger Ailes out in 2016, Rupert Murdoch has been transitioning control of Fox News to Lachlan Murdoch, (both of Murdoch's 2 sons are very liberal-Left) and if Lachlan fully had his way, Fox News would become another CNN.
And now this above revelation of unfair business practices to suppress Newsmax. I've noticed for years that many of my favorite Fox anchors and guests have been making a gradual exodus over to Newsmax, such as Victoria Toensing and Joe DiGenova, Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz, John Solomon, Matt Taibbi, James Rosen, Ed Henry and many others. Apparently they were considered too conservative or too pro-Trump, and were no longer invited back to Fox. But I've been hearing for 4 years that Fox News has been telling guests if they appear on Newsmax, they wouldn't be able to continue appearing on Fox News. And the above article just confirms what's been known for years.
And visible with Tucker Carlson's abrupt firing, and the attempts by Fox to slander Carlson and make him radioactive in the weeks after his firing, so that no other network would hire him either, Fox has done the same to Bill O'Reilly, Eric Bolling, James Rosen, Ed Henry, Judge Nick Napolittano and others, often leveraging them to quietly quit with sexual allegations too shaameful to discuss as a way o quietly push them out, and then badmouthing them quietly behind the scenes in the industry so no one else would want to hire them either. Which again undermines trust in the character of those in executive positions running Fox News, not the people they slandered.
And this hardball underhanded way Fox has done things all originates to 2016 when Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly were both leveraged out. And then many others after, in a mean underhanded slanderous way pushing out conservatives on the network. And trying to blacklist them in the industry, even after they left or were fired by Fox News. So while I have an increasing distaste for the way the executive leadership has been running Fox the last 9 years, there are still people on Fox that I like. And I wish Fox would scrap their current executive leadership, and replace them with people their audience would once again actually trust.
![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/blogban3.jpg)
[/center]![[Linked Image from i13.photobucket.com]](http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a275/captainsammitch/boards/banners/jlamiska.jpg)
[/center]
Nyah nyah nyah, You're a poopy-face. Fuck you, fuck your mother, asshat, doofus, etc., etc. 
![[Linked Image from i1.wp.com]](https://i1.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/20160215-new-3.jpg)
