Free for All: 11/18/14

What’s on your mind?

155 Responses to “Free for All: 11/18/14”

  1. The ratings were down for CNN, MSNBC and FNC for October vs. October 2013.

    Anomaly or trend?

    What do you think?

    It’s not like it was a slow news month.

  2. Why has the US traditional media done such an appalling job covering the disappearance of 43 students in Mexico? It took them three weeks to actually report the story, when the international press was all on it. Where is the outrage? Does America care?

  3. “Anomaly or trend?”

    ^^It’s a trend that has been going on for some time and will continue into next year (a non election year) unless there are a number of huge news events (major war or natural disaster etc).

    The reasons are pretty obvious.
    1) There are now a number of new cable news nets that have fragmented the cable news market.
    2) CNN has decided to mostly get out of the news broadcasting business.
    3) FNC and MSNBC have committed to filtering the news through a political filter, thus limiting any growth to viewers who are either liberal (MSNBC) or conservative (FNC).
    4)The average age of a cable news viewer is in the sixties and as they die off their replacements (younger viewers) are not using cable nets to get their news.
    5) Most people (particularly the young) now get their news on line and on not TV.

  4. “Where is the outrage?”

    ^^ JDB on MSNBC has been all over the story for days. The rest of the media? Not so much. There is an occasional story but no major coverage even on other MSNBC programs.

    Does America care?”

    ^^Not very much. The students are Mexican after all. The cartels torture and kill thousands of Mexicans every year. Almost none of the killings gets serious coverage in the US. If an American was among those students then the coverage would be wall to wall. That’s how news coverage works in this country.

  5. The killings are horrific. But, it’s not news that Mexico is a corrupt sh!t hole.

    For obvious reasons, I know more about the situations on the border. That that happened in Mexico City was (somewhat) surprising to me.

  6. http://www.mediaite.com/online/rep-john-lewis-calls-for-massive-non-violent-protests-nationwide-if-wilson-isnt-indicted/

    This is incredibly careless and irresponsible. A sitting Congressman doesn’t care what the facts of the case are, he only cares that one guy is black and one guy is white. And, if he thinks that people are going to hear him calling for non-violence as opposed to the massive protesting part, he’s delusional. The coverage of this case has been incredibly irresponsible. A powder keg has been created and it’s likely about to explode.

    Much of the left, the black community and the media are turning a guy who committed a robbery, assaulted a convenience store worker and assaulted a policeman (in his patrol car) into a national hero. Insane.

    I’ll likely never get shot by policeman. Not because I’m white. Because I would never attack a policeman and attempt to take his gun.

    A very similar thing happened to a white college honors student who was on academic scholarship here in Texas. He was hopped up on drugs, ran from a cop then attacked him and got shot and killed. HIs parents were obviously upset but there wasn’t much more outrage than that. Certainly no national media. And nobody was attempting to turn him into a hero. If you do stupid sh!t like that, the outcome might not work out very well for you.

  7. Alleged to have:
    “assaulted a policeman (in his patrol car)” and
    “attack a policeman and attempt to take his gun”
    It’s still a matter of dispute and only a fact to you and those in the right wing media.

  8. Well, I guess everything is “alleged”. But, there isn’t any dispute over the attack in the police car. The witnesses on his side acknowledge that. The media acknowledges that. So, your “right-wing media” snark is incorrect.

  9. “there isn’t any dispute over the attack in the police car. The witnesses on his side acknowledge that.”

    ^^That there was a confrontation at the car is not in dispute. Who initiated it and what happened certainly is in dispute.

  10. “Who initiated it and what happened certainly is in dispute.”

    Huh? Who initiated it? How exactly does a cop, sitting in a car, become involved in an altercation that he “initiates”?

    In what world do you live in where it’s ok to assault a cop in any capacity? Especially one sitting inside a police car? Jeebus.

  11. Obama: “There was no deception”.

    The White House website, as of this second: http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthreform/healthcare-overview

    If you like your plan you can keep it and you don’t have to change a thing due to the health care law.

  12. It’s just ignorant to accuse people of assuming they know what happened in Ferguson, then doing the same damn thing. You’re wasting our time with your agenda.

  13. I can attest that in two hours of Carol Costello (thank me later) there was but passing mention of Gruber, in response to a clear shot from Boehner.
    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/nov/18/jonathan-gruber-mentions-tv-fox-news-779-msnbc-79/

  14. Amazing that some people make it so long through life without being able to read and/or comprehend.

  15. “How exactly does a cop, sitting in a car, become involved in an altercation that he “initiates”?”

    ^^It’s alleged by some witnesses that Mr. Wilson called the victim over to the car,started the conflict and pulled out a gun.

    “where it’s ok to assault a cop in any capacity?”

    ^^Again facts in dispute.

    “Especially one sitting inside a police car?”

    ^^Irrelevant.

    Facts not in dispute are that Mr. Wilson shot and killed an unarmed Mr. Brown with a bullet through the top of his head at a distance of 20-30 feet.

  16. “I can attest that in two hours of Carol Costello…”

    Wow. People who typically do that get paid for it. Mediaite writers for one. You’re a trooper.

  17. I’m starting to understand why Carol Costello never apologized on air: “If I start now, we’ll be doing this once a week. Besides, Fareed Zakaria still works here, so buzz off.”

  18. Facts not in dispute are that Mr. Wilson shot and killed an unarmed Mr. Brown with a bullet through the top of his head at a distance of 20-30 feet.

    With named, on camera witnesses who say Brown ran; turned with his hands up; was shot. This includes a contractor shouting these facts in real time as he was being filmed by someone’s cell phone.

    Playing the game of “nobody knows what happened”, then telling us you do, opens you up to another side of this story being presented, too.

  19. @ Lone

    And yet, they talk so much.

  20. “^^It’s alleged by some witnesses that Mr. Wilson called the victim over to the car, started the conflict and pulled out a gun.”

    Ha. Ok. That version isn’t backed up by most witnesses. I haven’t even heard Brown’s team using that nonsensical version of events.

    In any case, you don’t assault a police officer, ever. Unless you’re an idiot or worried about something else (like if you just robbed somebody).

    I had an officer pull a gun on me once. Over a simple traffic stop. Where I literally did nothing wrong other than go about 15 MPH over the speed limit. It was pretty scary. But, you know what I didn’t do? Punch him in the face. You know why? Because I’m not an idiot. And I don’t have a death wish.

    The fact that people are making the guy who just assaulted a convenience store clerk, stole stuff from said store and within a few minutes assaulted a cop; into a hero, is crazy. If he were Chinese, White, Hispanic, anything other than black, this wouldn’t be a controversy. But we live in a backassward politically correct world where looting, destruction and Molotov cocktails are considered non-violent but 65 year-old grandma tea-partiers are called racist terrorists.

  21. “And yet, they talk so much.”

    fritz is a good dude. But, I ignore about 95% of what the other one writes. I refuse to answer and/or acknowledge him which is made much easier by just not reading his nonsense. Of the few that have actually been “banned” from this site, I can’t believe he’s not one with his over-the-top accusations posters to this blog. But, whatever. Ignoring him makes it much easier. It’d be nice if there were a block function on here, though.

    fritz is able to argue & disagree with me without calling me some sort of anti-American epithet.

  22. For goodness sake thee is testimony and analysis from professional medical examiners about residue on Michael Brown’s hand. He had his hand in the weapon inside the cop car. What idiot does that?

    If you are able you will need yo read to paragraph 8 to get some specifics.

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/official-autopsy-shows-michael-brown-had-close-range-wound-to/article_e98a4ce0-c284-57c9-9882-3fb7df75fef6.html

  23. Regarding those that have been banned, can we start a petition to get Laura “officially”🙂 reinstated?

  24. “What idiot does that?”

    No sane, rational, thoughtful person. But, apparent sane, rational, thoughtful people think it’s cool when others (well, some others) do it.

  25. LS, claiming to ignore me while making absurd claims about me isn’t going to work. Either interact or don’t. Pick one.

  26. But CNN has plenty of time for Charles Manson’s “marriage”, and some woman who’s written a book about the crime. That’s just great.

  27. ^ Meanwhile MSNBC has been doing real news. Which amuses me greatly.

  28. When did it become acceptable to have the author of a book as a guest, in the context of a “news” story, during “straight news” shows? Evening/opinion shows are one thing, but this seems pretty skeezy. She’s clearly selling a book, while discussing Manson’s blessed event. It’s a shameless plug, layered atop a story best ignored, or at least downplayed. One has to wonder what, if any business interest CNN has in that book.

  29. “That version isn’t backed up by most witnesses.”

    “The key word being “most”. Your admitting it’s in dispute.

    “In any case, you don’t assault a police officer, ever.”

    ^^ Your correct here LS which is why Mr. Brown assaulting Mr. Wilson is in dispute. Some witnesses say he didn’t assault Mr. Wilson. It’s in dispute.

    “But, you know what I didn’t do? Punch him in the face. You know why? Because I’m not an idiot. And I don’t have a death wish.”

    ^^Exactly. Some witnesses say Mr. Brown didn’t punch Mr. Wilson in the face. There is a small chance he wasn’t an idiot with a death wish. There is also a chance, however small, that Mr. Wilson’s account is not true and he fabricated a story to save his ass.

    “within a few minutes assaulted a cop”

    ^^Again an opinion. The facts are in dispute.

    “If he were Chinese, White, Hispanic, anything other than black, this wouldn’t be a controversy.”

    ^^Unlikely. Any unarmed teen killed by a police officer under disputed circumstances would garner attention. If he were white in a mostly white community and the cop black then the cop would most likely have been charged with something by now.

  30. Fritz: did you read the article I linked? The idiot “gentle giant” had his hand inside the police car on or near Officer Wilson’s gun. There is no dispute from the professionals about that fact. That is assaulting a police officer – no two ways about it.

    For you to say that there was no assault is patently ridiculous.

    But…..whatever!

  31. “The fact that people are making the guy who just assaulted a convenience store clerk, stole stuff from said store and within a few minutes assaulted a cop; into a hero,is crazy”

    ^^Your right if that was the case LS. I don’t see anyone making Mr. Brown into a hero. He’s the victim of an alleged crime. No rational person would call him a hero.

  32. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/watch-chuck-todd-react-to-uncomfortable-question-about-david-gregory/

    “Todd said he’s bumped into Gregory a few times since the latter left NBC. Hill asked if it was awkward at all. Todd responded, “About as awkward as being asked questions about it.””

  33. I’m not sure what facts you’ve been seeing/reading, fritz, but it’s pretty much not in dispute that Brown assaulted the police officer. And, that’s no small thing. You can’t just go around attacking cops because you think their “pigs”. It’s a felony with I believe a 10 year minimum prison sentence in MO. Many people are excusing his actions because: a) they don’t like cops and/or b) because of the color of the skin of those involved.

    Here’s a similar case that didn’t result in violent protests, statements from the POTUS or investigation from Eric Sharpton Holder:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2524083/Chris-Carter-pictured-The-mean-campus-police-officer-shot-killed-straight-A-student-23-asked-You-gonna-shoot-me.html

    There was some national coverage shortly after the incident but that’s about it.

  34. “The idiot “gentle giant” had his hand inside the police car on or near Officer Wilson’s gun.”

    ^^The reason his hand was in the car near the gun is in dispute. There are lots of opinions, like yours and LS’s, about the subject but a firm conclusion by a court has not been made to date.

    “There is no dispute from the professionals about that fact.”

    ^^There are different opinions about what happened by professionals and others. Whether he was assaulting Mr. Wilson or defending himself is in dispute. Stating strongly something is a fact and calling me names does not make it so. When a judge has ruled on the subject we will know and even then it will be appealed.

  35. “pretty much not in dispute that Brown assaulted the police officer.”

    ^^Pretty much not in dispute means it’s in dispute. Period. End of story.

    “I’m not sure what facts you’ve been seeing/reading, fritz”

    The only facts are in the autopsies which don’t say Mr. Brown attacked Mr. Wilson. they do say how Mr. Brown died. everything else is disputed by someone or other; most with a hand in the game.

  36. “Here’s a similar case that didn’t result in violent protests,”

    I remember the case. It has some similarities and some differences to the Brown shooting. The kid shot in the back, was white – as was the cop. There was a conflict between the two and what happened is in dispute. The cop (to my knowledge) hasn’t been charged yet after nearly a year and there is a dispute about whether the case should be in a federal or state court. A wrongful death suit has been filed. There were some protests at the time but your right the case was not cause at the time.

  37. You seriously think he was “defending himself”? There’s a better chance we’re all living in the matrix and Wilson is an agent.

    Completely ridiculous. NOBODY is claiming that and his supporters are claiming some wild sh!t

  38. Hey, I have an idea. Why don’t you take your endless tirades about the Brown case and stuff it. You have an obvious bias and agenda, and you’re clogging up this blog with it. Who needs to hear one more version of how you think Officer Wilson is swell and Michael Brown a thug? Seriously.

  39. Well, at least we can both agree that the facts are in dispute. We’ll see what happens going forward. Hopefully nothing too crazy I’d no indictment. Good back and forth fritz!

  40. Oops…’If’ no indictment

  41. I am surprised at the number of people who seem to fail to see that what happened at the officer’s SUV and what happened 20-30 feet away where Brown was shot and killed are two separate and independent legal issues for the grand jury to consider.

    Arguing about what happened at the SUV is not as legally significant in determining whether the shooting was justified as what transpired when Brown was shot. Even though my suspicion (along with many others) is that the grand jury will not indict.

  42. Michael, people don’t see it because they have an agenda that presupposes Brown was a thug who deserved to be shot. It’s repulsive, and completely ignorant of the legal issue being addressed here: How did Michael Brown end up unarmed and dead in the middle of that street? He was not shot at the liquor store, he was not shot beside the cop vehicle. Those two locations are irrelevant.

  43. “Even though my suspicion (along with many others) is that the grand jury will not indict.”

    ^^I actually think the grand jury will indict Mr. Wilson for something. The question really is; and it hasn’t been discussed at all as far as I can see; what happens next?

    The prosecutor obviously doesn’t want to try the case in Ferguson so what does he do? My guess is try for a change of venue. Whether this can be done I have no clue, but I would think he would have a pretty good case.

    The thing is finding a location acceptable to both prosecutors and defense lawyers (who will have the same goal – find Mr. Wilson innocent) that will guarantee an all white jury and yet not put forth the image to the media of a show trail in reverse. It should be fascinating.

  44. Pretty much not in dispute means it’s in dispute. Period. End of story.

    I feel the same way about Global Warming/Climate Change/Weather. Every time some scientist of weather person says, “It’s not man made,” the Al Gore disciples scream, “But it’s settled science!”

    Clearly, it’s not “settled.”

  45. “Clearly, it’s not “settled.”

    ^^ Interesting analogy blue. You’d be right if there was a video, with sound, of the whole event and every witness (95%+ of climate scientists) told the exact the same story (climate change is real) but Mr. Wilson (the climate change deniers) and that story (climate change is real) was diametrically opposed to Mr. Wilson’s (climate change deniers) story (climate change is a hoax). In that case the climate change would be in dispute.

  46. Some people in this thread need to take a chill pill…

  47. Hey Spud: do you always let posters tell others what they can and cannot comment on and tell them to leave your site?

    That SHOULD be your job!

  48. I had a feeling there would be a… “But but but… it’s different…!” excuse.

    Oy vey.

  49. You can go to a rightwing cable news blog where nobody disagrees with you, Pam. Or you can stay here and complain about me. Your choice.

  50. @ wipam

    Just ignore the ICN troll. It’s not worth your time.

  51. As Darth Vader used to say…This is CNN:

    “http://www.mediaite.com/tv/don-lemon-to-cosby-rape-accuser-when-you-had-oral-sex-why-didnt-you-use-your-teeth/”

  52. “Just ignore the ICN troll. It’s not worth your time.”

    Exactly. Works for me. If I’m being called all sorts of childish names, I no longer see it.

  53. CNN needs to do something about that fool. We should have known he wasn’t right when he had the supernatural grabbing airliners out of the sky.

  54. Exactly. Works for me. If I’m being called all sorts of childish names, I no longer see it.

    You guys keep talking about not talking about me. I don’t think you understand the term ‘ignore’…

  55. Random thought:

    Alison Camerota is good on CNN. Wasn’t a big fan of hers at FNC but I like her role on CNN.

  56. “This is CNN Breaking News”

    Then Banfield says “I want to take you back to the story of the hour…” That is decidedly not the definition of breaking news.

    Yes, FNC is awful with this too.

  57. CNN has gotten to that thing where they come out of many commercial-breaks with their Breaking News audio. The TV is often in another room, but I hear it all the time, especially on OutFront.

  58. I’ve noticed Megyn Kelly starts virtually every show with “breaking now…” and the music.

  59. I’m such an idiot that when I hear “breaking news”, I’m still expecting to see that a plane has crashed into a building or that the POTUS was kidnapped. Or something actually important.

    Not something about a snow storm and a random lady giving birth in a fire station.

  60. Ugh, Megyn is the worst with this. Every Kelly File starts with her wide-eyed, breathless BREAKING TONIGHT drama, then they start in with whatever liberal thing Fox is pissed off about that day. It’s all quite silly.

  61. Cavuto used to start every show with the “Swoosh”, until they wore it out.

  62. Then again, I also don’t expect to see a news anchor ask an alleged rape victim why she didn’t Lorena Bobbitt Cliff Huxtable.

  63. Surely there will be a thread on that bit of classic television…

  64. In the 1pm hour while CNN and MSNBC already reported Obama’s announcement on immigration was happening Thursday FNC was still saying Friday in Vegas when they did their segment on immigration.

    At 1:12pm ET FNC did a FOX News Alert to announce the speech was Thursday. After that they went to break and came back with another quick alert then moved on to other news.

    CNN is still talking about it and MSNBC just moved onto other news.

  65. I laugh when FNC uses the “FOX News Alert” during their Saturday Business Shows that were taped on Friday afternoon.

    They are alerting on something that was taped the day before.

  66. Don Lemon just apologized “if anyone was offended”.

  67. Try again, Lemon..

  68. It was just such a rambling, weird question. Or, an Al Sharpton question. Don Lemon has said some stupid stuff (black holes) but he doesn’t strike me as dumb.

  69. It was like a question you’d get from some fool on Twitter. I have to wonder if he wasn’t seeing it there, and thought it was reasonable to ask.

  70. It’s obscenely stupid. Part of what makes rape what it is is the threat of harm if you do something the attacker doesn’t like. But sure, let’s ask the poor woman why she didn’t pull a dangerous stunt while knocked out on drugs.

    I don’t like getting on the firing bandwagon, but this really does qualify for it. Don Lemon has lost all credibility to be asking people questions on that network.

  71. If you ever need a respite from watching cable news, I suggest teh 1993 movie Dave, starring Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver. It’s a comedy/drama/love story with plenty of political dancing, and you get the bonus of seeing Helen Thomas, Chris Matthews, Fred Barnes, and many others in their prime, not to mention cameos by Tip O’Neil, Senator Paul Simon. Jay Leno had grey hair even back then.

  72. ^ that movie is pretty good.

  73. Michael J. Fox owes Rush an apology:

    https://time.com/3594916/bubble-boy-stem-cells-cure/

  74. kaboom!

    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/11/204947-45-new-milwaukee-chiefs-compassionate-anger-city-shines-light-natl-controversy-ferguson/

    Hopefully the professional agitators at CNN & MSNBC are listening. Though I’m sure they couldn’t care less. Agendas to promote and such.

  75. Remember how the WH spent the whole year bragging about ObamaCare enrollment rates?

    http://www.vox.com/2014/11/20/7254793/report-white-house-secretly-counted-dental-plans-in-obamacare

  76. Ol’ Wolf lets sitting Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee get away with saying “hopefully the grand jury does the right thing…and indicts”. I assume she’s been privy to all the grand jury testimony? Or, maybe she’s just the same racist she’s always been.

  77. Shela Jackson Lee is the Dems Michelle Bachmann, minus the charm and intelligence.

  78. A lot of what she says doesn’t make national news. I have the unfortunate privilege of hearing just about all of it as her distict is in inner city Houston and I live about 40 minutes from there. She’s a peach.

  79. She’s more like their Louie Gohmert, perhaps. In any case were she a Republican.. well, you know.

  80. She always gets endorsed by the Houston Chronicle. They also endorsed Wendy Davis (for Governor) for what that’s worth.

  81. Mark O’Mara just made an interesting point on Banfeld’s show. Prosecutor not supposed to bring a case that he doesn’t think he can win at trial. And, I don’t think there’s a single rational person out there that believes this case can be won at trial.

    The indictment is largely to satisfy the angry mob. And the justice department investigation is because the POTUS nominated Al Sharpton as Attorney General.

  82. Never understood this whole idea that you can magically deport over 11 million illegal migrants. Aside from the racist views held by a minority of people, the issue goes into economic resources. Resources are finite and you can’t save the world. US citizens need jobs too.
    The most dangerous should be deported at any cost, that’s just common sense. But deporting those who aren’t dangerous is a different matter. If there were maybe 100 000 migrants, it maybe practical to deport but at over 11 million, it’s not. Deportations aren’t free nor is all that effort put into finding every single illegal migrant. To deport all of them is probably going to cost more than the cost of illegal migrants milking the system, which some claim is rampant (true or not, the cost of deportation is great).
    Honestly, if I were an American, I wouldn’t know what should be done. Giving them work permits will incentivize more people to cross the border, doing nothing has an incentive effect too, mass deportations will bankrupt the country. The real issue should be on coming up with better solutions not playing politics.

  83. Two years of BS, and this is what former journalist Ed Henry gives us after the entire made-up Benghazi conspiracy is discarded by REPUBLICANS. Major Garrett never would have agreed to this embarrassing 30 seconds. Oh right, he QUIT so he could do journalism again.

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/how-fox-news-dismissed-todays-benghazi-report-in-less-than-30-seconds/

  84. You can’t deport 11 million but you can keep 11 million more from coming here. You can makes sure & not incentivize them by granting amnesty. If you are here illegally, you shouldn’t be allowed to work or take advantage of any of our handouts. And, you should never be allowed to vote.

  85. ^^ Sounds like Greta gave it about the same amount of time, though perhaps more detail. The conservative response to all of this has been predictably quiet, especially Fox. Can’t imagine why that would be.

  86. “If you are here illegally, you shouldn’t be allowed to work or take advantage of any of our handouts.”

    ^^Yes just what the US needs.11 million people begging on the streets.

    “And, you should never be allowed to vote.”

    LOL! Yes the thing Republicans fear most. People voting. I think conservatives/Republicans would happily to repeal the 15th, 17th, 19th, and 25th amendments if they could. In fact the voting systems of Russia, Iran, Egypt etc. would seem to be much more to their liking.

  87. @fritz

    Is that what you think the 11 million are doing currently? Begging on the street?

    As for voting, why should illegals be allowed to vote? Is there anyone you don’t think should vote?

  88. I live in an overwhelmingly Republican district. It is also a community that is quite diverse in terms of ethnicity and religion. Doesn’t happen all the time, but more than once I’ve been in the voting queue when a small group of newly-sworn citizens raise their arms in triumph proclaiming to all that it’s their very first time voting. Everyone applauds them loudly. Our right as American citizens to vote is a very big deal that should never be cheapened by allowing those who have unlawfully arrived here to participate.

    “To former abolitionists and to the Radical Republicans in Congress who fashioned Reconstruction after the Civil War, the 15th amendment, enacted in 1870, appeared to signify the fulfillment of all promises to African Americans.” Source: ourgovermentdocs (emphases mine)

    The 19th Amendment was introduced by the 66th Congress, when both Houses were controlled by Republicans.

    Noted politicians have expressed a desire to reform the 17th Amendment because of its “appointment by governor” provision for filling vacancies, with only a small few calling for its repeal.

    I have no idea why anyone might think that Repubs would be happy to repeal the 25th Amendment.

  89. savefarris Says:

    In fact the voting systems of Russia, Iran, Egypt etc. would seem to be much more to their liking.

    Well yeah: those countries require ID!

  90. Facts about the Benghazi Report: it was only written by 2 members of the House: Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger. It was NOT written by any committee.

    Question: is there a reason Mike Rogers wants this issue to go away? Possibly – his wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, in her role as the CEO OF Aegis LLC (American Branch) got a $10 BILLION CONTRACT with the State Department which provide State Department employees worldwide with security. They were the Ones who contracted with the group Feb 17 to provide local security in Benghazi (these are the ones that gave up on security at our consulate). So…possibly trying to cover the ass of his wife?

    Just asking!

  91. So now Mike Rogers, and his wife, are in on the Benghazi conspiracy. Talk about grassy knolls.🙂

  92. The facts about the Benghazi Report are that Fox News and the crazies in Congress spent two years fabricating that the President of the United States abandoned a US Ambassador and thee other men to die in a terror attack. It was untrue and disgraceful.

  93. Is that what you think the 11 million are doing currently? Begging on the street?”

    ^^ Well if you don’t allow them to work, refuse them social services and they can’t leave because they have children or parents to support that’s what your left with.

  94. Misleading facts about the Benghazi Report: It was only written by 2 members of the House: Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger.

    The rest of that sentence should include, “the committee chairman and ranking member, respectively.” Pretty much how all House committee reports are written.

  95. I agree that is how most reports are written but they are also usually signed onto by the other committee members. No other signatories on this report.

  96. “I agree that is how most reports are written but they are also usually signed onto by the other committee members. No other signatories on this report.”

    ^^So others on the committee have a different POV on what happened at Benghazi? Then why no minority reports or someone on the committee with a different POV speaking up? It’s crickets from the report writers (let alone those, on the committee, who disagree with the report) as far as I can tell. I imagine they will eventually comment but nothing yet.

    This was a Friday night news dump and FNC and other right wing media has, with a couple of minor exceptions, mostly ignored the story. My guess this is the end of the Benghazi storyline on Fox News and other mainstream right wing media and they will move on to the next scandal; whatever that will be.

    The big question is how does the House Special Benghazi committee react. My guess is they ignore this report, just like the other five Benghazi reports and pretend all the relevant facts aren’t known. Trouble is it’s unlikely that FNC, let alone the MSM, will be watching.

  97. So others on the committee have a different POV on what happened at Benghazi? Then why no minority reports or someone on the committee with a different POV speaking up?

    They do, in the report itself. For example, the ranking member writes in Appendix 2, “These are all bipartisan conclusions based solely on objective facts. Where we differ from the majority at times is in their characterization of some of those facts.”

    If you read the actual report and its appendices, much of the administration’s handling of this event, both before and after the attack, is not shown to be very good or forthright. Not surprisingly, the majority is more critical of the Obama administration and the minority gives more benefit of doubt.

    Pam’s post above touches on the possibility that Rogers has reason to hide something. He does, as does Mr. Ruppersberger, but the reason(s) need not be anything other than what they’re legally allowed to disclose. In the report, in fact, the chairman indicates that he did halt questioning during a hearing (paraphrased) “because not all members present have sufficient security clearance along these lines.”

  98. The issue, from a cable-news perspective, is coverage. The story was dropped on Friday night, and the network that has covered the story endlessly managed to give it about a minute’s notice. Half of that, from Ed Henry, completely missed the part that refuted most of what’s been discussed on Fox.

    From what I gather of yesterday (Saturday, day after report is released), it was never mentioned. This terribly important story (which I agree it is), that they’ve been pushing for two years, has a huge development..and they kinda overlook it. Did Jeanine Pirro ever mention it, having done her histrionic accusations of the President, lo these many months? My understanding is that she didn’t. You might think that any development would at least be fodder for a segment questioning the veracity of the report, if nothing else.

    The same lack of coverage appears to be the case today, with some mention by Howard Kurtz on Media Buzz. Unfortunately, his angle is that “the media” downplayed the report. Uh, “the media” tended to ignore the larger story, leaving it for Fox to obsess upon. The network with the largest (if not all) responsibility for the spreading of these “conspiracy theories” is Fox, so if anyone should be covering the report, it is them. One has to wonder why they aren’t.

  99. I’ve not watched Fox’s Benghazi coverage other than reports that have made it on the broadcast network, and all of those that I’ve seen have been tame.

    Since the report came out Friday evening it’s probably not reasonable to expect that their opinion-head hosts will have much to discuss until tomorrow. My own un-educated guess is that FNC will obsess about the report if and when a controversial aspect can be fashioned into a persistent drum beat.

  100. FNC can bleat about other aspects of the report until they’re blue in the face, and none of it will matter a lick until they address the two years they spent promoting the theory that the White House called off a rescue mission. So far what little they’ve said completely ignored this issue, as did Lindsay Graham today on CNN. He’s back to “CIA talking points”, while calling the GOP report “a bunch of crap”. Well golly, that’s helpful.

  101. – won’t matter a lick –
    I suppose that depends on what the goal of their “bleating” is.

  102. Two minutes on The Fox Report “Insiders” panel: The report is crap; Mike Rogers is corrupt; everyone in Congress is corrupt. You’ll note this makes it convenient for Fox to ignore anything they’ve said about Benghazi because the report “doesn’t count”. Reality is whatever Fox says it is, even if it’s different from any earlier versions of it. George Orwell wrote a book about this…

  103. anything they’ve said about Benghazi..

    If it was about dispensing news and intelligent discussion on current events, then whatever they’ve said would not be at issue. News organisations aren’t supposed to be the news makers. But just like when the print news industry began circling the drain, that principle is one of the first to go.

  104. That network has promoted the “left behind” theory for two years. If a Republican committee concludes there’s no truth to it, Fox needs to stand up and say so. So far what little coverage they’ve given this report has completely avoided the topic. It’s dishonest.

  105. savefarris Says:

    If you ever need a respite from watching cable news, I suggest teh 1993 movie Dave, starring Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver.

    Just caught it on Encore this weekend. It’s amazing how much it appears Obama seems to have treated it as a training manual.

    Congress? Negotiating? Executing Laws? Pshaw: that’s the Chief of Staff’s problem! As President, I only have time for touring robot factories, playing in the yard with the dogs, and lecturing kids with guest co-speaker Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    Oh, and my big initiative involves a complete lack of understanding of how economic works!

  106. Fox needs to stand up and say so.

    Or what? They’ll risk being taken seriously as a news organisation?

    Obama seems to have treated it as a training manual.

    Not everything in life need be about bashing the sitting president. Sometimes a silly comedy flick is just good entertainment.

  107. Just watched a report by FNC’s Mike Emanuel on the broadcast network about the president’s unilateral immigration action. It was legitimately fair and balanced. I’m now wondering if these Fox News reports appearing on the big Fox network are edited differently than what appears on FNC.

    I’ll just have to continue wondering because I’m not going to watch the cable show to find out.

  108. savefarris Says:

    Sometimes a silly comedy flick is just good entertainment.

    I’ll give the filmmakers this: it’s one of the few pieces of entertainment in the last 2 decades that didn’t portray Republicans as inhuman monsters to be destroyed. Especially when compared to it’s “cousin” of a similar vintage: The American President.

  109. Or what? They’ll risk being taken seriously as a news organisation?

    They’re already considered as such by most of their viewers, and a good portion of that number consider them the only true source for news. It would be helpful if Fox would tell these people a GOP committee has debunked the theory they’ve been fed hundreds of times: that the United States Government abandoned four men to die, including a US Ambassador. I don’t think it’s too much to ask.

  110. Oh, it’s not too much to ask provided you’re not holding your breath waiting for that to happen. It might sort of happen, but only if a PR exec wants that to be a segue to a different approach or whole other theme to run with.

    Ironically, if I read on this blog or elsewher that Megyn Kelly said something on her programme along the lines of, “Boy, we certainly had THAT all wrong” then I might be inclined to try watching that cable channel again.

    Naht gAWN-nA duh It.

  111. Al, I replayed the Insiders segment to make sure I didn’t miss something. Check this out: Harris never said a word about the contents of the report. She started with a clip of Graham calling it “a buncha crap”, then asked the panel what they thought. The topic was that Graham didn’t like a report Fox viewers were told nothing about. That’s good television, baby!

  112. It is good reality-style television, for those who’ve bought in to it. Edit out the boring crap and get to the controversy. Sensationalism sells.

  113. Which would be fine, if some didn’t choose to get all their news from Fox. But ignorance is chosen, it is not thrust upon us.

  114. So good – and I hate to point this out – they even have you watching.

  115. Shep Smith always seems to be the FNC contrarian. How has he been handling the Benghazi stuff all this time?

  116. I watch bits and pieces during the week if there’s something to look out for, like this thing. Plus I have mysterious friends who watch a lot more and tell me what FNC is up to. And I watch Media Buzz and some of the weekend newshours. I’m a news junkie, with a particular interest in cable. A cable news watcher with no knowledge of Fox would be a strange thing indeed.

  117. savefarris Says:

    “Nobody wants violence of the streets, but …”

    Stay classy, Sharpton’s guest.

  118. savefarris Says:

    Hazards of Live TV, Volume ???

    MSNBC’s Reporter on the Ground in Ferguson has their teleprompter go out during interview on Hardball’s opening segment.

  119. savefarris Says:

    So far, MSNBC has struck out yet again in trying to forment a race war. Maybe the Cleveland thing will work out…

  120. Keep race-baiting, Farris. Readers love it.

  121. savefarris Says:

    Awesome split-screen at MSNBC where Obama calls for calm as Rioters try to turn over a police car …

    … And here comes the tear gas!

  122. savefarris Says:

    Thanks joe. I’m of the opinion that readers are smart enough to figure out who’s actually doing the race-baiting.

  123. You’re the guy who showed up tonight making race comments, buddy. Busted.

  124. savefarris Says:

    State Sen. Maria Nadal on MSNBC: “This is our race war”

    Yeah, but it’s all my fault. Right.

  125. Reported. I’ll let the moderator deal with it.

  126. What a repulsively single-minded human being, if I can call him that.
    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/hannity-asks-how-ferguson-grand-jury-decision-reflects-on-obama/

  127. Not in front of a TV fortunately. Watching converage on FNC app. I assume CNN is as terrible as they’ve been from the beginning and MSNBC is, well, MSNBC as you noted, Farris. What a good few days to not have access to television.

  128. So, not actually watching cable news, but you still managed to stop by and criticize the coverage. Hey, Formula One was on yesterday; maybe you can assume how that went, too.

  129. Meanwhile, Megyn Kelly seems bewildered that black people don’t “respect the process” that let Wilson off the hook. I don’t care how freaking white you are, to be in the news business as long as she has and not understand the Afraican-American community’s distrust of law enforcement…it’s laughable. I refuse to believe she’s actually that ignorant.

  130. Yeah, but she had Mark Fuhrmann on, so we really know that she gets it.

  131. ^ I thought you made that up… perhaps a flippant comeback to something I missed. So I checked. Wow.

  132. Mark Fuhrmann, and then some prosecutor person who seemed to take great joy in telling us not only how bad Michael Brown was, but also Trayvon Martin, in case we’d forgotten. It was racially insensitive and unnecessary.

  133. “And I have to tell you, this is St. Louis’s race war,” she continued calmly, holding back tears. “We didn’t have a race war like other cities throughout the country. This is our race war. And people have to be open, and they have to be honest. And they have to earnest. And they have not been earnest for decades. I know people in my own party, in my own government structure who disregard things that we say, and how we feel. And we are not going to allow it anymore.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/missouri-state-senator-to-msnbc-this-is-our-race-war/

  134. I used to be a regular Fox News Channel watcher so I know it has a good number of very professional and very qualified television journalists on its payroll. I don’t believe any serious person would quibble with that. But its programming – the overall daily product FNC offers to viewers – is not even up to cheap tabloid standards. Seriously, TMZ holds its zany production to a higher level of journalistic integrity.

  135. Right now, Fox has Kelly Wright anchoring, and Ted Williams as law enforcement representative. Why in the hell they couldn’t have them during hours when people are actually watching is anyone’s guess.

  136. They could have had a Kelly Wright anchoring, and would have if thoughtful, straight news reporting was their intent. It isn’t.

  137. A State Senator making personal comments is not “MSNBC’s race war”, and they were made after Farris posted his rancid, race-baiting, trolling comment. I realize it’s hard to keep up with facts, but give it a whirl.

  138. Lynn at 9:17pm: why is that not a legitimate question to ask or is it just that Hanniity asked it?

    Obama inserted himself into this situation by sending staff to the funeral, Holder to monitor the investigation (and if you listened to the press conference it was explained how involved they were with even DoD personnel doing an autopsy in addition to the medical examiner and Dr. Baden (hired by the family)) and tonight over 100 FBI officials sent to Ferguson. Donna Brazile also mentioned on CNN how many different parts of the Justice Department, but mainly, Community Relations, were working in the community. It was the Justice Department who helped “negotiate” the rules of conduct for the police. Obama was on TV tonight giving a speech about remaining calm but the idiots were simultaneously burning a cop car. Split screen on both CNN and Fox (CNN reporter said the gyre started because of someone pouring lighter fluid in the car after breaking the window).

    So….back to why is that not a legitimate question? Or once again is it because HANNITY asked it?

  139. savefarris Says:

    In joe’s world, *I* sparked State Senator Nadal to make her comments.

    oooo kayyyyy…

  140. Sounds about right

  141. Just ignore the ICN troll. He won’t go away, but there’s only so long Spud can put up with his continued rudeness and insulting behavior.

  142. In joe’s world, *I* sparked State Senator Nadal to make her comments.

    In the real world you posted your comment about the network, MSNBC, when the decision was announced. It had nothing to do with Nadal’s later comments, a person who doesn’t work for a network. Your implication was clearly that the network is engaged in a race war. Which you pulled out of your a** as race-bait trolling.

  143. savefarris Says:

    Your implication was clearly that the network is engaged in a race war.Which you pulled out of your a** as race-bait trolling.

    … based upon MSNBC’s broadcast choices, such as I documented above.

    No one forced MSNBC to interview a guy who said “Nobody wants violence, but …”.
    No one forced MSNBC to air This is our race war.
    No one forced MSNBC’s anchors to equate “justice” with “grand jury indictment”.
    No one forced MSNBC to have guest after guest come on and claim that “it’s now legal in America to shoot an unarmed black citizen”.

    They chose to play up the division and the hatred. They chose to stir the pot rather than calling for calm.

    They wanted it. They got it.

  144. Honestly, it took me a moment to catch why it was bad.
    http://cnncommentary.com/2014/11/25/marijuana-in-the-air/

  145. If you think hosting guests who discuss real racial issues in this country is “a race war”, you need to get out more. Troll.

  146. There are plenty of ways to discuss real racial issues without saying “This is our race war”.

    Funny how MSNBC was unwilling/incapable of finding them.

  147. Discussing real racial issues

    “It feels like we’ve given license, that a person is intimidated by a black person in this country, you can pull out your gun and shoot them.”

  148. ^ That’s a real race issue. Any black person trying to get home can tell you this.

  149. Nobody understands the “Black American experience” better and more completely than White male liberals.

    Just ask them. They know it all.

  150. I understand it a damn sight better than white conservatives who ignore the real issues African-Americans face, then bleat some BS about “race wars” when they try to discuss them. Trolls.

  151. If you’re on the left coast, and if you’re interested, catch Bill O’Reilly being interviewed by Jimmy Fallon on The Tonight Show. Besides the interesting discussion about his new Book “Killing Patton”, O’Reilly is asked about what’s going on now in Ferguson, MO., and his his response is quite reasonable from both the factual as well as the emotional parts of the issue. “When you don’t like what’s going on and you want change, you protest. That’s what keeps America vibrant. But you don’t burn down someone’s shop that they spend a lifetime building.”

  152. I am in a NYC for Thanksgiving and went to the protests that started in Union Square Park last night. The comment about taking away someone’s livelihood because “you” are pis**d off is what I had very long, intense, discussions with many of the protesters about. I also took the issue that Michael Brown was wrong for reaching into the cop car, which was the initial actions that I believe that escalated the situation. I think I was videotaped by more people that I have ever been in my whole life. At times the discussions became very aggressive and loud but never frightening.

    My husband and I spent about 2 hours discussing this issue with people. I actually had people by the end saying they understood some of where I was coming from. It was an interesting way to finish my night after a special dinner with my son and daughter.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: