Taraka

Kumerow makes this team I think McBeane really like him. Just a guess

nice effort Breida

not bad considering Bills 2nd stringers playing Detroits starters in 1st quarter

Bills WR bro mentality standing up for his football brother #rideordie that's how it reads to me

this is the stooge that many in this thread choose to call "the Man" The Legal Defense For Fox's Tucker Carlson: He Can't Be Literally Believed : NPR You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers September 29, 20204:34 PM ET DAVID FOLKENFLIK Twitter Fox News host Tucker Carlson "is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary,' " U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil wrote. Tucker Carlson appears to be made of Teflon. Fox News' top-rated host has been repeatedly accused of anti-immigrant and racist comments, which have cost his political opinion show many of its major advertisers. Yet Carlson endures in his prime-time slot. Carlson even attacked his own network's chief news anchor on the air, with no real consequences. That anchor, Shepard Smith, quit mid-contract shortly after Carlson went after him. Now comes the claim that you can't expect to literally believe the words that come out of Carlson's mouth. And that assertion is not coming from Carlson's critics. It's being made by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and by Fox News's own lawyers in defending Carlson against accusations of slander. It worked, by the way. Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' " Article continues after sponsor message She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes." Vyskocil, an appointee of President Trump's, added, "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable." Vyskocil's ruling last week, dismissing a slander lawsuit filed against Carlson, was a win for Fox, First Amendment principles and the media more generally, as Fox News itself maintains. As a legal matter, the judge ruled that Karen McDougal, the woman suing Carlson, failed to surmount the challenge. But in the process of saving the Fox star, the network's attorneys raised the journalistic question: Just what level of fact-checking does Fox News expect, or subject its opinion shows to? Media lawyers note this is not the first time this sort of defense has been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC's top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion." In the Fox case, Carlson was presenting his own narrative, not even one extrapolating from known facts. During the 2016 presidential campaign, McDougal, a former Playboy model, had sought to tell her account of an earlier affair with Trump. The National Enquirer tabloid bought McDougal's story for $150,000 during the 2016 campaign and then buried it to protect Trump from any fallout. More than two years later, in December 2018, Carlson began presenting Trump as the victim of extortion. Seeking to discredit former Trump attorney Michael Cohen's tale of hush payments — and alleged campaign finance law violations — Carlson first told viewers, "Remember the facts of the story. These are undisputed." But they aren't undisputed. They're not even facts. He then proceeded to say, "Two women approach Donald Trump and threaten to ruin his career and humiliate his family if he doesn't give them money. Now that sounds like a classic case of extortion." Pictures of former adult film star Stephanie Clifford, known as Stormy Daniels, and McDougal flashed on screen. Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 on behalf of Trump, who denies that either affair occurred. New Documents Reveal How Trump, Cohen, Aides Worked To Seal Hush Money Deals In reality, McDougal never approached Trump. She and her representative had spoken to ABC News and to the National Enquirer because, she said, she feared word of the affair would leak out during the campaign anyway and she preferred to be the one to tell the story. It wasn't publicly known that David *****, then the CEO of the tabloid's parent company, had promised Trump he would help keep stories about extramarital affairs from seeing the light of day. Carlson and Fox never corrected that significant error, as The Washington Post's Erik Wemple underscored. Not to worry, Carlson's lawyers said. In written briefs, they cited previous rulings to argue Carlson's words were "loose, figurative or hyperbolic." They took note of a nonjournalist's use of the word "extort," which proved nondefamatory because it was mere "rhetorical hyperbole, a vigorous epithet." Carlson has been accused of hyperbolic, vicious and unfounded claims about women, people of color and immigrants in the past. This year, his audiences have made his show the top-rated program in the history of cable news. He maintains the backing of Fox Corp. Executive Chairman and CEO Lachlan Murdoch. The Daily Beast reported Tuesday that Fox recently slashed its research team, cutting it by about one-fourth during modest networkwide layoffs. Fox News said that is overstating the size of the cut to the unit. It said it eliminated duplication and those functions are conducted elsewhere throughout its newsroom and programs. In Carlson's defense, Fox's attorneys, from Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, noted that meeting the standard of "actual malice" requires more than just showing someone should have researched or investigated a subject before popping off, thanks to U.S. Supreme Court rulings. The Fox team's legal briefs compared Carlson's show to radio talk-show programs hosted by ex-MSNBC and Fox Business star Don Imus, who won a case more than two decades ago because an appellate court ruled that "the complained of statements would not have been taken by reasonable listeners as factual pronouncements but simply as instances in which the defendant radio hosts had expressed their views over the air in the crude and hyperbolic manner that has, over the years, become their verbal stock in trade." In sum, the Fox News lawyers mocked the legal case made by McDougal's legal team. She alleged "a reasonable viewer of ordinary intelligence listening or watching the show ... would conclude that [she] is a criminal who extorted Trump for money" and that "the statements about [her] were fact." "Context makes plain," Fox's lawyers wrote, "that the reasonable viewer would do no such thing." The judge fully agreed.

so annoying its been that way all draft

CB Eric Stokes GA

If these allegation are indeed true, what a disgusting POS of a person this guy is football player be damned

WHY?

1. On Rush Limbaugh's passing: Harry Truman supposedly said "it's a damn shame when anyone dies." Fair enough. But Consider this timeline: 1985: Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" predicts a world where entertainment values wreck civil discourse 1987: Reagan's FCC... 2. . ...kills the Fairness Doctrine and creates the possibility of conservative talk radio 1988: Sacramento radio guy Rush Limbaugh goes national with right-wing talk Now, Limbaugh (as his later soulmate, Glenn Beck) was basically the nightmare predicted in "Amusing Ourselves... 3. ...to Death" -- a smooth entertainer with no real political ideas worth discussing, just a talent for funneling white rage into a 3-hour show. Yet in doing so, he changed U.S. politics forever and set the stage for Trump's American fascism Before "Lock her up!" there was... 4. ...Rush and his attacks on "feminazis." Before America became the world leader in denying climate change, Rush went to war with "tree-hugging" environmentalists Before Trump made "the cruelty is the point" a national catchphrase, Limbaugh ridiculed Michael J. Fox and... 5. ...anyone else he disagreed with As Republican politics devolved from the dog whistles of the Reagan era to the racist, xenophobic air horns of Trump, Rush was there for every step down Even worse, his success launched 1,000 other black suns of right-wing hate, from local... 6. ...radio to the Fox News Channel. He was the first pocket of an air bubble that allowed the masses to breathe the all-day air of white supremacy, and to expand that bubble of unreality to insane conspiracy theories like QAnon It will take decades, if it's even possible, to... 7. ...undo the damage to American's beliefs in fact-based news reporting, in the science around life-or-death issues like climate, COVID-19 and vaccines, in a politics that isn't a holy jihad, that was originally sparked by Rush Limbaugh. On the day of... 8. ...his death, I'm hard-pressed to think of someone in my lifetime with a more powerful negative impact on American society. His passing is a moment to reflect -- on all the work that lies ahead, for good people to reverse his legacy - 30 - @willbunch

great route by A Brown right there,

Look at all the people good ole Rudy was around with no mask in these videos. I wonder how many will contract/contracted covid from him? Or he caught it from Them? Noone deserves covid but some people are too stupid for their own good.

yeah I'm fascinated also...fascinated he would tweet such a thing that might even conceivably impact the Bills negatively and invite scrutiny. Idiot.

Wallace was in a No win situation with 2 "debaters" neither willing to obey the rules of civil debate and have enough respect for their opponent . Forget debate process most importantly they failed the American people to participate in a fruitful way. So what if in its aftermath its America who loses. What a couple of losers one of which we are about to elect. Biden called "weak" Trump a "Bully" Stalemate of mediocrity **limp clap** Congratulations Men you both suck.

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/r...d-a9630830b009Russia Could Never Discredit The US Empire The Way These Guys Just DidCaitlin JohnstoneSep 30 · 4 min readWell.Wow.I mean, wow.So in case you missed it, the first US presidential debate was everything the US empire deserves and a fair reflection of everything the US empire is.If Vladimir Putin were every bit the election-meddling demon the Democrats say he is, and if he had unlimited time and unlimited resources to create the perfect ninety-minute propaganda video to discredit the US-led unipolar world order, he could not have designed one more effective than the performance that was just delivered by President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden with the help of moderator Chris Wallace.I mean, it had everything. Both candidates yelling over each other the entire time, Biden telling the sitting president of the United States to shut up on live television, Trump at one point saying the Proud Boys should “stand back and stand by”, Chris Wallace literally shouting to be heard over the unceasing interruptions, Biden getting confused and arguing that the Green New Deal would pay for itself and then turning around saying he does not support the Green New Deal, mountains of lies and nonsense, both candidates trying to out-right wing each other, and absolutely no meaningful discussion of policies that will actually help ordinary Americans at all.It was crazier than any of Trump’s debates in 2016. It was crazier than any presidential debate that has ever happened. You seriously could not have designed a more perfect display to do everything we’ve been told for years that Russian propagandists are trying to do: depress the vote, encourage support for third parties, weaken public trust in America’s institutions, and humiliate the United States on the world stage.The world is going to be talking about this for a while now. Clips from this debate are going to share widely all across the planet. It will be translated in many languages. Articles will be written about it for days. And people who’d never thought to question whether this is the government that should be leading the world into the future are suddenly going to find themselves contemplating that question.And hopefully the next one will be even worse.It is good for the US empire to invalidate itself in this way. The government that has encircled the planet with hundreds of military bases and snuffed out millions of human lives while displacing tens of millions since 9/11 in military interventions that were based on lies, which sanctions, sabotages and destroys any nation which dares to disobey its dictates, and which is escalating world-threatening cold war aggressions against not one but two nuclear-armed nations is not a government that should have any control over humanity’s collective future.The uglier a face that appears on this murderous empire, the better it will be for everybody. In a government that is intrinsically evil and destructive from root to flower, an attractive face with competent management is the last thing anyone should want.It doesn’t matter who won this accidental Kremlin propaganda performance of a debate. It doesn’t even matter who wins the election; the most evil aspects of the US government will continue unhindered regardless of which oligarchic puppet wins in November. What does matter is that the dark, ugly aspects of global power that people had previously not noticed are being drawn into the spotlight and seen by everybody. 2020 seems to be a good year for that.If the imperialists who run things have any sense they will find a way to cancel future debates in the name of national security, because they’re the ones who will be worst affected by them. Here’s hoping they don’t, though. so PPP now has its own moderator. How wonderful a job that must be.

PPP is the biggest right leaning circle jerk forum of any I read because that is exactly what its core right wing partisan group wants. Ignoring whom you consider trolls is just another way to censor thoughts or opinions you don't agree with. Shocking ...Not in the least. You want to guarantee it be even worse than it already is just appoint one of the ringleaders of this forum a moderator. You may as well rename it MAGA central.

Another example of Trump hiring only the best people. How ironic that the guy "fundraising" to build the wall to keep out criminals is himself a criminal...Allegedly* facing 20 years in a federal prison.

#MAGA

LOL

The "law and order" candidate strikes again.Of course, he's really only the "law and order" candidate for uppity minorities, not for himself and his cabal of criminal buddies.Typical right-wing authoritarian bull****. His idiot supporters will applaud it.Sane America will be even more enthusiastic to vote him out in November. Right-wingers are going to suffer for this.They thought it would be super funny to elect an internet troll president and "own the libs" and look where it's gotten them.An out of control pandemic, an economy in free fall, and racial/civil unrest. I hope they're sick of winning already.