MSU Grad, dad, braves fan, enjoy cigars, USC Aiken baseball. USC Gamecocks Womens Soccer, politics, dog lover,hunting, married 34 years, grandfather to 3
Remember this interview of a Juror from the OJ Simpson trial?
She said 90% of jurors thought Simpson was guilty……but voted “not guilty” to pay back whites!!!
Wow. I thought that it was wrong for him to stab a kid to death but now that I see these videos of Karmelo smiling and stuff I’ve realized that actually he should have been allowed to murder whoever he wanted. I apologize for my error.
I find the 2 most insufferable group of people on the planet are lifetime educators and lifetime politicians. Both live in a fantasy world that lacks common sense and would not survive a day in the real world
The reason ID is banned in California (and New York) elections is to enable large-scale fraud.
When you combine no ID and mail-in voting, fraud is de facto legalized.
When statistically impossible things happen, we should not be expected as a society to accept them. Evidence of fraud isn’t limited to video surveillance. Statistical impossibilities are hard evidence of fraud.
This is insane homicidal racial tribalism and it’s not the exception to the rule or some kind of aberration. It’s why black jurors are overwhelmingly more likely to acquit black defendants.
After being fired from CBS, former “60 Minutes” correspondent Scott Pelley yesterday said that “new management has instructed me to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story. I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified.”
Those are remarkable claims for which Pelley presented no evidence. Indeed, it would be extraordinary for CBS to demand such things of a correspondent, either verbally or in writing, given the reputational risk to the network.
A more likely explanation is that Pelley disagreed with someone at CBS and then declared a difference of opinion to be a demand to lie. Support for this interpretation comes from the fact that he claimed Tuesday that CBS’s new management, led by Bari Weiss, was trying to kill “60 Minutes,” something for which he also did not provide evidence.
Moreover, the accusation makes no sense. CBS Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss took the job to rebuild CBS News, not to wreck it, and a ruined “60 Minutes” would hurt her. Paramount’s owners did not pay billions for the network to burn its best asset for spite. So the simpler reading is that Pelley is the one stretching the truth.
Doing so appears to be a habit for Pelley. He told The New York Times, “I have been in combat in Afghanistan. I have been in combat in Iraq,” but being in a combat zone as a journalist is not the same as being “in combat.” The remark is yet more evidence of Pelley’s propensity to exaggerate to the point of lying.
For decades, mainstream liberal journalists have displayed remarkable levels of arrogance, even as they get major stories wrong.
Consider the case of CBS News’ former anchor Dan Rather. In the fall of 2004, two months before the election, Rather presented documents purporting to show favoritism in George W. Bush’s National Guard service. Experts called them forgeries. CBS apologized: “We made a mistake in judgment, and for that I am sorry,” Rather said. On air, he added, “I want to say, personally and directly, I’m sorry.”
But then, a decade later, Rather told Variety he still stands “100 percent” behind the report and reframed the apology.
Or consider NBC’s Katie Couric. In her 2016 documentary “Under the Gun,” editors inserted roughly eight to nine seconds of silence after she asked Virginia gun owners how to keep guns from felons and terrorists without background checks, making them look stumped. The raw audio revealed that they answered immediately.
Couric’s first instinct was to defend what she did, saying she was “very proud of the film.” Only after sustained backlash did she apologize.
In her 2021 memoir “Going There,” Couric admitted she cut Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s harshest anthem-kneeling comments from her 2016 interview. Ginsburg had said kneeling players showed “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life, which they probably could not have lived in the places they came from.”
NBC’s “Meet the Press,” in the spring of 2020, aired a clip of Attorney General Bill Barr that omitted part of his answer, misleading the public.
When Catherine Herridge interviewed Barr for CBS Evening News, she asked what history would say about his decision to drop the case against a former National Security Advisor to President Trump, Michael Flynn. The Obama administration’s FBI had illegally targeted Flynn for entrapment and prosecution. Barr replied that ”history is written by the winner. So it largely depends on who’s writing the history.”
"Meet the Press'" anchor at the time, Chuck Todd, said on air that Barr “didn’t make the case that he was upholding the rule of law. He was almost admitting that, yeah, this is a political job.’” But “Meet the Press” had left out the second part of Barr’s answer to Herridge, in which he said, “But I think a fair history would say that it was a good decision because it upheld the rule of law.”
The safeguards the journalism profession built against error did not work when it mattered. The corrections, the editors, the fact-checkers, and the standards desks all sat in place while the press got the border, trans medicine, climate, the sixth extinction, Russiagate, the Hunter Biden laptop, Covid and much else wrong. Gerth described how reporters sought to “shoot the messenger” rather than grapple with evidence contradicting the Russia collusion narrative...
https://t.co/K5tE372xGo
Please subscribe now to support Public's award-winning journalism and to read the full article!
"60 Minutes" is the most prestigious TV news program in America. But a new review of the last 20 years of its reporting reveals serious inaccuracies and partisan bias on immigration, transgenderism, climate change, Covid, Russiagate, the Hunter Biden laptop, and more.
News is a Narrative. Journalism has never been objective.
The self-aggrandizing whining by Scott Pelley and others at 60 Minutes is a last gasp of their "without fear or favor" bullshit
They're political hacks who got exposed in the Trump era and no longer wield the power over perception they once did
But it was always a lie. The pretense of journalism as a neutral, nonpartisan career path is a 20th century fiction
When America was still colonies, newspapers were openly partisan. They were organs of political parties. There was honesty in this. They didn't hide the overall agenda from the reader.
Only a moron could believe today that 60 minutes, CBS News, NYT, WaPo or any lib press outfit is unbiased (or ever has been)
Their most consistent ethic is to be unethical. The central premise of their profession- "we just tell the truth"- is a lie
Ultimately the objection to change at 60 minutes is really just rage that the general public sees them for what they are- activists and stooges
People who pay attention and live in reality no longer trust them, and their self-anointed role as the priesthood of truth has become a laughingstock
If they didn’t put 60 Minutes on immediately after NFL games, how many people would watch? Almost none. Could any 60 Minutes employees make a living off the show independently in media? I don’t think so. It’s astounding to me how entitled & cocky these “journalists” are.
There’s some quirk in physics where, if there’s a small hole in a bag of mulch it will leak all over your vehicle.
But if you rip a giant hole in the bag and try to dump it out into your landscaping, almost none will fall out.
Not caring about him wheeling six chicks at once when he was married is your choice
Not caring that he pretends to be a populist when he went to one of the richest prep schools in America is your choice
Not caring he went to war saying he always wanted to kill people is your choice
Not caring he went to work for Blackwater after serving and now calls the army very dumb and stupid is your choice
Not caring that he made fun of Purple Heart recipients is your choice
Not caring that he jerks off in porta potties is your choice
Not caring about all the shit he’s deleted on Reddit and he never thought would see the light of day and shows what a giant jackass is he is your choice
Not caring that he is a Nazi is your choice but if you support him and promote him don’t ever lecture anybody about the moral high ground again because you are a piece of shit
Why do NFL team leaders have a “responsibility” to address a teammate’s political opinions they disagree with, but not a teammate’s felony arrest for beating women? Aren’t violent felony charges far more serious to a team’s reputation? Love to hear your take @1NCRDB1.
As Democrats demand the removal of the masks of ICE agents, a protester was shown yesterday yelling at an agent, "I've got your face. I'll kill your whole f**king family. You whole f**king family is dead. Your child, your wife, and all are dead. I have your face mother f**ker. You re dead."