Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Fox News viewers really do see the world differently

Fox News viewers really do see the world differently

+5
Sal
RealLindaL
2seaoat
Markle
ZVUGKTUBM
9 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Fox News fans pessimistic about the country, and Clinton
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/28/media/fox-news-conservative-media-poll/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool

Excerpts:

New data shows that Fox loyalists, when compared to the public at large, are far more pessimistic about America's future; are far more critical of President Obama's performance; are far more fearful of Hillary Clinton; and are more forgiving of Donald Trump.

....21st Century Fox patriarch Rupert Murdoch recently told the Wall Street Journal that it would be "business suicide" to change Fox's editorial direction.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:Fox News fans pessimistic about the country, and Clinton
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/28/media/fox-news-conservative-media-poll/index.html?iid=ob_homepage_deskrecommended_pool

Excerpts:

New data shows that Fox loyalists, when compared to the public at large, are far more pessimistic about America's future; are far more critical of President Obama's performance; are far more fearful of Hillary Clinton; and are more forgiving of Donald Trump.

....21st Century Fox patriarch Rupert Murdoch recently told the Wall Street Journal that it would be "business suicide" to change Fox's editorial direction.

We get the truth, the facts and both sides of issues. Unlike the Clinton News Network.

"CNN has cut ties with commentator and interim Democratic National Committee chair Donna Brazileafter WikiLeaks revealed that Brazile leaked more primary debate questions to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The network said it accepted Brazile’s resignation as a contributor Monday after the hacked emails showed that she had tipped off Clinton’s campaign to likely questions during the primaries."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/cnn-drops-donna-brazile-as-pundit-over-wikileaks-revelations/2016/10/31/2f1c6abc-9f92-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_brazile-3pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory


2seaoat



Fox News plays to stupid. After the election, Trump is going to want to get some of that stupid. It should be fun to watch the new network try to out stupid Fox. My brother watches Fox. I just smile.

Guest


Guest

I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.

I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

RealLindaL



SheWrites wrote:I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.

I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was  thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

Excellent, cogent post, SW, and right on the money on every point.  Thank you -- and yes, thanks to Z-man for the thread.  I do agree the positively desperate spam-slamming of this board between Markle and TTT has gotten way beyond tenable, and fact-checking their often outrageously fictional sources is an exercise in futility I personally have no more time for.

Sal

Sal

Studies have consistently shown that Fox News viewers are less informed than people who consume no news at all.

Guest


Guest

RealLindaL wrote:
SheWrites wrote:I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.

I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was  thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

Excellent, cogent post, SW, and right on the money on every point.  Thank you -- and yes, thanks to Z-man for the thread.  I do agree the positively desperate spam-slamming of this board between Markle and TTT has gotten way beyond tenable, and fact-checking their often outrageously fictional sources is an exercise in futility I personally have no more time for.

I think it's the basics, Linda, when it comes to research and writing. Of course a lot more detail if you want to be accepted as a writer with integrity. You are kind and I always appreciate your input.

Markle

Markle

SheWrites wrote:I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.

I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was  thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

Obviously, you weren't taught or skipped that "class" on sticking with the topic.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

SheWrites wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
SheWrites wrote:I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.

I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was  thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

Excellent, cogent post, SW, and right on the money on every point.  Thank you -- and yes, thanks to Z-man for the thread.  I do agree the positively desperate spam-slamming of this board between Markle and TTT has gotten way beyond tenable, and fact-checking their often outrageously fictional sources is an exercise in futility I personally have no more time for.

I think it's the basics, Linda, when it comes to research and writing.  Of course a lot more detail if you want to be accepted as a writer with integrity.   You are kind and I always appreciate your input.

I appreciate both of you, SheWrites and LindaL, although I'm remiss in saying so. And Othershoe...thanks for your wonderful contributions over the years. Sadly, there are a lot of liars out there...and it surprises me how many people seem to have lost the basics of morality in their attempt to be moral...hence the Trump support from the "religious" right.

I knew what Fox was before Bush was elected (should have put that in quotes as well). I've told the story about a person I worked for locally, helping him to prepare his parents' house for sale...I pointed out a PNJ letter that was anti-Bush. He had 5 TV's in his house, all blasting Fox 24/7. He turned red in the face and got really angry. (He's no longer with us, so I can talk freely without naming him.) My point is that he was something of a rare bird then, but the constant propaganda from Fox, Limbaugh, talk radio, etc. is really a form of brainwashing...and more people seem to be succumbing to the lies and distortions. As a TV medium, Fox is ubiquitous...at the doctor's office, at the pharmacy, even in the UWF Commons (I used to change the channel). When I read someone's blog about politics dividing families, I think how easily I could have written the same thing. It makes me horribly sad to see how people can be led by the nose (and I'm talking about my family members and a few old friends).

Markle

Markle

Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

dumpcare



Floridatexan wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
SheWrites wrote:I read the news until I can find direct quotes or transcripts of speeches, inquiries by Congress, etc.  I seek the source of the news story and when it comes from blogs or someone who has a vendetta, I dismiss it.  For instance, the right loves to quote Hillary saying "What difference does it make" and act as though she is saying what difference does it make lives were lost.  That's not the context at all.  But I've watched "Fox and Friends" and watch them spin something out of nothing, go to the source, and then see how twisted they are in their race for ratings and money.  And those who live off sensationalism follow...  

Yesterday they raved on about the Chicago Tribune.  They called it a left leaning newspaper that is not endorsing Hillary.  If you know the back story, you know this is not a flip flop.  But all they have to say is "left leaning" and the people who tune in cheer.



I was taught research five reliable sources before stating facts and summation.  Trouble is with the internet - everyone and anyone can have a "news" blog and  8 times out of 10 it's biased opinion.  I guess that's why I most often veer away from posts by TTT and Markle.  It was hard this morning. Between the two of them they have slammed the politics section with 10 posts.  I was  thankful to see this post from Z.  I thought everyone had left the building!

I'm surprised Markle and TTT have not posted the article about Scott Baio's claim that Chelsea married into the Soros family and even had her wedding at his place.  All a big fat lie...from the boy who was Chachi!  I mean a Happy Days actor...that's a source!  Razz Razz

Excellent, cogent post, SW, and right on the money on every point.  Thank you -- and yes, thanks to Z-man for the thread.  I do agree the positively desperate spam-slamming of this board between Markle and TTT has gotten way beyond tenable, and fact-checking their often outrageously fictional sources is an exercise in futility I personally have no more time for.

I think it's the basics, Linda, when it comes to research and writing.  Of course a lot more detail if you want to be accepted as a writer with integrity.   You are kind and I always appreciate your input.

I appreciate both of you, SheWrites and LindaL, although I'm remiss in saying so.  And Othershoe...thanks for your wonderful contributions over the years.  Sadly, there are a lot of liars out there...and it surprises me how many people seem to have lost the basics of morality in their attempt to be moral...hence the Trump support from the "religious" right.  

I knew what Fox was before Bush was elected (should have put that in quotes as well).  I've told the story about a person I worked for locally, helping him to prepare his parents' house for sale...I pointed out a PNJ letter that was anti-Bush.  He had 5 TV's in his house, all blasting Fox 24/7.  He turned red in the face and got really angry.  (He's no longer with us, so I can talk freely without naming him.)  My point is that he was something of a rare bird then, but the constant propaganda from Fox, Limbaugh, talk radio, etc. is really a form of brainwashing...and more people seem to be succumbing to the lies and distortions.  As a TV medium, Fox is ubiquitous...at the doctor's office, at the pharmacy, even in the UWF Commons (I used to change the channel).  When I read someone's blog about politics dividing families, I think how easily I could have written the same thing.  It makes me horribly sad to see how people can be led by the nose (and I'm talking about my family members and a few old friends).    

That's strange you talk about everywhere you go that has a tv has fox news on. I was two doctor's office's, one today and one a few months ago and yep they had it on and I watched the people staring at it and the expression's on their faces, I remember thinking these people look like you could lead them to Jim Jones and drink his magic potion. Sad to say my sister was just like that.

dumpcare



Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

Jim Jones is calling you Markle.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

Fox "News" is not even classified as a news network. They're "entertainment". I don't see them anymore, and I haven't missed a thing.

Markle

Markle

Sal wrote:Studies have consistently shown that Fox News viewers are less informed than people who consume no news at all.

Have you ever read the questions asked in the survey?

I have.

Telstar

Telstar

ppaca wrote:
Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

Jim Jones is calling you Markle.




Markle

Markle

Telstar wrote:
ppaca wrote:
Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

Jim Jones is calling you Markle.


Specifically, this has what to do with the credibility of Fox News?

What have you got?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


He has a good point...about followers...people who are unable to form their own conclusions...and therefore need someone else to tell them what to do...authoritarian followers.

Telstar

Telstar

Markle wrote:
Telstar wrote:
ppaca wrote:
Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

Jim Jones is calling you Markle.


Specifically, this has what to do with the credibility of Fox News?  

What have you got?



Fox News viewers really do see the world differently Dogfox10

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

And as Bill Maher so frequently points out, it's amazing how many Americans are just plain stupid.

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

And as Bill Maher so frequently points out, it's amazing how many Americans
are just plain stupid.

And, we all know who are stupid...according to the architect of ObamaCare.


3 Jonathan Gruber Videos: Americans "Too Stupid to Understand" Obamacare

Telstar

Telstar

Fox News viewers really do see the world differently Fox-ne10

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:Poll: Fox News most trusted network
By NICK GASS 03/09/15 06:25 AM EDT

Fox News has the most trusted network and cable news coverage in the United States, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Monday. But network TV is much less trustworthy than it was in the days of Walter Cronkite, American voters say.

In comparison rankings, 29 percent responded that they trust Fox News the most. CNN follows with 22 percent, CBS News and NBC News are at 10 percent, ABC News at 8 percent and MSNBC at 7 percent.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/fox-news-trusted-network-poll-115887#ixzz4OnaJhrRi

And as Bill Maher so frequently points out, it's amazing how many Americans
are just plain stupid.

And, we all know who are stupid...according to the architect of ObamaCare.


3 Jonathan Gruber Videos: Americans "Too Stupid to Understand" Obamacare


Fact: Gruber speaks for all liberals the same way David Duke speaks for all you fascist-racists.

Hillary has my vote. Bernie has my heart!

Guest


Guest

I've tried to find a clip to post but it's not on Fox News, Bret Baier's blog page, or CNN.

On CNN, this morning, Alison Kosic and Chris Cuomo showed a clip from Bret Baier's evening news show on Fox. He retracted a statement that said Hillary was close to being indicted. He went through the process to indictment and stated he was wrong and had things out of order (wish I had the clip or a note on what he said because I'm probably misquoting!) Anyway, no one mentioned it on Fox and Friends this morning. Nothing on the internet. And I don't see it on CNN online. Hopefully it pops up a bit later. I doubt it.

The fast paced "we gotcha" news arena needs to be schooled. We are over run with low quality "journalism."


Telstar

Telstar

SheWrites wrote:I've tried to find a clip to post but it's not on Fox News, Bret Baier's blog page, or CNN.  

On CNN, this morning, Alison Kosic and Chris Cuomo showed a clip from Bret Baier's evening news show on Fox.  He retracted a statement that said Hillary was close to being indicted.  He went through the process to indictment and stated he was wrong and had things out of order (wish I had the clip or a note on what he said because I'm probably misquoting!)  Anyway, no one mentioned it on Fox and Friends this morning.  Nothing on the internet.  And I don't see it on CNN online.  Hopefully it pops up a bit later.  I doubt it.

The fast paced "we gotcha" news arena needs to be schooled.  We are over run with low quality "journalism."  








Oops: Fox anchor retracts claim of ‘likely’ Clinton indictment after conservatives sites go wild

Fox News anchor Bret Baier admitted on Thursday that he had been wrong when he reported that Hillary Clinton would “likely” be indicted by federal authorities, a claim that sent conservative websites into a frenzy.

“We talked to two separate sources with intimate knowledge of the FBI investigations,” Baier explained on his Wednesday program. “The Clinton Foundation investigation is far more expansive than anybody has reported so far… Several offices separately have been doing their own investigations.”

“They are actively and aggressively pursuing this case,” the anchor insisted. “The investigations will continue, there is a lot of evidence. And barring some obstruction in some way, they believe they will continue to likely an indictment.”

That news immediately exploded on conservative–leaning sites.

But on Thursday, Baier said that his characterization of the news was simply not true.

“I want to be clear — I want to be clear about this,” he explained. “I pressed the sources again and again what would happen [if Hillary Clinton wins]. I got to the end of that and said, ‘They have a lot of evidence that would likely lead to an indictment.’”

“But that’s not, that’s inartfully answered,” Baier continued. “That’s not the process. That’s not how you do it. You have to have a prosecutor. If they don’t move forward with a prosecutor with the DOJ, there would be, I’m told, a very public call for an independent prosecutor to move forward.”

“There is confidence in the evidence, but for me to phrase it like I did, of course that got picked up everywhere, but the process is different than that.”

Watch the video below from Fox News, broadcast Nov. 3, 2016.




http://www.rawstory.com/2016/11/oops-fox-anchor-retracts-claim-of-likely-clinton-indictment-after-conservatives-sites-go-wild/

Guest


Guest

Found it!
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/11/surprise-bret-baier-has-walk-back-clinton

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Fox News viewers really do see the world differently

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum