Just watched this Tucker program,
I have to say, him and his team of writers are truly admirable, regardless of their clear Trump preference, what they’re calling for is honesty even if it means a defeat for Trump, to withhold the trust in the institutions. They still call out the bs and biases but their message is honesty as the cure for the troubles they see in the country today.
I gotta say that is humble and admirable.
I have another take on what happened last night on Tucker Carlson's show. Actually, I couldn't even listen to the end of his opening remarks once he stated:
"at this stage the fraud that we can confirm does not seem to be enough to alter the election results." This said after the show's inserting some footage of a Georgia election official declaring (before they even started the re-count) that they WILL find evidence of voter fraud. The intended meaning, of course, of that particular insert is that it demonstrates that there is always SOME voter fraud in every election. (Yeah, so go back to sleep. Nothing new here.) Really, Tucker? Is this REALLY the best you can do?
Meanwhile, if you put together all the information we've been gathering on this thread -- which is not even exhaustive, with the Trump team and others coming up with new developments every day -- we're seeing plenty of evidence of MASSIVE fraud, which is something Tucker (and his slave drivers at Fox) will not permit any "comprehensive" reporting on. Yes, his slave drivers say, you can cover a few anecdotes suggesting fraud, as well as some of the other hard hitting material you did during these past few months, such as the role of Big Tech censorship (which Tucker covered again last night in a later segment). But you CANNOT in any meaningful way cover the extensive information gathering going on as we speak from highly legitimate sources, and you cannot interview those involved in that work. This was also true of Hannity's show last night, although I only gauged that in watching the opening of that show, as well. But the opening of these shows is important. It lets you know what is going to be "allowed," and more importantly, it lets you know
what will remain unsaid.
Last night especially was a litmus test for how Fox would handle its seemingly divergent roles given what seems to be contradictory coverage. In other words,
what would Tucker and Hannity do the Monday after the weekend in which Fox called the election for Biden, PREEMPTING Giuliani's press conference announcing the Trump campaign's investigation into voter fraud?
The answer is pretty much what I accused Laura Ingraham of doing (in an earlier post) the Friday preceding Fox's doing this: let your viewers down gently. Stroke their wounds. Recall the other great coverage you did, which is what Carlson did last night in bringing up his previous work on the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, among other things. But, whatever you do, DON'T COVER THE DETAILS OF THE MASSIVE FRAUD NOW BEING UNCOVERED -- including the election fixing via two software companies: one, Dominion, directly tied to Pelosi, the other... well, here:
"Though accusations of election fraud in the 2020 US presidential election have been swirling across social media and some news outlets for much of the past week, few have examined the role of a little known Silicon Valley company whose artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm was used to accept or reject ballots in highly contested states such as Nevada.
That company, Parascript, has long-standing cozy ties to defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin and tech giants including Microsoft, in addition to being a contractor to the US Postal Service. In addition, its founder, Stepan Pachikov, better known for cofounding the app Evernote in 2007, is a long-standing and 2020 donor to Democratic presidential candidates."
Untested AI software was used to verify mail-in ballot signatures in highly contested localities like Clark County, Nevada. The company that produces it has close ties to Lockheed Martin and Microsoft and its founder has a bone to pick with Donald Trump.
unlimitedhangout.com
So, that's Fox's "compromise" as far as their weekday, late-night programming goes. Yes, you can indignantly go on and on about all sorts of legitimate grievances concerning this election. But, no, you can't put together, in one convincing show or segment, some hard hitting, detailed reporting on all the "real" diligent work taking place -- on all levels of state and federal government, in multiple states -- at the behest of the Trump campaign, in order to get to the bottom of what actually happened on election night, and the "about face" of the morning after.
It's Fox's ugly deal, and it's meant to suggest that, as Tucker told us... "at this stage the fraud that we can confirm does not seem to be enough to alter the election results." "We can confirm" is supposed to indicate that they're doing the best they can, but still coming up short.
While I can't speak to the behind-the-scenes due diligence of Tucker and his assistants and producers, I can suggest that it's the role of good reporting to ask the difficult questions, even if you don't have all the answers, and to lay out the legitimate facts as they emerge, which, in the case of election fraud 2020, are rapidly amassing before our eyes, as anyone who has been reading this thread can attest to. Only trouble is, if you stick to Tucker's show, or Hannity's, and Ingraham's, you'd never get to realize just how rapidly and comprehensively this is all happening. Instead, all the "noise" Tucker and this colleagues are making -- some of it very good information, in fact -- is meant to be a diversion, again, from a hard hitting presentation of the emerging evidence of massive fraud -- implicating hundreds of thousands of votes -- demonstrating in every way that good journalism could possibly demonstrate that Trump's initial victory on election night has been stolen from him and perhaps the majority of the country (as Trump's
real margin of success seems to indicate). Such a show, if Tucker were allowed to present it, would also bolster the case for Trump's refusing to concede, and would go a long way toward putting the onus on the Biden team to
prove itself innocent of these mounting charges. But, instead, the M.O. at Fox is not to do a true exposé of massive fraud -- quite the opposite, in fact, given that, while it's acknowledging its viewers' indignation, it's subtly suggesting to them to give up, that the battle is lost. And in so doing, Biden & Company, and all their Democrat voting followers -- all complicit in an overt (and covert) attack on the constitutional foundations of this country -- yes, all of them can continue with their "make believe" victory, as helped along considerably by Tucker Carlson, et. al., and their producers at Fox.
www.breitbart.com
www.newsweek.com
