I quite agree with you, and for the same reasons. Even if it somehow happens that he is convicted for a jailable offense, he will take an overseas vacation and never come back.
Yes, there is legislation, passed in 1924, in the aftermath of the Teapot Dome Scandal, where a corrupt member of Harding’s administration was convicted of accepting bribes.
I have, I’ve watched them for hours on end. I would like you to give me a cite of either of these channels broadcasting propaganda or outright lies ( that were not retracted with apologies).
And since your comparative standard is Fox daytime programming, please make these examples from CNN and MSNBC daytime programming.
Yes, the channels do have a distinct leftward lean and this is sometimes reflected in weight, the amount time which they devote to certain stories.
And they do not give air time to disinformation, not matter how widely disseminated it may be. And they have felt an obligation for the last four years to call out every lie told by the compulsive liar sitting in the White House, which got tiresome at times - but I’m not blaming the messenger.
But there is absolutely no left wing media that even approaches right wing media in size, scope and viewership. The right wing has Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, NewsMax, OANN and dozens more …a full lineup for anyone anyone that wants to fill their head with bullshit 24/7.
I’ll agree that Fox News daytime programming can be very reasonable, but that’s the one exception in right wing media, the one island of real news in a sea of bullshit. And the hardcores are listening to Rush then.
The “left” has Rachel Maddow and and Chris Hayes for a couple of hours in the evenings.
Heck, before 2016 you couldn’t find a good left wing political morning show if you wanted one. Joe Scarborough of MSNBC was a Republican back then. Yes, they’re anti-Trump now but that’s mostly because of the extortion attempt.
Is there any chance that his attempts to overturn the election could be a crime?
He tried to get the state legislatures to ignore the election and appoint pro-Trump electors.
There must be something illegal about that. There has to be something there that he can be charged with. Election fraud? Sedition? Attempting a coup? Treason?
This is absolute nonsense.
Five of the twelve hours between 6am and 6pm are hosted by right leaning hosts (Scarborough and Wallace).
On top of that MSNBC loves having conservatives on.
Steve Schmidt
Michael Steele
Charlie Sykes
Susan Del Percio
Richard Painter
The list goes on and on.
You can’t watch MSNBC for more than a few minutes during the day without hearing a conservative voice.
For Maddow, the example I used above, I found this right off the bat. Here she is, spreading disinformation from the relatively trivial (that George W. Bush never gave an interview to the New York Times during his presidency), to the not-at-all trival (that the New Black Panther Party decided the election for Obama). And there’s more at the following link. And that’s only going back to 2010.
To address the other things your wrote:
You want examples from daytime programming. I didn’t record these channels on a day to day basis, so I can’t provide this. But that is what I saw during all those months. Mulitple interviews on Fox with pundits on both sides, with calm, fair discussions, but not on MSNBC.
You say there is no left wing media that approaches right wing media in size and scope. Agreed. And you mention specifically people on Fox primetime, which I excluded from my post. Nowhere have I said that the various channels are equal to Fox, but only that they are not beyond reproach.
You say that Fox News daytime programming can be reasonable. On this, we clearly agree.
Finally, as one who remembers Joe Scarborough from “back in the day”, going back to the early 2000s, when he was basically a dyed in the wool right wing pundit, I now consider him my hero, for the excoriating coverage he has regularly and correctly destroyed Trump with for a good long time now.
In summary, since the election, Fox news daytime has gone back to their usual shit, to the extent I have been watching them, which is not much. When Biden won, there was a distinct switch to back to business as usual, and I stopped watching. But it was not as such pre-election during Fox daytime.
I am not familiar with Susan Del Percio. But as for the others, I’ve seen most them on MSNBC for quite a while now. They are paid contributors, and even willingly giving them the benefit of the doubt as to speaking their minds, they know who writes their paychecks. They don’t support Trump, they are there to destroy him. I am talking about daytime shows, where a Republican elected official or pundit is given time to argue his issues with a Democrat. Can you show me an instance where, for example, Steve Schmidt was brought on one of the MSNBC shows and had to debate someone who disagreed with him. That is what I mean by two pundits at a time, not a bunch of liberals sitting around agreeing with each other, no matter how right they are.
So just so you don’t mention my point: I generally agree with what the people you list say, but they don’t have to debate anyone, which is the whole idea of fair and balanced.
That should read, “…so you don’t miss my point…”.
One more thing, I missed this. Wallace hasn’t been right leaning since at least when Trump was elected. Yeah, she was a right-wing operative for quite a while, but does not generally support the right-wing’s viewpoint on her show. Good on her, I’d say.
Total bullshit.
Recalibrate your meters or whatever the hell else you gotta do.
Lance_Turbo, I’ll get right on it. While I’m doing that, if you’d like to respond to what I wrote about your pundit list, that’d be cool. And I don’t get why you have to be so argumentative, btw.
Sure thing.
“MSNBC isn’t balanced because the right wing folks they put on the air are paid by MSNBC which is left wing,” is a dog shit argument. You should be embarrassed to advance it.
Let me know if I can do anything else for you.
Nah, I’m good, since you’ve neglected to address the issue at hand, that Steve Schmidt and the like don’t have to debate anyone. And I didn’t say they weren’t balanced simply because I mentioned the fact that pundits are paid. If you don’t want to respond, that’s okay with me. But again, why can’t you just say so politely. Why the “bullshit” remark? I don’t get it.
I thought the issue at hand was Trump’s possible crimes, which has jack-all to do with this MSNBC vs. Fox thing.
I’ve already said that as I created the thread, I retract my not wanting to hijack it with this other issue. Going back to what I said earlier about this Fox vs MSNBC thing, I asked you if you had watched Fox during the day. Seems to me that would be a more important thing to address, as for my contention that Fox was more fair, but whatever.
What push-back was there after the refusal?
Possibly Trump has committed incest. That’s a crime, right? Possibly against a minor, even. Now that’s GOT to be a crime.
I already said I’m not playing the “Let’s drop the subject after I’ve made my point” game.
Talking about Trump now, okay?
Again, if you don’t want to address directly what I said about Fox being more fair during the day, and not overall, that’s fine. However, I think it’s reasonable for me to be of the opinion that you did not in fact watch Fox during the day. I could of course be wrong. But I respect your decision not to answer.
Here is a good article from NPR about Trump’s possible legal troubles:
Out Of Office, Trump Could Face Significant Legal Peril : NPR