John Bolton Laughing

A big fan of Bolton now, huh?

he was a regular on Fox News- dumpy has hired not only attorneys from Fox but 21 others away from Fox. Are you suggesting that FOX screen Dumps new hires better? He will hire anyone that says one nice thing about him.
All hired AWAY from FOX ( the fair and balanced news source, you know it is true because they told you)
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders will be an on-air contributor to Fox News
Hope Hicks
David Bossie
Thomas Homan
Bill Shine
Heather Nauret
Sebastian Gorka
Elaine Chao
John Bolton
Mercedes Schlapp
Ben Carson
Scott Brown
Richard Grenell
Georgette Mosbacher
Anthony Scaramucci
Tony Sayegh
Lea Gabrielle
Morgan Ortagus
John McEntee

Oh wow! Fox news! Gee, everyone without TDS HAS to follow and cherish Fox news! Moron.

But just to point out your swallowing the libtard kool aid, a Harvard study in 2018 found Fox was negative to Trump 53% of the times as compared to 96% for CNN, 93% for MSNBC and I think 87% for NPR. Going off memory.

Which sounds more balanced to you, altboy?

You reckon its just kool aid he is swallowing?

I'm trying not to get too nasty with Stanie. Why? No idea.

The classic 'but muh Fox news' deflection always makes me laugh. Guys like this swear by Don Lemon. All MSM is crap but c'mon.

Yeah well call me biased all day if you like. But it has been obvious for many years now that Fox is the most balanced and thorough of the msm networks. That's Not something someone would possibly have uttered 10 years ago without being looked at sideways, Today its quantifiable fact.

I hate defending Fox. I hated their guts in 2000-2010 or whatever.

Now even Hannity made Maddow look like a conspiracy theorist during the Mueller investigation.

Name me another network that has right leaning anchors. Fox has Wallace, Cavuto, who at least criticises Trump. Smith before whatever happened with his leaving. Juan Williams with his TDS everywhere. CNN had that 'real' 'republican' Ana 'Tubby' Navarro.

As someone who worked in Public Affairs for a Federal Department for decades (most of it during Republican Administrations) let me break to you, the news industry does not show up on your door the day that everything runs smoothly. People don't tune in to any network news to hear that things are going as planned. Even Fox news trades on the negative, most of the time. Their focus is just distributed to topics of interest to their viewers. Their viewers want to hear negative things about other subjects and fewer stories about the president. This is the same policy that the Wall Street Journal, which is owned by the same guy who owns Fox, follows.

I read the Harvard Study you quote. If you had, you would know that the study was done on Trump's first hundred days by the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy. It's findings were published March 18, 2017. So you got the date wrong. This is important because it shows that you are quoting someone else who misstated the numbers, and did not do so yourself.

The general conclusion that CNN and MSNBC have some sort of bias is not proved by these incorrect numbers. Negative stories on Fox News were 52%, not the number you reported. The study reported no numbers for MSNBC or NPR. CNN did 93% negative stories. But, the German Network ARD's coverage of Trump was 98%. On specific subjects Fox's coverage was closer to CNN's. For example, on Immigration, Fox New's coverage was 81% negative, and on health care it was 79% negative. If the subject was perceived as negative by the public, it would have been difficult for Fox to spin it positively.

There was one story that was covered about 4 to 1, positive to negative. That was the case for coverage of the president's response to Syria gassing its citizens. Trump authorized missile strikes against military targets in Syria. Traditionally, opposition politicians stand behind the president in such cases, which most of them did in this case. That story makes news, and provided opportunities for positive coverage.

I know you don't believe it, but the news media does not make up the news. Photos and video of crying babies behind bars do not elicit positive public reactions. Attacks on health care for the poor, is not a touchy-feely story. The people doing this report, judged subject,not packaging, in reaching positive versus negative conclusions. The difference was in how much time was given to negative stories.

What about going off memory didn't you get? I could have swore I've seen numbers for MSNBC and NPR tho.

I fully admitted that all MSM have problems.

But stannie's claim was that Fox in unbalanced compared to other networks. Sure, they have Hannity and Pirro that won't criticise Trump but others do. Someone like Tucker has lefties on every night.

I never talked about coverage of immigration. You really think CNN has gotten better since then? Don Lemon just laughed at Trump voting 'rubes' a day or two ago.

The media doesn't make the news, huh? Like using footage at a shooting range and passing it off as Iraq? Cooper standing in a ditch to make a flood look worse? Altering footage of Trump and the Japanese pm feeding Koi to slam Trump? Just off the top of my head.

The Syrian gas attack was fake news, Mr. Caird. The rebels attempt to draw Trump further into war.

Your unsubstantiated claims of visual alterations, even if taken as fact, do not rise to the level of lying. When reporters lie, it is big news and everyone covers it. Brian Williams lied about the extent of shelling he experienced on a story, and he was demoted. The same would happen if a Fox reporter did something similar. These news sources do not lie. They even qualify a report, noting if they are providing it second had from another news source without independent verification. In the "breaking news," TV News era, the number of stories attributed to other media outlets pending independent verification, are more common than in the print news industry. None-the-less, the number and types of stories that appear on a given outlet are determined by their business model, which has identified a market for stories on given subjects. In my Journalism 101 class, I learned on the first day that the first responsibility of a news editor is to run their operation in a way that makes a profit for the investors. Nothing has changed since then.

I ran out of space, but needed to include these quotes from the Harvard Study:

"(T)he fact that Trump has received more negative coverage than his predecessor is hardly surprising. The early days of his presidency have been marked by far more missteps and miss-hits, often self-inflicted, than any presidency in memory, perhaps ever.

What’s truly atypical about Trump’s coverage is that it’s sharply negative despite the fact that he’s the source of nearly two-thirds of the sound bites surrounding his coverage."

In other words they conclude that the primary source of Trump's negative coverage is stuff Trump said and did, during the period surveyed.

I worked for three decades on teams of people working to deliver to Veterans the care and sevices we promised them for defending us from the global aggression of the Nazis and Russia. I worked for Republicans most of these years. For the most part, they were sincee and honest conservatives. I never discussed politics with them, except for the fwe times I had to remind them that I was a civil service employee, and not political apointees, like them. In your extremist view of the world what I said seamlessly traslates into what you said. Unless that crap is all for show, I pity you and wish there was something I could do for you.

Oh, and I am sorry that I actually read the study that you misquoted, and it did not say what you said it said. That must have been embarrassing, being so wrong, again.

Those are real people, that were hired away from Fox, what fact is a problem with this?
being just 53% is generous when you could post 1 our of 5 posts that are just blatant lies . Or the lies/stats he makes up at his Klan rallies- all can be fact checked, but you are too lazy, stupid, or just dont care about FACTS. It is easier to remain clueless,

A company has turnover. Call the press! So?

Yet you post no examples *yawn*

nothing to do with turn over Cletus- it is where they all went. Fat Donnie loves people that say nice things about him.

Exactly — this realization seems to have forced the GOP Senate’s hand on witnesses. Well played, War Walrus.

Hannity likewise described Bolton’s hiring as “good news” and a “huge improvement” from McMaster on his March 22 program. “He will serve the president, right, and his agenda,” Hannity added. “Now, he brings in John Bolton, and though John Bolton has some establishment ties, no one questions his loyalty,” Bongino went on.

And Fox contributor Dan Bongino said that unlike past members of the administration, Bolton would be loyal to the president. “One thing about Donald Trump we all know, and what I’ve heard from a lot of people who know him, and friends of mine who obviously still work there is he prizes loyalty over anything else, everything,” Bongino said, noting that his National Security Council members were “loyal to themselves, they’re loyal to the swamp, and strangely, they’re loyal to the press that will screw them over in a minute

“I know John Bolton,” former Bush White House press secretary and Fox contributor Ari Fleischer told Hannity the next night. “With John Bolton at NSA, even more is about to get done. John Bolton is one of the sharpest, savviest operators in Washington. And he is a true north. He is a principled conservative and I welcome John Bolton into this administration.” “Yes, me too,” Hannity replied.