Fox News' election fraud source was a completely unbelievable scapegoat

Originally published at: Fox News' election fraud source was a completely unbelievable scapegoat | Boing Boing


Seems like there’s an unnecessary indefinite article in that statement.



The Republicans really are beyond parody now, aren’t they? You couldn’t invent anything as ridiculous as this, much less more ridiculous.


“Yeah, I’m crazy,” Bourne told The Daily Beast. “Crazy like a fox FOX.”



“Fact check? we don’t need to fact-check! this email is a perfectly reasonable explanation!” If this story is true, then FOX really ought to fold the tent. If they still own a tent when this case is done.


The cognitive dissonance here makes my head hurt. So the Orange One states that he’s going to make it so much easier to sue reporters and news outlooks and his supporters are on their feet and cheering the idea.

Then the Orange One’s news outlet gets sued and is probably guilty as all anything under the current law, and his supporters are now all up in arms about how free speech and the press is being suppressed.

I get that people who vote for the face eating leopard party are surprised when the leopards eat their faces. But it makes my head hurt.


For there to be “cognitive dissonance” there first has to be “cognizance” . . .

It’s “dissonance” all the way down.


That’s the Daily Beast denigrating a responsible journalist. Instead of just relying on one source, she corroborated her findings by included reports from hidden messages she detects in films, AND song lyrics she hears on the radio, AND overheard conversations she hears while in line at the supermarket checkout. No wonder no one trusts the liberal media.


Yeah, but this is FOX we are talking about.

Presuming she was getting paid for her spewage, then she has a point.

Talk about delusions of grandeur…


It seems like low-hanging fruit at this point. Did a completely nutty person contact Fox News to peddle unproven conspiracy theories? Yes. Did Fox News present this person’s wild delusions as facts? Yes. Did Fox News provide any sort of indication that this material was questionable? Never. Rinse and repeat.

What’s more concerning is that, thanks to the Dominion lawsuit, Rupert Murdoch confirmed what we all have long suspected: that Fox News is explicitly a public relations arm of the Republican Party (emphasis added):

In a November 16 email, Rupert Murdoch told [Fox News CEO Suzanne] Scott to read a Wall Street Journal piece about Newsmax, telling her: “These people should be watched, if skeptically. Trump will concede eventually and we should concentrate on Georgia, helping any way we can."

So, yes, Fox News exists to “help” the Republican Party “any way we can.” As though this weren’t abdundantly clear not only throughout its entire existence, but having one of its most important personalities—Sean Hannity—appear prominently alongside Trump at campaign events. Imagine the incessant screaming that would come from that same Fox News if Jake Tapper campaigned for Joe Biden at a campaign event. (To Fox’s credit, which it absolutely does not deserve, Hannity was apparently told not to do things like that, but he appears to have endured no actual punishment.) Then again, the last six years have taught us that hypocrisy is not only not bad, it’s desirable.


Oh wait. So now you’re “the press” instead of an entertainment source that nobody would possibly take seriously when defending yourself in court?


giphy (65)


Did she get a signed affidavit?


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.