Hey! Remember how Fox News, going down the home stretch in the election campaign, alienated a major portion of its viewers by turning against President Trump and suddenly running in the pack with all the Far Left nooze media? Remember how mad that made a lot of us?
We felt betrayed–and what has Fox News gotten for it? What was their reward for going over to the dark side?
This is our “free and independent press” that the Dems absolutely love when it’s carrying their water–which most nooze outlets do, most of the time. And now Dems are saying that the “free and independent press” should be punished for freely and independently choosing not to cover a certain story in time to bend an election toward the Democrats.
Are these people totally disgusting, or what?
So the House Committee on Crushing Freedom or whatever they call it has demanded “documents” held by the Fox reporter who researched Trump & Daniels. Meanwhile her editor has told them to take a long walk off a short pier.
They want the “documents” because they’re trying to show that Fox’s decision not to run with the story constituted an in-kind campaign contribution and therefor violated campaign finance law.
They could just as easily say a favorable story about a candidate was also an in-kind contribution and a violation of the law. They can get you for running with the story, or they can get you for not running with it. Either way, they’ve got you.
So what we have here is a barefaced attempt to exercise total control over what news gets reported in America and what news doesn’t–even at a time when almost all the “mainstream” nooze media have voluntarily sold themselves into slavery to the Democrat Party: and sold themselves cheap, at that.
If you voted for them, you really ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Misbegotten headlines have always been a rich source of accidental comedy (“New insecticide kills aunts on contact!”), but you’d think that today, with all the time and money spent on education, and all the technological back-up, howlers from the press would go extinct. But not so!
“Imam says journalists should be beheaded during Fox News interview.”
I don’t think the headline writer meant to raise the question of should journalists be behead; and, if so, when and where. I wonder what the answer would be, if you took a nationwide poll. During the actual interview, though–I don’t know. It’d make a mess of the studio.
Anyhow, blabs Todd, it’s time for the media to “fight back” against “the campaign to destroy the legitimacy of the American news media,” because the “hatred was artificially stoked” (we’re supposed to love them!) by “exploiting the fears of older white people” who are just too ignorant and deplorable to reward the noozies with their due degree of veneration, etc. There’s a limit to how much of this bilge I can read on a hot day. Note they never miss a chance to play the race card.
Anyone who portrays Hillary Clinton as honest doesn’t deserve to be listened to. Not for a minute.
They still cling bitterly, as former President *Batteries Not Included would say, to their core belief that the natural default position of any sane human being is Far Left crazy, and that’s where we’d all be if it weren’t for Fox News and Lex Luthor or some other super-villain tricking us into being conservatives.
By cracky, that’d make for a mighty lively–or deadly?–interview show. Does this mean it’s the interviewer who gets beheaded, or the guest? Or both, if both are journalists. Would the beheading come before or after a commercial?
You don’t expect to see such a misbegotten headline in such a prominent venue as townhall.com.
Our popular culture: in every way that you can think of, sinking deeper by the day.