Connect with us

Opinion

DAVIDSON: Unfortunately, It’s True What They Say About Fox News

Sad but true.

Jeff Davidson

Published

on

For several weeks after November 3rd, I had been reading about viewer discontent with Fox News. The discontent started on election eve when the network made the early call, “Arizona for Biden,” even though no mathematical reason to do so was apparent. The Fox News anchors covering the election seemed to have a faint ‘Mona Lisa’ type smile as they reported unwelcome results for Trump supporters. From there, things apparently spiraled out of control.

I didn’t pick up on those vibes that night. I figured okay, Fox is calling it as best they can. Everybody makes a few faux pas here and there. What’s the big deal?

Dust Ups While Spiraling Down

Trending: Biden Looks Straight Into Camera, Says America Is ‘Morally Deprived’ — Watch

As days and weeks passed, I saw more and more accounts of how Fox had gone to the dark side: Rupert Murdoch’s children who run the show are opposed to his political viewpoints, and it filters down to the actual broadcasts.

take our poll - story continues below

Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?

  • Has Big Tech Gone Too Far Banning the President?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

As a somewhat regular viewer of Tucker Carlson Tonight, Hannity, and The Ingraham Angle, I did not detect any malarkey originating from these three network stars. Then, I read about Tucker Carlson’s dust-up with attorney Sidney Powell and wondered why he was pressing her when she was not ready to talk. Anyone familiar with legal affairs knows that a good attorney has strategies in pursuing a case.

One strategy in particular is to bait the other party by making inflammatory statements that prompts them to sue, thus giving the offending attorney the right to discovery. Only a skilled attorney would ever attempt this, and Sidney Powell is highly-skilled.

Another issue with Carlson’s angst is that in assembling a legal case, especially one as massive as election fraud at the county and state level, it is no easy feat to produce 75 to 100 pages of documentation to convince a court that a lawsuit should proceed. In submitting two massive lawsuits, what Sidney Powell did is beyond astounding. Sure, she made typos, but both documents are at the level of preparing a PhD dissertation in a matter of days! Do you know anyone who has done that lately?

No Thanks, Fox

On Thanksgiving Eve, I am watching Fox News. Before returning from a commercial to The Ingraham Angle, a Fox News Alert is issued. Most of these are merely brief news updates and decidedly not “alerts” of any kind. A lesser-known reporter offers a quick rendition of the latest news, and that’s usually it.

Mentioning the Trump Campaign legal team at the Pennsylvania fraud hearing, it hit me like a shot: The reporter concluded her brief summary by saying something like, “The Trump Campaign was claiming voter fraud, but provided no evidence.” This statement was made before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court had made any ruling. Hmm. No evidence, did I hear that correctly? Yes, she said no evidence. Would Fox legal analyst Greg Jarrett agree? The day before, I watched the Philadelphia voter fraud hearing, almost in its entirety. I was astounded by the amount and level of evidence presented. One eye witness after another, who had already submitted sworn, legal affidavits, under penalty of perjury, bravely recounted their experiences.

The breadth and scope of what they presented was amazing. In vivid detail, each recounted some aspect of election fraud that they had encountered. They named names where appropriate, they offered data when they had it to present. Rudy Giuliani, in particular, was masterful in conducting the event and impacting those legislators who had been in attendance. A preponderance of testimony pointed to massive voter fraud.

Mandated from the Top

For someone at Fox News to hand the Fox News Alert reporter a closing line that said, “without evidence” is a clear indication that the network has gone to the dark side. What are they waiting for, hanging chads? “Without evidence” is what an Anderson Cooper, or a Rachel Maddow or any of the other completely compromised reporters on MSNBC or CNN would say without looking any further.

There is simply no excuse for offering such a judgmental statement, which is contrary to reality. It is like giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and I for one, was aghast. I wrote to the station and told them that I had been a fairly regular Fox viewer for at least the last 16 years. I couldn’t understand why they have started down a path that will lead to massive losses in viewership.

Such irresponsible editorials, however, are their call. If Fox executive wish to slash their own throats, so be it. I likely will continue to watch Carlson, Hannity, and Ingram, a bit longer, but will now be wary of the Network.

If any subsequent commentary confirms that Fox has sold out and no longer is interested in portraying the truth, fair and balanced, to the best of its ability, I’m gone. If they lose me as a viewer, I can surmise that they’ve lost you, and they’ve lost hundreds of thousands of others.

*Headline

Dem Senator: Troops Remain In DC Because Trump May Incite Another Capitol Attack

Bush league.

John Salvatore

Published

on

On a scale of 1-10, this quote from a Democrat Senator hits 11 on the side of stupidity. People like Chris Murphy just can’t help themselves. They are literally obsessed with President Donald Trump. Hey, Connecticut – want a do-over on this guy or what? If you live in the Constitution State and said no, you may want to re-evaluate. During an appearance on CNN, Murphy said: “The threat to the country is not over. We still have 5,000 National Guard members surrounding the Capitol complex. Why? Because there are still existing threats, present threats to the security of the Capitol. And so long as Donald Trump is empowered by Senate Republicans, there’s still the chance that he is going to incite another attempt at the Capitol or stir up similar trouble at the state legislative level or in a governor’s election when things don’t go his way. The threat is still very real to American democracy.” From The Daily Wire: Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) added to the already deep divide in our nation during a online meeting with constituents in San Francisco on Saturday, claiming the Trump supporters who breached the Capitol on Wednesday chose their “whiteness over democracy.” Pelosi said, “When that assault was taking place on the Capitol, 3,865 people in our country died of the coronavirus, many of them people of color because of the injustice of it all. The next day, on Thursday, 4,000 people died of the coronavirus. Why? Because decisions were made at the highest level, months before in the Oval Office, of denial, distortion, delay, calling it a ‘hoax.’” She added, “I thought it was going to be an epiphany for those who were in opposition of our democracy to see the light. Instead, it was an epiphany for the…

Continue Reading

News

Report: Biden Forming Committee With Intent of Packing the Supreme Court

Uh oh.

John Salvatore

Published

on

Biden refused to answer on the campaign trail if he would pack the court. He even said the American people don’t deserve to know his position on the matter. But since SCOTUS currently leans 5-4 conservative (though, four of the five justices sometimes side with the liberal minority), Joe is now making it clear that he’s planning to bump up the total from nine. From Politico: The Biden administration is moving forward with the creation of a bipartisan commission to study reforms to the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary. The commission will be housed under the purview of the White House Counsel’s office and filled out with the behind-the-scenes help of the Biden campaign’s lawyer Bob Bauer, who will co-chair the commission. Its specific mandate is still being decided. But, in a signal that the commission is indeed moving ahead, some members have already been selected, according to multiple people familiar with the discussions. CONTINUED: Among those who will be on the commission are Cristina Rodríguez, a professor at Yale Law School and a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Obama Department of Justice, who will join Bauer as co-chair. Caroline Fredrickson, the former president of the American Constitution Society, and Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor and a former assistant attorney general in the Bush Department of Justice, will also serve on the commission, those familiar with discussions said. Fredrickson has hinted that she is intellectually supportive of ideas like court expansion. In 2019, she said in an interview with Eric Lesh, the executive director of the LGBT Bar Association and Foundation of Greater New York: “I often point out to people who aren’t lawyers that the Supreme Court is not defined as ‘nine person body’ in the Constitution, and it has changed size many times.”…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week