Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
pepperonikkid

Thanks, Fox News, for reminding us of the Soros role in creating America's riot-coddling DAs

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

pepperonikkid

Thanks, Fox News, for reminding us of the Soros role in creating America's riot-coddling DAs

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/

By Monica Showalter

September 17, 2020

 

Article:

 

Fox News has drawn our attention to the fact that George Soros is bankrolling the leftist district attorneys who are fostering so much rioting in America's blue cities, based on their refusal to prosecute looters and rioters. But probably not in the way they meant to.

Here's what went down over at the semi-cheesy news commentary show called 'Outnumbered' whose format is a group of leggy women sitting on a circular sofa with some man in the news and grilling him with chick-like excited shouts and exclamations. It's now a Zoom thing without the leg business. And in this case, it led to a very unexpected outcome: 

What an amazingly insulting way to treat a supposedly honored guest, a former Speaker of the House. Look at the shock on Newt's face at that shutdown. They invited him on, they asked him his take on the leftist riots in America's blue cities, and they got an answer: Gingrich pointed out that the  riots were happing because of district attorneys, financed by George Soros, who refuse to prosecute rioting.

It wasn't really news. Nor was it controversial. It's been reported in detail by conservative outfits for years. Fox News itself, news division, reported it. What was strange was that bizarrely unprofessional reaction from this one show, and from hosts that most viewers have trusted and respected, such as Harris Faulkner and Melissa Francis. The leftist flak for the Obama administration, Marie Harf, no journalist, could be dismissed, given that she is no stranger to boldfaced lying for her bosses to sing for her supper. But why was Francis the first to bring it up, only to have Harf as her growling dog backing her up with her absolutely adamant call not to engage Gingrich? What did he say that was so evil and un-fit for TV?  Note that Harf was unable to cite any reasons, she has none, she just wanted to play commissar censor and like all commissar censors, had a whiff of fear of those above her -- note that booming, croaking, dead-toned angry adamant voice, like that of an upset socialite or desperate high school principal. Shut up, she explained. It really was remarkable. She really didn't want any discussion or even mention of Soros. But why did Faulkner coolly move on after cutting Newt off?

The strange behavior of Francis and Faulkner actually drew more attention to the issue than it might have otherwise because we expected better. Had they not tried to shut down Newt, the whole thing would have rolled out like water off a duck's back, not news, easily forgotten, because, well, everyone knows it -- they read it on Fox News.

What we didn't know was that Fox News's commentary show, at least one of them, maybe more, seems to be on some kind of mission to protect Soros from scrutiny, which is rather unfitting for a news outfit that calls itself 'fair and balanced.'

Are they in hock to him? Does one of their board members have business ties to him? Are they under some kind of legal threat? Because how else can we explain the bizarre attempt by two respected anchors to gaslight us? They are trying to dismiss any scrutiny of Soros, and let's face it, Newt put his finger on it, as something we can see with our own eyes, but they are effectively (and falsely in the case of Harf) saying it isn't happening. It's creepy, really. We didn't know this about Fox News. Now we do.

 

 

 

Full Story

  • Best Post (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Good article. 

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RedSoloCup

maxresdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rock N' Roll Right Winger

Again, many of us did know this about Fox news. :yes:

  • Disagree (-1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NH Populist

It's pretty obvious someone was speaking into the hosts earphones telling 'em to shut that conversation down!   Who knew that cherry picking the news is fair, balanced and unafraid! :doh:

Edited by NH Populist
  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight

Complete over reaction.  Faulkner just issued basically an apology on air stating something to the effect that it was wrong of her not to jump in when the former speaker was interrupted.  She re-iterated that they don’t censor.

There was NOBODY getting into anyone’s ear about shutting down the discussion about Soros.  That is utter crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
41 minutes ago, LeansToTheRight said:

Complete over reaction.  Faulkner just issued basically an apology on air stating something to the effect that it was wrong of her not to jump in when the former speaker was interrupted.  She re-iterated that they don’t censor.

There was NOBODY getting into anyone’s ear about shutting down the discussion about Soros.  That is utter crap.

I'm not on either side of the Fox discussion but it looked to me like they definitely did not want to talk about the Subject OR They were having some kind of technical issue..then again I don't know the people on Fox well enough to know how they do their jobs...So what really happened LTTR?

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taggart Transcontinental
4 hours ago, LeansToTheRight said:

Complete over reaction.  Faulkner just issued basically an apology on air stating something to the effect that it was wrong of her not to jump in when the former speaker was interrupted.  She re-iterated that they don’t censor.

There was NOBODY getting into anyone’s ear about shutting down the discussion about Soros.  That is utter crap.

Yeah wrong, the way they were talking and listening? Yeah someone upstairs was talking, that's what happens when you are stopped midstream, happens all the time on our radios where someone is interrupted in their thought.

And yes THEY DID CENSOR. Therefore, they are wrong.

Edited by Taggart Transcontinental

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
7 hours ago, kestrel said:

I'm not on either side of the Fox discussion but it looked to me like they definitely did not want to talk about the Subject OR They were having some kind of technical issue..then again I don't know the people on Fox well enough to know how they do their jobs...So what really happened LTTR?

Kestrel...

Falkner is as professional a tv person as there is on tv.  Francis is pretty good, but she doesn’t like when the discussions veer off in some direction.  I think she was thinking Gingrich was taking the discussion somewhere other than what he was actually saying.  Francis jumped in too quickly in my opinion, and Falkner didn’t step in to correct her and allow Gingrich to expand on his opinion.  Harf is a Dem/Liberal apologist.  So it’s no surprise that she agreed with what Francis said.  But again, my opinion is that Francis didn’t interrupt to shut down the talk because it was Soros.  I think she just jumped in like that because I think she thought Gingrich was going to veer off into conspiracy land.  Harf was just agreeing because it was Soros who was mentioned.  Again, Falkner failed to correct the issue and allow Gingrich to clarify his line of thinking.  Today, Falkner apologized for basically that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
3 minutes ago, LeansToTheRight said:

Falkner is as professional a tv person as there is on tv.  Francis is pretty good, but she doesn’t like when the discussions veer off in some direction.  I think she was thinking Gingrich was taking the discussion somewhere other than what he was actually saying.  Francis jumped in too quickly in my opinion, and Falkner didn’t step in to correct her and allow Gingrich to expand on his opinion.  Harf is a Dem/Liberal apologist.  So it’s no surprise that she agreed with what Francis said.  But again, my opinion is that Francis didn’t interrupt to shut down the talk because it was Soros.  I think she just jumped in like that because I think she thought Gingrich was going to veer off into conspiracy land.  Harf was just agreeing because it was Soros who was mentioned.  Again, Falkner failed to correct the issue and allow Gingrich to clarify his line of thinking.  Today, Falkner apologized for basically that.

Well I guess we'll see when Newt is back on "Outnumbered"...Real soon ya think?..Like I said I don't watch Fox (or T.V. very much for that matter)..So I made a special effort to see if this subject would be mentioned on any of the other shows....Not yet.

Edited by kestrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
3 hours ago, Taggart Transcontinental said:

Yeah wrong, the way they were talking and listening? Yeah someone upstairs was talking, that's what happens when you are stopped midstream, happens all the time on our radios where someone is interrupted in their thought.

And yes THEY DID CENSOR. Therefore, they are wrong.

You are speculating that someone was in there ear interrupting them.  You have no proof of that.

If what you and others are claiming is true, then why even bring it up today on the show and apologize for not letting Gingrich clarify?

What makes more sense is that Francis misunderstood where Gingrich was going and interjected, and Falkner was caught off guard with the interruption and then due to the awkward silence moved on, and then issued an apology for it today.  They’ve talked about Soros before and they’ll talk about Soros again.  It’s foolish conspiracy theory to think that mentioning Soros caused the network heads to jump in and shut down their conversation.  It’s just dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
2 minutes ago, LeansToTheRight said:

You are speculating that someone was in there ear interrupting them.  You have no proof of that.

If what you and others are claiming is true, then why even bring it up today on the show and apologize for not letting Gingrich clarify?

What makes more sense is that Francis misunderstood where Gingrich was going and interjected, and Falkner was caught off guard with the interruption and then due to the awkward silence moved on, and then issued an apology for it today.  They’ve talked about Soros before and they’ll talk about Soros again.  It’s foolish conspiracy theory to think that mentioning Soros caused the network heads to jump in and shut down their conversation.  It’s just dumb.

Dumb?...what would you call it if it was true?..No dog in this fight I'm just curious.

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
9 minutes ago, LeansToTheRight said:

Falkner is as professional a tv person as there is on tv.  Francis is pretty good, but she doesn’t like when the discussions veer off in some direction.  I think she was thinking Gingrich was taking the discussion somewhere other than what he was actually saying.  Francis jumped in too quickly in my opinion, and Falkner didn’t step in to correct her and allow Gingrich to expand on his opinion.  Harf is a Dem/Liberal apologist.  So it’s no surprise that she agreed with what Francis said.  But again, my opinion is that Francis didn’t interrupt to shut down the talk because it was Soros.  I think she just jumped in like that because I think she thought Gingrich was going to veer off into conspiracy land.  Harf was just agreeing because it was Soros who was mentioned.  Again, Falkner failed to correct the issue and allow Gingrich to clarify his line of thinking.  Today, Falkner apologized for basically that.

Fair enough....as a very infrequent T.V. viewer it looked strange to me....

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
Just now, kestrel said:

Fair enough....as a very infrequent T.V. viewer it looked strange to me....

Kestrel...

Strange for sure.  Unprofessional for sure.  Harris Falkner is top notch, but anyone can make a mistake.  She owned up to it.  It’s as simple as that.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
Just now, LeansToTheRight said:

Strange for sure.  Unprofessional for sure.  Harris Falkner is top notch, but anyone can make a mistake.  She owned up to it.  It’s as simple as that.

I will be guided by you in this matter...

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
5 minutes ago, kestrel said:

Dumb?...what would you call it if it was true?..No dog in this fight I'm just curious.

Kestrel...

What would I call it if the network heads actually had a hand in shutting down the conversation?  I would call it awful.  But it didn’t happen that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
19 minutes ago, LeansToTheRight said:

What would I call it if the network heads actually had a hand in shutting down the conversation?  I would call it awful.  But it didn’t happen that way.

Fair enough...as i said before.....and BTW do you watch a lot of Fox...and if so have you seen anybody else comment on this deal?..Hannity? Tucker?..The Five?

Kestrel...

Edited by kestrel
BS email...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Call me naïve, but when you INVITE someone on your show because of their experience/credentials/gravitas as it pertains to the theme of your TV show, don't you WANT them to posit their thoughts so that debate ensues?

While I didn't see the program, and haven't tracked it down to do so, it seems to me that when you have someone with Newt's background ( like him or not, the man has credentials that give him a solid foundation to speak from ) bringing up the point he did, the people who KNOW he's absolutely on point are going to be the ones who jump on him first to shut down that avenue of discussion.

And anyone who allows it is either lazy, complacent, complicit or... on the payroll.

Sometimes it's easier to cover your tracks by offering a mea culpa after the fact  rather than put your stake in jeopardy by getting into the thick of it when the moment is at hand.

But, again, that's just my :2cents:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ASE

The world would be better off without a sore-nose mucking things up. 

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
51 minutes ago, Ticked@TinselTown said:

Call me naïve, but when you INVITE someone on your show because of their experience/credentials/gravitas as it pertains to the theme of your TV show, don't you WANT them to posit their thoughts so that debate ensues?

While I didn't see the program, and haven't tracked it down to do so, it seems to me that when you have someone with Newt's background ( like him or not, the man has credentials that give him a solid foundation to speak from ) bringing up the point he did, the people who KNOW he's absolutely on point are going to be the ones who jump on him first to shut down that avenue of discussion.

And anyone who allows it is either lazy, complacent, complicit or... on the payroll.

Sometimes it's easier to cover your tracks by offering a mea culpa after the fact  rather than put your stake in jeopardy by getting into the thick of it when the moment is at hand.

But, again, that's just my :2cents:

Normally, I’d agree with you.  But Falkner is top notch and simply made a mistake.  I think she was caught off guard by Francis’ interruption and then the silence - like she thought Newt might’ve more forcibly jumped back in.  I’m not sure.  But she made a mistake in how she handled the situation and apologized for it the very next day.  There really is nothing more to it than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
4 hours ago, kestrel said:

Fair enough...as i said before.....and BTW do you watch a lot of Fox...and if so have you seen anybody else comment on this deal?..Hannity? Tucker?..The Five?

Kestrel...

Yes, I watch a lot of FNC.  I don’t like Hemmer or Cavuto, so I don’t watch them.  They wouldn’t have mentioned it anyway.  I doubt the 5 mentioned it, though I wasn’t able to watch today’s show.  Tucker nor Hannity mentioned it, but they aren’t likely to cover this sort of thing.  It possibly could show up on Howie Kurtz’ “Media Buzz” show on the weekend, but I doubt it.  Why?  Because it really was nothing to it.  I saw it happen live, and I saw Faulkner’s apology live.  It was an awkward moment when it happened, but that’s it.  The apology was sincere and warranted because she let an awkward moment happen on her show, and because some of the crazy theories like in the OP.  But this is really a non-story.  Tin-foil hat type of conspiracy theory realm is just not the reality here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NH Populist

It's a little silly to think Fox News isn't biased, their coverage favors the Right at least 90% of the time.   And yes, they bring on Leftist idiots like Donna Brazil and Harf to offer a different perspective, but they're clearly in Trump's corner.   And so am I and why I watch the network, but even Trump will tell you Fox News has changed.  We'll see, if they bring Newt back to discuss Soros' roll in bankrolling Leftist D. A.s, I'll still view ALL news sources with skepticism, but we'll at least get hear what Newt had to say...

Edited by NH Populist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
10 hours ago, LeansToTheRight said:

Yes, I watch a lot of FNC.  I don’t like Hemmer or Cavuto, so I don’t watch them.  They wouldn’t have mentioned it anyway.  I doubt the 5 mentioned it, though I wasn’t able to watch today’s show.  Tucker nor Hannity mentioned it, but they aren’t likely to cover this sort of thing.  It possibly could show up on Howie Kurtz’ “Media Buzz” show on the weekend, but I doubt it.  Why?  Because it really was nothing to it.  I saw it happen live, and I saw Faulkner’s apology live.  It was an awkward moment when it happened, but that’s it.  The apology was sincere and warranted because she let an awkward moment happen on her show, and because some of the crazy theories like in the OP.  But this is really a non-story.  Tin-foil hat type of conspiracy theory realm is just not the reality here.

Fair enough LTTR Thanks for the response...

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg
On 9/18/2020 at 3:10 AM, LeansToTheRight said:

Yes, I watch a lot of FNC.  I don’t like Hemmer or Cavuto, so I don’t watch them.  They wouldn’t have mentioned it anyway.  I doubt the 5 mentioned it, though I wasn’t able to watch today’s show.  Tucker nor Hannity mentioned it, but they aren’t likely to cover this sort of thing.  It possibly could show up on Howie Kurtz’ “Media Buzz” show on the weekend, but I doubt it.  Why?  Because it really was nothing to it.  I saw it happen live, and I saw Faulkner’s apology live.  It was an awkward moment when it happened, but that’s it.  The apology was sincere and warranted because she let an awkward moment happen on her show, and because some of the crazy theories like in the OP.  But this is really a non-story.  Tin-foil hat type of conspiracy theory realm is just not the reality here.

You talk a lot about this incident. You say that no one can prove it wasn’t an accidental error. However, given what we can KNOW at this point, no one can prove that it was either. 

It HAPPENED. It would be better to own up to it than make excuses. To the program: SHOW us that you don’t censor. Prove over the next 20 episodes that you don’t. Then you might start winning my trust back. Until then: live with it. 

Edited by zurg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LeansToTheRight
10 hours ago, zurg said:

You talk a lot about this incident. You say that no one can prove it wasn’t an accidental error. However, given what we can KNOW at this point, no one can prove that it was either. 

It HAPPENED. It would be better to own up to it than make excuses. To the program: SHOW us that you don’t censor. Prove over the next 20 episodes that you don’t. Then you might start winning my trust back. Until then: live with it. 

Because the previous 6 years did nothing for you, the next 20 aren’t going to either.  You’ve made up your mind.  Falkner came out and said we do not censor.  What else is she supposed to do?  What would make you not believe a stupid conspiracy theory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...