47

GrumpyRN said:

 

I'm curious how you think that "fact checking" is bias. If it is a fact then it stands alone as a fact, no bias. You may not like it but that is irrelevant. A fact is a fact is a fact.

I'm thinking in terms of why an audience would watch, and therefore why it would be produced.

It's not to hard to find 100 lies from any politician.   

Only a TDS sufferer would schedule a few hours out of their day to watch an entire show dedicated to it.  I doubt you learned too much earth shattering info, but you got a nice dopamine hit from viewing it.  Am I right?

GrumpyRN said:

Look at what has happened to people already in the USA, snatched off the streets with no due process.

Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, Lisa Cook and others fired or cancelled. Does that not screech overreach and authoritarianism? 

No one is being snatched off the street without due process,  and government had no role in those folks being canceled.   Who is sharing these lies with you?

The SCOTUS and lower courts essentially said people were snatched without due process and had to be returned. 

GrumpyRN said:

 

I'm curious how you think that "fact checking" is bias. If it is a fact then it stands alone as a fact, no bias. You may not like it but that is irrelevant. A fact is a fact is a fact.

 

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

 

Look at what has happened to people already in the USA, snatched off the streets with no due process.

Jimmy Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, Lisa Cook and others fired or cancelled. Does that not screech overreach and authoritarianism? 

I am curious how you think "fact checking" isn't bias. It depends on who is doing the checking, we have all seen instances of fact checkers who have gone off the rails.

Some people have won in court by Dem activist judges because of procedural problems. Mistakes happen when the system is overwhelmed bc the Biden admin let in so many illegal aliens. 
 

So you think that entertainers or others should not be fired for doing a bad job? Just exactly what does that have to do with overreach or authoritarianism. Maybe if you don't go off the rails you don't get fired?!

Charlie would invite a conversation with others he didn't agree with unlike Jimmy:

"I want everyone with a television to watch the show, but if they're so turned off by my opinion on healthcare and gun violence, then ... I probably wouldn't want to have a conversation with them anyway." he said.

He (along with other lefties) was fired bc he lost half his audience and did it purposefully, which of course means less money coming in. He didn't care and just wanted to be a left wing activist and apparently it got to the point that his bosses pulled the show, his choice!

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jimmy-kimmels-late-night-evolution-from-apolitical-funnyman-dem-activist

Daisy4RN said:

I am curious how you think "fact checking" isn't bias. It depends on who is doing the checking, we have all seen instances of fact checkers who have gone off the rails.

Some people have won in court by Dem activist judges because of procedural problems. Mistakes happen when the system is overwhelmed bc the Biden admin let in so many illegal aliens. 
 

So you think that entertainers or others should not be fired for doing a bad job? Just exactly what does that have to do with overreach or authoritarianism. Maybe if you don't go off the rails you don't get fired?!

Charlie would invite a conversation with others he didn't agree with unlike Jimmy:

"I want everyone with a television to watch the show, but if they're so turned off by my opinion on healthcare and gun violence, then ... I probably wouldn't want to have a conversation with them anyway." he said.

He (along with other lefties) was fired bc he lost half his audience and did it purposefully, which of course means less money coming in. He didn't care and just wanted to be a left wing activist and apparently it got to the point that his bosses pulled the show, his choice!

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jimmy-kimmels-late-night-evolution-from-apolitical-funnyman-dem-activist

 

And I'm curious what you think any of this has to do with fact-checking possibly  being biased? As far as I can tell, the only way that happens is when you withold facts in order to promote your case. Pharmaceuticals companies did this when they dropped embolism-related fatalities from studies of oral contraceptives in order to get their product approved in the US.

https://apnews.com/live/donald-trump-news-updates-9-19-2025

Quote

U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday ruled that Trump's lawsuit was overly long and was full of "tedious and burdensome" language that had no bearing on the legal case.

"A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally,” Merryday wrote in a four-page order. "This action will begin, will continue, and will end in accord with the rules of procedure and in a professional and dignified manner.”

The judge ruled that Trump has 28 days to file an amended complaint that should not exceed 40 pages in length.

Tedious and burdensome.  LOL

I wonder if that made the POTUS angry. He's often agitated by things that appear completely unrelated to his duties. Maybe he'll be too busy ignoring Russian intrusion into NATO  protected air space to respond to this.  

GrumpyRN said:

Entertainers should be fired for not entertaining. Suddenly Kimmel is doing a bad job? What does the FCC have to do with how entertainers entertain? If entertainers are that bad then they get dropped by their networks, not fired by dictatorial (sorry, presidential) whim. Entertainers are supposed to go off rail occasionally because that is the whole idea of entertainment - find new things to do.

Yes Charlie would have a conversation with anyone but only on his terms. He obfuscated and even his last words were a deflection from the question asked. I am in no way condoning his shooting.

Isn't it strange that these comedians weren't a problem until they started criticizing Trump. The bosses only pulled his show when they were suddenly presented with ultimatums from FCC and others that would interfere with mergers etc. That is censorship.

It sounds like whatever source your getting your info on the Kimmel story needs to be fact checked.

GrumpyRN said:

And that is called lying. Fact checking kind of gives it it's name.

Don't know anything about the US court system and don't really care. When the president can nominate his own people then it sounds like authoritarianism. (See Russia, DPRK etc.)

Entertainers should be fired for not entertaining. Suddenly Kimmel is doing a bad job? What does the FCC have to do with how entertainers entertain? If entertainers are that bad then they get dropped by their networks, not fired by dictatorial (sorry, presidential) whim. Entertainers are supposed to go off rail occasionally because that is the whole idea of entertainment - find new things to do.

Yes Charlie would have a conversation with anyone but only on his terms. He obfuscated and even his last words were a deflection from the question asked. I am in no way condoning his shooting.

Isn't it strange that these comedians weren't a problem until they started criticizing Trump. The bosses only pulled his show when they were suddenly presented with ultimatums from FCC and others that would interfere with mergers etc. That is censorship.

And by the way, your use of the words "Lefty" and "Leftist" show that you (and a lot of Americans) do not actually understand the correct meaning of those words. And as a learning for you, Socialism does NOT mean communism. Two totally separate ideologies.

And finally; don't ever use Fox news as a reference source. They are politically biased, liars and just generally ignorant presenters.

LOL, I really didn't expect you to agree with me. 

If you really believe that so called fact checkers are not bias you are mistaken. Just who are the "fact checkers" and where do they get their "facts".

President Trump is not breaking any laws, you are just used to hearing all the nonsense from the liberal media. And just for the record I get my news from many different outlets both right and left (as I have said here before)

Did you even read the article I posted (oh probably not bc it was on Fox). Jimmy Kimmel along with other "comedians" have turned into full left wing activists, that was the problem with his bosses along with declining viewership and money. Agree if you will about the FCC but same reason. 

I used the terms lefty and leftist to show how ridiculous it is for the left to keep saying MAGA, as if that means anything. Thanks for making my point. 

Did I ever say that Socialism and Communism are the same? Although one does follow the other and neither have been proven throughout history to ever work for the people, only the elites. Think about it.

Again, I read all kinds of news and since I live in a free Country I can use whatever references I choose. As always though thanks for your comments and suggestions. 

GrumpyRN said:

Are you kidding? Trump is supposed to be the most powerful person on Earth and he is telling over 100 lies in just this year so far? If you accept that from "any politician" then your country is in trouble. It's worrying that you don't think these things are important to know.

As for TDS, I have never liked Trump as I found him arrogant, lazy, bullying, selfish, narcissistic and stupid. And he has not changed over the years, just gained more power. I am  more concerned that you are willing to ignore the lies rather than find out about your "hero".

 

It is called trustworthy news channels, watching people being snatched by faceless ICE agents with no paperwork.

Don't bother asking because as soon as I say BBC, ITV, Channel 4, SKY etc. the first thing you are going to say is "fake news" because that is easier than having your worldview turned over to the truth as you would rather hide behind TDS.

You don't think that law enforcement has a right to privacy and/or protect their health when people are doxxing them and spitting in their face, throwing urine etc at them. How about protestors? Should they be allowed to wear masks to hide their identity?

heron said:

And I'm curious what you think any of this has to do with fact-checking possibly  being biased? As far as I can tell, the only way that happens is when you withold facts in order to promote your case. Pharmaceuticals companies did this when they dropped embolism-related fatalities from studies of oral contraceptives in order to get their product approved in the US.

You don't think that fact checkers, just like news orgs do this. Of course they do!