Fox News news

stumbler · Nov 19, 2018

Oh yeah Trump's White House is running like a well oiled machine when the advisor to the president goes on Fox News and gets blindsided.

Out of the Loop? Kellyanne Conway Apparently Had No Idea White House Planned to Ban Acosta Again

On America’s Newsroom Monday, anchor Bill Hemmer interviewed Kellyanne Conway about the banning and reinstatement of Jim Acosta to the press corps, and CNN’s lawsuit over it.

News broke Sunday night that the White House plans to revoke the pass again once the 12-day temporary injunction expires. CNN has called an “emergency meeting” over the situation. but Conway said she was unaware when Hemmer brought it up.

After playing a clip from Chris Wallace‘s interview with President Donald Trump that aired on Sunday, Hemmer asked Conway about the development of rules of behavior or conduct in the briefing room. Conway said that the rules are being developed now, something that was confirmed on CNN’s Reliable Sources on Sunday by the attorney who argued Acosta’s case to the court last week.

In her response, Conway said that in the upcoming days or weeks they would have new guidance, but that even while “that reporter” was gone, “the particular outlet in question” still had access to be “fairly anti-Trump” and be a 24 hour news network.

Hemmer replied, asking whether Acosta is now still permitted in the White House. “Is that reporter allowed back in the White House? Because I was given a note about an hour ago that the White House has made a quote preliminary decision to suspend the hard pass for Jim Acosta yet again,” he said. “Are you fighting this?”

“I am not aware of that,” said Conway. “I am not aware of anything happening in the last hour. I will have to talk to the press shop about that.”

Hemmer asked “Is he allowed access to the White House today?”

“I do not know, I do not know that answer,” said Conway. “I got someone from the press shop standing right here, I do not know that answer.”

At the end of the clip, Conway goes for an angry indictment of the reaction to the pass being pulled, but Fox’s Hemmer simply talked through it and didn’t bite.
Click to expand...

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/out-of-...idea-white-house-planned-to-ban-acosta-again/

And just once again God help us when a real crisis strikes.

shootersa · Nov 20, 2018

Yeah, probably trump will blame it on a video posted on The web.

stumbler · Nov 20, 2018

Fox News’ Shepard Smith on Trump Khashoggi Statement: He ‘Insulted the Murder Victim and Sided With the Saudis’

“President Trump stands with Saudi Arabia.”

Fox News’ Shepard Smith opened his show with a brief breakdown of President Donald Trump‘s stunning statement siding with Saudi Arabia while leaving it an open question of whether the crown prince was involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

And as Smith said, “Today the President insulted the murder victim and sided with the Saudis who said our CIA is wrong.”

Smith has previously blasted the lacking U.S. response to Khashoggi’s assassination and the too-cozy relationship the U.S. has had with Saudi Arabia, and today he knocked Trump’s “lengthy missive, riddled with presidential exclamation points.”

He noted that despite Trump’s “maybe” game on whether the crown prince ordered the assassination, the CIA has reportedly concluded he was clearly involved.
Click to expand...

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-new...-the-murder-victim-and-sided-with-the-saudis/

stumbler · Dec 3, 2018

Fox News panel admits Mueller might have dirt on Trump: ‘Things are starting to seem a little weird’

A Fox News panel on Monday admitted that special counsel Robert Mueller might just have something on President Donald Trump.

Even though Trump-loving guest Matt Schlapp kept insisting the entire Mueller probe is a political “witch hunt” during his appearance on Fox News’ “Outnumbered,” co-hosts Harris Faulkner and Kennedy cautioned that they were growing suspicious of some of the behavior of Trump associates such as Roger Stone and Jerome Corsi.

The biggest question that’s out there still has to do with what the president knew and when he knew it,” Faulkner said of the Mueller probe. “You have so many shady people where these questions are involved. It’s kind of hard to know where you are. You have to wait and see what he’s pieced together.”

Kennedy, who last week found herself appalled that Trump surrounds himself with so many criminals, took things a step further and suggested Mueller might really have the goods on Trump.

"There might be something there,” she said. “There absolutely might be something there. We don’t know what Mueller has — he might have something. Things are starting to seem a little weird.”
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/fo...dirt-trump-things-starting-seem-little-weird/

Truthful 1 · Dec 4, 2018

Good

stumbler said: ↑

Fox News panel admits Mueller might have dirt on Trump: ‘Things are starting to seem a little weird’

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/fo...dirt-trump-things-starting-seem-little-weird/
Click to expand...

good luck STUMBLES

stumbler · Dec 4, 2018

@CS natureboy

Fox & Friends claims marijuana gummies are ‘killing people’: ‘There’s a price to pay for pot’

Fox News hosts warned viewers on Monday that “gummies” infused with marijuana are threatening the lives of Americans.

On Monday’s edition of Fox & Friends, host Brian Kilmeade spoke to a sheriff in Florida about a 12-year-old boy who was charged with felonies for sharing marijuana candy with his classmates.

“No one talks about this,” Kilmeade complained. “THC is addicting. I know so many people — they say they were told one thing and they get addicted to it and that’s an addicting substance. There is a price to pay for pot.”

“It’s not a minor non-violent felony,” Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd opined. “It’s ruining families and killing people every day across the United States. And we stand here in denial thinking that it’s not a gateway drug to drugs that’s killing people.”

“Yeah,” co-host Ainsley Earhardt agreed. “You don’t start on cocaine, you probably start with marijuana and it leads to other things.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/fo...-gummies-killing-people-theres-price-pay-pot/

Distant Lover · Dec 4, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

@CS natureboy

Fox & Friends claims marijuana gummies are ‘killing people’: ‘There’s a price to pay for pot’

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/fo...-gummies-killing-people-theres-price-pay-pot/
Click to expand...

I smoked marijuana for about eleven years. It did not lead to hard drugs. Eventually I lost interest.

tenguy · Dec 4, 2018

Everything stated has a degree of truth, substance abuse can lead to death, legal or illegal doesn’t matter. Anything that alters one ability to grasp reality, can lead to injury or death, by an accident which normally could be avoided by reasonable thoughts.

Would the child have been charged if he was handing out jello/vodka shots to his classmates?

CS natureboy · Dec 4, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

@CS natureboy

Fox & Friends claims marijuana gummies are ‘killing people’: ‘There’s a price to pay for pot’

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/fo...-gummies-killing-people-theres-price-pay-pot/
Click to expand...

LOL, you are so fucking lame. First off, FOX news never made any such claim.

And if you click on the only link in the story you posted, it takes you to a ABC news website....

Hitting the sauce early today, huh Stumbler???

shootersa · Dec 4, 2018

https://www.eehealth.org/blog/2017/01/gummy-bears-incident-abrupt-reminder-of-marijuana-dangers/

stumbler · Dec 4, 2018

CS natureboy said: ↑

LOL, you are so fucking lame. First off, FOX news never made any such claim.

And if you click on the only link in the story you posted, it takes you to a ABC news website....

Hitting the sauce early today, huh Stumbler???
Click to expand...

Actually you are just being stupid and ignorant (two different things) again. Click on the RAWSTORY link and you can watch the whole Fox segment and hear them sat all that themselves.

stumbler · Dec 4, 2018

Oh yeah now Hannity, who talks to Trump nearly every night, wants Trump to declare marshal law and of course the Trump supporters around here will be all for it. Because Trump.

Sean Hannity Apparently Thinks Trump Can Investigate the DOJ via Military Tribunal. That’s ‘Completely False.’

Sean Hannity was very busy getting the law very wrong over the weekend. This time, the law as it relates to the U.S. military system of justice. And how.

During the November 30 edition of The Sean Hannity Show, a caller brought up the idea that President Donald Trump might be able to investigate the U.S. Department of Justice by way of a military tribunal.

Here’s how the relevant part of that interaction went:

Caller: I haven’t heard an idea that I have, and I don’t know if it’s feasible or not. With the corruption in the Department of Justice, the people that are demanded to appear, they don’t appear, they appear, they lie, everything that’s going on with all the corruption–what about–does President Trump have the authority to do–have the JAG in the military do a tribunal, and investigate the Department of Justice that way? Where Congress…

Hannity: He actually does have that authority.

Caller: …apparently cannot do its job.

Hannity: Well, it’s the–again, that would be within the realm of the executive branch of the government, which he is the head of. Yeah, he would.

The problem for Hannity here is that, no, Trump actually wouldn’t have any such authority whatsoever. And, for what it’s worth, nor would any other president.

There are two major sources of law which authorize military tribunals in the United States: (1) The Military Commissions Act (MCA); and (2) the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

First of all, the MCA cannot ever be used against U.S. citizens–much less a governmental body comprising an outsize component of the federal U.S. government–that’s simply not why it was passed, not why it exists and has no grant of authority to prosecute Americans or American institutions.

Second, while the UCMJ does contain some provisions for the prosecution of American citizens, none of those provisions come close to applying in the scenario described by Hannity and his call-in guest above. There’s simply no argument to be made here.

University of Texas Law Professor and national security law expert Steve Vladeck noted:

The Military Commissions Act only applies to “alien unprivileged enemy belligerents,” and Article 21 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (the WWII authority that applies to citizens) requires a violation of the [international] laws of war.

Vladeck called Hannity’s claim “completely false.” Since the MCA simply does not and cannot apply to American citizens, let’s take a brief look at the UCMJ.

As Professor Vladeck pointed out, the only civilian-applicable authority contained in the UCMJ is Article 21. On its face, UCMJ Article 21 doesn’t appear to have much to say about any application to U.S. citizens. The statute itself reads, in full:

The provisions of this chapter conferring jurisdiction upon courts-martial do not deprive military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals of concurrent jurisdiction with respect to offenders or offenses that by statute or by the law of war may be tried by military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals.

Article 21’s grant of authority to prosecute U.S. citizens–who are accused of violating the international laws of war–was read into the statute by the 1942 Supreme Court case Ex Parte Quirin. This landmark case concerned several U.S. citizens who were accused of working as German saboteurs during the Second World War. The court agreed that U.S. military authorities could try the alleged saboteurs under the UCMJ. The decision noted:

By the Articles of War, and especially [Article 21], Congress has explicitly provided, so far as it may constitutionally do so, that military tribunals shall have jurisdiction to try offenders or offenses against the law of war in appropriate cases. Congress, in addition to making rules for the government of our Armed Forces, has thus exercised its authority to define and punish offenses against the law of nations by sanctioning, within constitutional limitations, the jurisdiction of military commissions to try persons for offenses which, according to the rules and precepts of the law of nations, and more particularly the law of war, are cognizable by such tribunals.

Pro-Trump fantasists like Hannity and internet comments section galleries may be wont to declare that Trump is “at war” with the press and the DOJ. But this hyperbolic euphemism for media and legal adversity doesn’t come close to squaring the unsupported circle here.

Under both the UCMJ and Ex Parte Quirin, the phrase “law of war” is a legal term of art referring to the actual, substantive international and domestic laws of war. In Quirin, for example, the Supreme Court cites the Hague Convention of 1907, the U.S. War Department’s Rules of Land Warfare and former president Abraham Lincoln‘s Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, among others.

Such laws and rules are standards which outline acceptable–and unacceptable–conduct and guidelines for military personnel during actual wars–typically defined in the sense of sustained armed conflict between at least two different state parties.

President Trump and his own Department of Justice wouldn’t quite qualify. Law&Crime reached out to a representative for Sean Hannity for comment on this story but no response was forthcoming at the time of publication.
Click to expand...

https://lawandcrime.com/legal-analy...via-military-tribunal-thats-completely-false/

shootersa · Dec 4, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

Actually you are just being stupid and ignorant (two different things) again. Click on the RAWSTORY link and you can watch the whole Fox segment and hear them sat all that themselves.
Click to expand...

https://www.eehealth.org/blog/2017/01/gummy-bears-incident-abrupt-reminder-of-marijuana-dangers/

CS natureboy · Dec 4, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

Actually you are just being stupid and ignorant (two different things) again. Click on the RAWSTORY link and you can watch the whole Fox segment and hear them sat all that themselves.
Click to expand...

LMAO!!!! There is nothing on rawsewage.com that claims FOX news said pot is killing people.

Post some proof or admit you are a liar.....

naztypanty · Dec 5, 2018

Faux news lies

stumbler · Dec 6, 2018

Conservative attorney delivers bad news to Fox viewers by dismantling Gingrich’s attacks on Mueller

Tom Dupree, a conservative attorney who worked at the Department of Justice under the George W. Bush administration, delivered bad news for many Fox News viewers on Thursday when he shot down former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s attacks on special counsel Robert Mueller.

After viewing a clip of Gingrich claiming that Mueller is running a “Trump destruction project,” Dupree told Fox News’ Bill Hemmer that Gingrich was not being fair to the special counsel.

“I’m not quite sure I would agree with the Speaker on that one,” Dupree explained. “I think it is fair to judge Bob Mueller once the dust settles and we see what evidence he has gathered and the total collection of charges he brings. I think at this point it’s too early for history to judge Bob Mueller and the legitimacy of this investigation.”

Dupree also said that any Trump supporters counting on the Mueller probe to go away anytime soon were likely going to very disappointed.

“I don’t see Mueller wrapping this whole thing up before Christmas break,” he said. “It’s possible he breaks off a piece of this investigation and submits that to Congress and says, ‘This portion of my investigation is wrapped up.’ But the notion that Bob Mueller is going to disappear into thin air by Christmas, I don’t think is realistic.”
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/co...iewers-dismantling-gingrichs-attacks-mueller/

ace's n 8's · Dec 9, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

Conservative attorney delivers bad news to Fox viewers by dismantling Gingrich’s attacks on Mueller

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/co...iewers-dismantling-gingrichs-attacks-mueller/
Click to expand...

Mueller shouldn't be done yet.

There are other aspects to this investigation that needs some attention.

For starters, just exactly how did this investigation get a foothold?

How did this investigation get surveillance warrants on Americans?

There are plenty of questions that need answers too.

stumbler · Dec 9, 2018

‘That stops me in my tracks’: Conservative writer stuns Fox & Friends by revealing Trump likely to be indicted

A prominent conservative columnist stunned the hosts of Fox & Friends on Sunday by arguing that President Donald Trump would likely be indicted for campaign finance violations.

In a Fox News op-ed column, National Review writer Andrew McCarthy suggested that Michael Cohen’s admission that he made payments to two former Trump mistresses was a stepping stone to the indictment of the president.

“The Southern District of New York case,” McCarthy explained, “which is different from the Mueller case on Cohen — they are clearly going after the president on campaign finance violations.”

“It’s clear Trump is the target and he’ll be indicted eventually,” he added.

“That kind of stops me in my tracks,” Fox & Friends host Ed Henry told McCarthy. “We’ve heard all along that Justice Department guidance is that the president himself can’t be indicted — or herself down the road — cannot be indicted.”

McCarthy speculated that the Justice Department would wait until Trump leaves office to indict him.

“The president is not supposed to get an advantage from being president,” the conservative writer said. “All we say is he can’t be put through the criminal process while he’s president.”

“They can indict him and he can be tried down the road,” McCarthy revealed. “Are they setting the stage to file charges against him? I can’t come to any other conclusion.”
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/st...-fox-friends-revealing-trump-likely-indicted/

ace's n 8's · Dec 9, 2018

stumbler said: ↑

‘That stops me in my tracks’: Conservative writer stuns Fox & Friends by revealing Trump likely to be indicted

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/st...-fox-friends-revealing-trump-likely-indicted/
Click to expand...

More notoriously implemented leftist speculation.

Trump said he didn't know about the payments until after Cohen made them. Asked by interviewer Ainsley Earhardt if he knew about them, Trump responded: "Later on I knew. Later on."

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

Truthful 1 coal fired windmills Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

tenguy Reasoned voice of XNXX

CS natureboy Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

CS natureboy Porn Star

naztypanty Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Fox News news

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

Truthful 1 coal fired windmills Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

Distant Lover Master of Facts

tenguy Reasoned voice of XNXX

CS natureboy Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

CS natureboy Porn Star

naztypanty Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Useful Searches