O'Reilly Fired by Fox

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: KeithE

Re: Fox News elected W 43

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:38 am

Stephen Fox wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
William Thornton wrote:Never much cared for the guy. Don't watch him. Won't miss him.

I like the 6:00 Fox News, Chris Wallace and most of their commentators, especially krauthammer. If tucker Carlson get in at 8pm, I'll catch that occasionally. Megan never did much for me.


Greg Gutfeld is the man. A little crude at times but love his monologues and writings. Good head on his shoulders concerning politics. IMPO.

Worth the watch and enjoy the humor.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5391119919001/?playlist_id=4249245556001#sp=show-clips


Greg Gutfeld is an Ass, a donkey's rear end of the first order with Watter's World. Occasionally Oreilly and the SNL comedian had a good line but Fox News is a creation of the Devil,Nixon's Revenge and the worst of Nixon.

The masturbators Oreilly and Roger Ailes, their sexual release of choice is grand metaphor for their politics and ideology.

The politics of resentment as they perfected the evolution of Lee Atwater's n.....ger memo into abortion politics the religion card and Ben Ghazi with the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC as instructive.

NPR made a good case yesterday Fox out of the gate in 96 with the Ailes Strategy put W in the White House and gave us all those missing limbs and damaged brains of the Iraq War, surely Christ work in the world, value of human life. NPR said two percent of the strategic electoral college vote could be attributed to Fox News first six years.

What a legacy

Here is one of the better takes on Oreily's downfall with a great pic of him and Trump

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ll/523665/


Stephen,

Why don't you tell us what you really think?

At least GG's writings are coherent, something usually missing in yours. I do admit you did your best job of coherency this time. Though totally incorrect on your opinion, I clearly understood your dislike for GG and a few others.

Maybe the truth, deep down,which you keep secret is that you like GG, his writing, monologues and his politics.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 27, 2017 1:02 pm

It's not so much of an ideological issue, or one of "spin" in news reporting. It's a matter of an individual with high visibility and lots of money getting a pass on serving the consequences of a crime he committed. Plenty of high profile, extremely well off so-called Christian leaders have done, and gotten away with, the same thing, walking away with bank account mostly intact, with a few gestures looking like repentance getting the cheers of their followers.

Justice depends on how high the threshold of tolerance will eventually go among those who are victims. It's hard to turn down, and hard to blame someone who doesn't, the kind of money that gets offered to settle. For the victim, who just wants the attention to go away and to get past the humiliation, a settlement is appealing. The only ones in our society who have to suffer and pay for the crime in a real sense, are those who can't afford to settle.

There is a little bit of ideological bias here. Among O'Reilly's conservative following, there is little sympathy for, and a lot of hostility, toward his victims. Regarding the horribly despicable behavior of harrassment and abuse exhibited by O'Reilly, not much fuss. Influence and power trump morality and principle every time, and Stephen is correct in his assertion. Many of his followers are evangelical Christians, who have been overwhelmingly silent on this, and on Trump's abominable, illegal, immoral behavior in this regard as well. The room where their values were once kept, and trotted out conveniently when needed, is empty, you can hear the crickets chirping loudly through the door.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Fox News elected W 43

Postby Jim » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:53 pm

Stephen Fox wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
William Thornton wrote:Never much cared for the guy. Don't watch him. Won't miss him.

I like the 6:00 Fox News, Chris Wallace and most of their commentators, especially krauthammer. If tucker Carlson get in at 8pm, I'll catch that occasionally. Megan never did much for me.


Greg Gutfeld is the man. A little crude at times but love his monologues and writings. Good head on his shoulders concerning politics. IMPO.

Worth the watch and enjoy the humor.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5391119919001/?playlist_id=4249245556001#sp=show-clips


Greg Gutfeld is an Ass, a donkey's rear end of the first order with Watter's World. Occasionally Oreilly and the SNL comedian had a good line but Fox News is a creation of the Devil,Nixon's Revenge and the worst of Nixon.

The masturbators Oreilly and Roger Ailes, their sexual release of choice is grand metaphor for their politics and ideology.

The politics of resentment as they perfected the evolution of Lee Atwater's n.....ger memo into abortion politics the religion card and Ben Ghazi with the fundamentalist takeover of the SBC as instructive.

NPR made a good case yesterday Fox out of the gate in 96 with the Ailes Strategy put W in the White House and gave us all those missing limbs and damaged brains of the Iraq War, surely Christ work in the world, value of human life. NPR said two percent of the strategic electoral college vote could be attributed to Fox News first six years.

What a legacy

Here is one of the better takes on Oreily's downfall with a great pic of him and Trump

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ll/523665/


A masterful exhibition of the profound eloquence emanating from the land and mentality of the four-letter word. It puts Rap in the shade, and you should go on the road with O'Reilly and Dennis and Watters...could make a fortune with this kind of garbage. Strangely, this slime is okay in the Forum but, used either as a perfectly good noun or verb, the word d **** is disallowed, at least in one of the threads. In the meantime, polish your stuff and maybe you can succeed Jerry Springer or Drake, the world's greatest and most garbage-tongued rapper.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 27, 2017 9:26 pm

If Stephen's post, and his choice of words riles you up like that, but O'Reilly's abominable, disgusting behavior and bribery doesn't, then clearly, your priorities are misplaced. Nice try at diverting attention away from O'Reilly's troubles.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

NPR On the Media re Fox News

Postby Stephen Fox » Tue May 02, 2017 3:05 pm

Easy google for last weekend. They get the story right on Fox. Ailes and Sean Hannity and Oreilly; Shamans bad for America as Ted Koppel nailed them.
"I'm the only sane {person} in here." Doyle Hargraves, Slingblade
"Midget, Broom; Helluva campaign". Political consultant, "Oh, Brother..."


http://www.foxofbama.blogspot.com or google asfoxseesit
Stephen Fox
 
Posts: 8885
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:29 pm

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Wed May 03, 2017 1:08 pm

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/bu ... 101165618/

Shine is gone, opening the door to speculation as to whether or not Hannity will hang around. These guys think that money ought to be able to buy them the right to abuse and mistreat women. I think their behavior disqualifies their opinion and political position, and compromises their right to comment.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jim » Wed May 03, 2017 7:33 pm

Sandy wrote:If Stephen's post, and his choice of words riles you up like that, but O'Reilly's abominable, disgusting behavior and bribery doesn't, then clearly, your priorities are misplaced. Nice try at diverting attention away from O'Reilly's troubles.


Riled? Au contraire! Quite calm and certainly amused...okay, a little disgusted, too. A fascination with body-orifices may predispose toward a psychological problem but who knows? You obviously did not read my post/blog on O'Reilly of 22 April and I don't blame you...too long requiring inordinate mental toughness or maybe self-flagellation, something a padre might assign as penance operation.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Wed May 03, 2017 9:11 pm

Jim wrote:
Sandy wrote:If Stephen's post, and his choice of words riles you up like that, but O'Reilly's abominable, disgusting behavior and bribery doesn't, then clearly, your priorities are misplaced. Nice try at diverting attention away from O'Reilly's troubles.


Riled? Au contraire! Quite calm and certainly amused...okay, a little disgusted, too. A fascination with body-orifices may predispose toward a psychological problem but who knows? You obviously did not read my post/blog on O'Reilly of 22 April and I don't blame you...too long requiring inordinate mental toughness or maybe self-flagellation, something a padre might assign as penance operation.


I can imagine that being required to read your blog might be assigned as penance. I didn't read it, not because it might require mental toughness or self-flagellation, but because after reading your posts on this blog, I've reached my bulls^^^ limit.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jim » Thu May 04, 2017 8:11 am

Sandy wrote:
Jim wrote:
Sandy wrote:If Stephen's post, and his choice of words riles you up like that, but O'Reilly's abominable, disgusting behavior and bribery doesn't, then clearly, your priorities are misplaced. Nice try at diverting attention away from O'Reilly's troubles.


Riled? Au contraire! Quite calm and certainly amused...okay, a little disgusted, too. A fascination with body-orifices may predispose toward a psychological problem but who knows? You obviously did not read my post/blog on O'Reilly of 22 April and I don't blame you...too long requiring inordinate mental toughness or maybe self-flagellation, something a padre might assign as penance operation.


I can imagine that being required to read your blog might be assigned as penance. I didn't read it, not because it might require mental toughness or self-flagellation, but because after reading your posts on this blog, I've reached my bulls^^^ limit.


Aw...don't be so hard on yourself. Just keep practicing (suggest listening to tapes of Hillary and Bernie) and you'll discover you haven't reached your limit. There's no telling how much you can produce...might even become a speechwriter for J. Fred Muggs if he should announce for 2020. If not, Joe Biden was campaigning in New Hampshire over the weekend (that God love ya) guy. Hillary just appeared with some gal, probably one of those "hate all white men" organizations, to announce (trumpet flourish!!!) that FBI Director Comey did her in; otherwise, she would be prexette today (even the thought makes the blood run cold). No...have some faith and self confidence. You can throw it with the best of them with a bit of practice...maybe in the same league as the Big O, who hands-down is the ruler of the barnyard -- Barrack Hussein O'Rooster, a sort of Kenyan Dubliner, Erin's best-loved oxymoron.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Thu May 04, 2017 8:47 am

Oh, it's not hard, nor is it taxing on my faith and self confidence to discern the glaring difference between the factually supported comments of intelligent and insightful people, and you and your comments.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby JE Pettibone » Thu May 04, 2017 9:56 am

Ed: Jim Wrote [quote}Aw...don't be so hard on yourself. Just keep practicing (suggest listening to tapes of Hillary and Bernie) and you'll discover you haven't reached your limit. There's no telling how much you can produce...might even become a speechwriter for J. Fred Muggs if he should announce for 2020. If not, Joe Biden was campaigning in New Hampshire over the weekend (that God love ya) guy. Hillary just appeared with some gal, probably one of those "hate all white men" organizations, to announce (trumpet flourish!!!) that FBI Director Comey did her in; otherwise, she would be prexette today (even the thought makes the blood run cold). No...have some faith and self confidence. You can throw it with the best of them with a bit of practice...maybe in the same league as the Big O, who hands-down is the ruler of the barnyard -- Barrack Hussein O'Rooster, a sort of Kenyan Dubliner, Erin's best-loved oxymoron. [/quote]

Jim

Posts: 3418
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.



Sandy wrote:Oh, it's not hard, nor is it taxing on my faith and self confidence to discern the glaring difference between the factually supported comments of intelligent and insightful people, and you and your comments.


Ed: I saw the bit to which Jim refers with
Hillary just appeared with some gal, probably one of those "hate all white men" organizations, to announce (trumpet flourish!!!) that FBI Director Comey did her in; otherwise, she would be prexette today
and it made me glad that I did not vote for her.

I believe that in large part she lost by being so anti Trump rather than focusing on issues along with poor decisions on where and when to campaign. Shows she and her handlers where not in touch with the electorate in places that counted. You just can't trust the old "every vote counts mantra". :brick:
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:48 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Thu May 04, 2017 11:21 am

You must have been watching a different campaign, Ed.

Clinton points to evidence indicating the effect that the Comey letter had on the polling, and also points to the wikileaks dumps, which we now know were engineered by the Russians. It's hard to change those things a week prior to the election. And I'm glad to see the Senate grilling Comey on both the timing of his information release, which eventually led to confirmation of the FBI's previous conclusion, that there was nothing in Clinton's email to warrant even so much as a fine, and on why he didn't release the same kind of information about the ongoing investigation of the orange haired buffoon, which is not only still going on, but so far has yielded eight connections to the Trump campaign, and is already yielding requests for immunity in exchange for testimony.

Trump's electoral victory comes down to 50,000 votes in five counties in three states. The information Clinton presented indicates that she would have won those three states, and most likely Florida as well, if it hadn't been for the timing of Comey's release and the wikileaks dumps. The buffoon and his followers don't deal in facts.

Jim doesn't allow facts to invade his fantasyworld.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jim » Thu May 04, 2017 2:19 pm

I watched the Comey hearing and found it to be fascinating, better than a spy-thriller. Having Hillary's classified documents on Weiner's laptop was a jewel, about as good as the missing emails by the thousands. I've watched Comey in the other hearings (be thankful for C-Span) and found that he doesn't intend to be the scapegoat for the Lynch/Bubba tarmac talk, where the deal to roast Comey was probably hatched. He was determined in all the hearings not to let that happen, though his hands are dirty in some of the kowtowing. He got even whether he meant to or not, thank God or that. He's too smart by half for those jugheads, whose cupidity is outdone by only their stupidity. Hillary joined Humpty-Dumpty in the whole rancid affair...fell off the wall and couldn't be put back together. As for the Russians (assuming they actually" discovered" Podesta or anything else...who knows), they did the world a favor if they helped keep this country from going third-world.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Fri May 05, 2017 6:59 am

Sandy wrote:Trump's electoral victory comes down to 50,000 votes in five counties in three states.


It could have come down to 50 votes in 5 counties in 3 states. He won. He is the President. Whining and complaining about the "IFS" of Comey will never change that.

Sandy wrote:The information Clinton presented indicates that she would have won those three states, and most likely Florida as well, if it hadn't been for the timing of Comey's release and the wikileaks dumps.


The information she presented and interpreted her way. She lost... she knows it... she refuses to take nay blame... Deal with those facts.

Sandy wrote:The buffoon and his followers don't deal in facts.


Fact - She lost, Trump won. I don't know how clearer the fact can be.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Haruo » Fri May 05, 2017 10:22 am

Clinton is yesterday's news. Trump is today's president. Not pleasant (especially the latter), but facts.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11392
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby KeithE » Fri May 05, 2017 10:51 am

Jon Estes wrote:The information she presented and interpreted her way. She lost... she knows it... she refuses to take nay blame... Deal with those facts.


Jon, I assume you meant “any” and not “nay” in the above.

Hillary did take partial blame. Read/listen to Hillary Clinton: I'm to blame for election loss but outside interference cost me.

We will never know if the Comey or Rusiian/WikiLeaks pronouncements changed the Election result. But they did soil our democracy.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8093
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jim » Fri May 05, 2017 7:43 pm

KeithE wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:The information she presented and interpreted her way. She lost... she knows it... she refuses to take nay blame... Deal with those facts.


Jon, I assume you meant “any” and not “nay” in the above.

Hillary did take partial blame. Read/listen to Hillary Clinton: I'm to blame for election loss but outside interference cost me.

We will never know if the Comey or Rusiian/WikiLeaks pronouncements changed the Election result. But they did soil our democracy.

One wonders why any special interest crowds should give a fig about alleged Russian “interference” in the election and see some sort of DANGER in that. Obama is campaigning on TV publicly for the guy in the French current circus (not even using emails or any subterfuge) while Trump is at least indirectly campaigning for the lady. Democrats are humiliating themselves as hopelessly ignorant in all their ranting over shenanigans that have obtained for years throughout the world. Maybe by the end of the year, the dems will finally understand that Hillary, without help or hindrance by the Russkies, proved herself inadequate every time she opened her mouth to spew memorized answers for the questions she already knew about.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Mon May 08, 2017 1:13 pm

Jon Estes wrote:Fact - She lost, Trump won. I don't know how clearer the fact can be.


Even hard core Republicans are facing the dilemma of how to respond to the pile of evidence of both Russian interference, and Trump campaign collusion. Yes, Trump won, but the question of the legitimacy of that election is, at best, clouded by Russian interference. So far the dots have led to eight Trump campaign officials, and a couple of them have already offered testimony in exchange for immunity, and there's been one cabinet resignation as a result. Clinton lost the three states that would have given her an electoral win--Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania--by collectively around 50,000 votes out of about 12 million. Polls prior to the referenced Comey announcement and Wikileaks dump showed her up between 4 and 6 points in all three states, and afterward, they showed the gap narrowing.

That leaves several open questions. Trump and the Russian collusion had been under investigation since prior to the conventions in the summer, and they already had evidence of contact with his campaign officials. If Comey had released that information, either back when the investigation started, or a week before the election, how much of an impact would that have had on his campaign? Enough to change that slim, 50,000 vote total at least that many votes in the other direction? Would Clinton have done better than that, in those three states, if there hadn't been a late announcement and a wikileaks dump? What if the FBI had disclosed that most of the content of the wikileaks stuff was fake? And how do you measure the impact? Clinton did better in early voting, in almost every state that has it, than she did on election day. In Florida, early voting ended before Comey made his announcement. Clinton won the early vote there by more than 100,000 votes.

It's not a question of whether the Russians interfered, it's a question of whether it did make a difference, and of whether or not our government can get past partisanship enough to understand the seriousness of it, allow for non-partisan, independent investigation, and have the cajones to do the right thing when the full outcome is discovered.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Tue May 09, 2017 10:26 am

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:Fact - She lost, Trump won. I don't know how clearer the fact can be.


Even hard core Republicans are facing the dilemma of how to respond to the pile of evidence of both Russian interference, and Trump campaign collusion. Yes, Trump won, but the question of the legitimacy of that election is, at best, clouded by Russian interference. So far the dots have led to eight Trump campaign officials, and a couple of them have already offered testimony in exchange for immunity, and there's been one cabinet resignation as a result. Clinton lost the three states that would have given her an electoral win--Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania--by collectively around 50,000 votes out of about 12 million. Polls prior to the referenced Comey announcement and Wikileaks dump showed her up between 4 and 6 points in all three states, and afterward, they showed the gap narrowing.

That leaves several open questions. Trump and the Russian collusion had been under investigation since prior to the conventions in the summer, and they already had evidence of contact with his campaign officials. If Comey had released that information, either back when the investigation started, or a week before the election, how much of an impact would that have had on his campaign? Enough to change that slim, 50,000 vote total at least that many votes in the other direction? Would Clinton have done better than that, in those three states, if there hadn't been a late announcement and a wikileaks dump? What if the FBI had disclosed that most of the content of the wikileaks stuff was fake? And how do you measure the impact? Clinton did better in early voting, in almost every state that has it, than she did on election day. In Florida, early voting ended before Comey made his announcement. Clinton won the early vote there by more than 100,000 votes.

It's not a question of whether the Russians interfered, it's a question of whether it did make a difference, and of whether or not our government can get past partisanship enough to understand the seriousness of it, allow for non-partisan, independent investigation, and have the cajones to do the right thing when the full outcome is discovered.


1 - Russian interference has nothing to with Trump or Clinton. Interference by them, is on them. It has been said early and 0ften... their interference did not change the outcome of the election.

2 - Just accusations concerning collusion. No connection made or shown. If you want to tie people to Putin, let's go back and talk about their getting large quantity of plutonium from a former SOS.

3 - what if... what if... lots of hopeful speculation coming from you.

I know it's difficult for you and you are finding an evil Trump tweet under every stone but an investigation is not synonymous to guilty. Of course, your dream President set the precident for guilty. There must be intent.

Enjoy Trump for the next 8 years.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Haruo » Tue May 09, 2017 11:07 am

Be interesting to see how much Trump will get accomplished with a Democratic majority in Congress. I mean, he's done wonders thus far with the GOP in power. Jon, maybe you've been missing out on the backlash to the AHCA, which has led to comfortably-elected GOP congressmen being booed and hissed by constituents at town hall meetings in places like Iowa and Idaho. These are people who in many cases voted both for the congressmen in question and for Trump, and who are now feeling betrayed. I think it will take some major finessing by Trump and the Senate to calm these waters, and I don't think it will happen.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11392
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Tue May 09, 2017 12:11 pm

Haruo wrote:Be interesting to see how much Trump will get accomplished with a Democratic majority in Congress. I mean, he's done wonders thus far with the GOP in power. Jon, maybe you've been missing out on the backlash to the AHCA, which has led to comfortably-elected GOP congressmen being booed and hissed by constituents at town hall meetings in places like Iowa and Idaho. These are people who in many cases voted both for the congressmen in question and for Trump, and who are now feeling betrayed. I think it will take some major finessing by Trump and the Senate to calm these waters, and I don't think it will happen.


A lot are hoping it won't happen. 96% of voters say they would vote Trump today. Just over 100 days, to early to make predictions. No health plan will be liked by all. It's easy to find stories from disgruntled. I think it is fair to say, this has become more political (the discussion) rather than logical.

Isn't it Idaho that now has no insurance companies to purchase from? OC working in Idaho.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Tue May 09, 2017 12:35 pm

The evidence that has been made public demonstrates that the Russians did interfere with the election, extensively. Right now, here in PA, they are actually looking into the possibility that voting machines, and vote totals, were hacked from outside. But even the Republicans have had to concede, and figure out how to handle, the mountain of evidence of their interference, and now, the individual connections of Trump campaign officials, eight of them by the most recent count, who had multiple direct contacts with the individuals on the Russian end who have been identified as having been involved. Among them, Michael Flynn and Carter Page, pretty close to the buffoon himself, and Flynn is already trying to negotiate immunity in exchange for testimony. Flynn appears to have been the key contact, as his name surfaces almost daily regarding the evidence being made public by the FBI.

When either a direct connection to the buffoon, or the establishment of his awareness of what was happening, is made, and I believe it will be, then the Republicans will be on the horns of a dilemma. Will they have the wherewithal and the integrity to do the right thing and draft articles of impeachment? They may well do that if they think that will get them ahead of the buffoon's sinking popularity and keep any chance alive of coming out ahead in 2018. They may have to, in any case, if criminal charges are filed, which is what I expect will happen.

Yeah, so what if 96% of buffoon voters would still vote for him now? He didn't come close to the 50% threshold, so 96% drops him below 40% of the total, which is similar to his job approval rating of 36%. If that's representative of the kind of vote Republican candidates for Congress can expect in 2018, then the Democrats will win fairly easily. But given the way things are going for the buffoon administration politically, if the FBI investigation drags on that far, the Democrats have a year and a half of his inept, incompetent, insanity to help them boost their Congressional numbers significantly. The health care bill has already helped immensely. Trump won't last two full years.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jim » Tue May 09, 2017 2:11 pm

The Clapper/Yates hearing was carried by TV yesterday so I watched as under oath both of these worthies swore that no collusion of the Trump campaign and Russia took place. The dem senators were horrified (probably shocked and awed, too) that Flynn wasn’t fired for two whole weeks—count ‘em—after Yates told the WH gang that she was putting it on notice, glibly not mentioning that Trump would have been an idiot to believe her instantly since she was a holdover from the Obama/Clinton pigsty of lie after lie. She fell into the acting AG job when Lynch resigned and got out of Dodge after being exposed, with Bubba, on the torrid tarmac where they doubtlessly and certainly unsuccessfully set up FBI guy Comey as the villain sinking Hillary, who was about as charismatic and convincing as a bear in hibernation. Strangely, neither worthy knew who “unmasked” (leaked) to some newsie the ID of an official, whose privacy was violated (no telling how many others…time will tell). Doing that is a felony and can be racked up to the Obama crowd, also. Otherwise, nothing new except a new set of hate-Trump speeches by the dems. Chairman Graham didn’t seem to even make a prepared opening statement, just let the ranking member drone on and on about the disaster that had befallen the country on election day. I had to laugh since committee-member Leahy was thrown off a similar hearing back in the eighties for LEAKING to the press.
Jim
 
Posts: 3496
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Jon Estes » Wed May 10, 2017 4:31 am

Sandy wrote:The evidence that has been made public demonstrates that the Russians did interfere with the election, extensively. Right now, here in PA, they are actually looking into the possibility that voting machines, and vote totals, were hacked from outside. But even the Republicans have had to concede, and figure out how to handle, the mountain of evidence of their interference, and now, the individual connections of Trump campaign officials, eight of them by the most recent count, who had multiple direct contacts with the individuals on the Russian end who have been identified as having been involved. Among them, Michael Flynn and Carter Page, pretty close to the buffoon himself, and Flynn is already trying to negotiate immunity in exchange for testimony. Flynn appears to have been the key contact, as his name surfaces almost daily regarding the evidence being made public by the FBI.

When either a direct connection to the buffoon, or the establishment of his awareness of what was happening, is made, and I believe it will be, then the Republicans will be on the horns of a dilemma. Will they have the wherewithal and the integrity to do the right thing and draft articles of impeachment? They may well do that if they think that will get them ahead of the buffoon's sinking popularity and keep any chance alive of coming out ahead in 2018. They may have to, in any case, if criminal charges are filed, which is what I expect will happen.

Yeah, so what if 96% of buffoon voters would still vote for him now? He didn't come close to the 50% threshold, so 96% drops him below 40% of the total, which is similar to his job approval rating of 36%. If that's representative of the kind of vote Republican candidates for Congress can expect in 2018, then the Democrats will win fairly easily. But given the way things are going for the buffoon administration politically, if the FBI investigation drags on that far, the Democrats have a year and a half of his inept, incompetent, insanity to help them boost their Congressional numbers significantly. The health care bill has already helped immensely. Trump won't last two full years.


The I Hate Trump Parade is in full swing, I see. That you chase after that which you hate so much is a sad thing.

If you are right, you ought to be pulling for Trumo to keep going as he is going. It only supports your theory, which is as wrong as global warming being the greatest threat to humanity.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: O'Reilly Fired by Fox

Postby Sandy » Wed May 10, 2017 9:27 am

Oh, Jon, I really feel sorry for you. So far away, and so out of touch. Here's a dose of reality. The buffoon fired James Comey yesterday. I suggest you click the link here and watch some real facts.

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/watch- ... watergate/
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... nal-crisis

You can use judgmental terms like hate, and apply them all you want to, all that does is weaken your credibility. You're not around, and you're certainly not in any kind of a position to determine or judge what I "chase after." I'm not in favor of seeing the country ruined, which is what "pulling for Trump to keep going as he is going" would be. His first 100 days in office proves that to be a completely true statement.

"Character is important. But it is OK to abandon it in order to elect a President who will throw you a few political bones so you can get what you want." That's the message my high school students got, loud and clear, from Christian supporters of Trump. I hear it from them, in their conversations, and I see it in attitudes and actions. They've picked up on the hypocrisy.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 7875
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest