Tucker Carlson Exposes Jan 6th Lies

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by LevelUP, Mar 7, 2023.

  1. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Yes and the narrator makes up the baseless claim that Lee Harvey Oswald was being given a tour by the police because in one scene he’s walking behind a policeman.

    Only unreasonable people would believe such obvious exaggerations especially to the point that they think the fellow will be freed from jail after pleading guilty. At least according to Fox News lawyers. LOL
    Rachel83az likes this.
  2. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I do not believe it is possible to know what a troll believes merely by what he posts. But it is very possible to know what he wants YOU to believe. But mainly, such postings are meant not to change minds, but to muddle the picture, turning the obvious into something now questionable.

    The goal is doubt, not certainty.

    Because this kind of person is not pursuing the truth, he won't accept it, either. It's not the point.
    Bill Huffman and Rachel83az like this.
  3. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I've come away with two main lessons.

    First, how amazingly far from truth the Tucker Carlson show actually resides. Second, how absolutely stupid people can be when they want to believe something ridiculous. I'm not really speaking about LevelUP specifically here because I agree he must be trolling. I'm referring to the apparently large number of folks that swallowed Tucker Carlson's silliness hook line and sinker.
  4. Maniac Craniac

    Maniac Craniac Moderator Staff Member

    Unprovoked personal attack. 2-day vacation.
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  5. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Sorry to see that, but I guess it was necessary.
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  6. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    For fun, I was poking around in the inmateintake.com website and was looking at their forum. I saw an exchange there that I thought was relevant to this statement by LevelUP.

    question - My LO projected release date was 2026 and is now 2025.... does this mean he cannot work on credits etc to be released earlier? Or is 2025 set in stone. He went in 2013... any help would be great...thank you.

    response - "Good time" in the federal system works out to 54 days per year, but the projected release date already takes that into account (it assumes you are getting good time, rather than assuming you aren't). There are ways to lower your time (beyond good time), but they are very specific and not available to everyone. The RDAP program for example if his crime was drug related (he can go through the RDAP program which takes about a year to complete to cut some time off).

    Your best option to find out why his sentence was reduced would be to ask him. I suspect he'll know why (maybe he completed the RDAP program, or maybe the court reduced his sentence).

    He can still get good time, but his projected release date is his release date if he continues to *have* good time. If he gets in trouble, his projected release date will go further into the future (he can lose up to 54 days per year).

  7. Rachel83az

    Rachel83az Well-Known Member

  8. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Okay, color me amazed that prosecutors actually bothered to respond to Tucker's ridiculous claim that his short video clips actually proved a negative that the Shamen of Qanon was magically innocent. Oh, I see they were responding to a motion in the Proud Boys trial.

    Federal prosecutors on Sunday pushed back against claims that a video of so-called "QAnon Shaman" Jacob Chansley that was shown by Fox News's Tucker Carlson exonerated anyone in the mob at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

    In court filings Sunday, federal prosecutors said that video did not show Chansley, who was sentenced to 41 months in prison for his actions on January 6, facing off with officers for half an hour outside the Senate chamber or when Chansley refused to be escorted out of the Capitol by an officer and only left after being forcibly removed.

    Why didn't Tucker show the relevant parts? Oh yes, he's not part of a news cast organization that's why (at least according to Fox News lawyers). I guess that crazy QAnon looney tunes character will be staying in prison after all. LOL
    Rachel83az likes this.
  9. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Excellent quote pointing out how totally flummoxed and out of touch with reality some of the Tucker Carlson viewers have become. They think that Tucker Carlson broadcasts the news. Fox lawyers have admitted that his show is not news, that he exaggerates and bends the truth past the breaking point. Even more interesting the Dominion lawsuit has published some of Tucker's private thoughts. Where he admits to hating Trump passionately, lying to his viewers because they like to hear lies more than the truth. If Fox News told the truth then they would lose viewers and the stock would tank.

    Mr Carlson's message to a colleague in January 2021 emerged as part of a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News.
    The latest filings in the case suggest Mr Carlson expressed his dislike of the outgoing US president two days before Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol to derail lawmakers from certifying Joe Biden's election win.

    "We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights," he wrote in a text sent on 4 January 2021. "I truly can't wait."

    "I hate him passionately," he added.

    Mr Carlson, the top-rated host on the conservative network, also appeared to denigrate the Trump presidency in these private messages, despite lauding his achievements on air.

    "That's the last four years. We're all pretending we've got a lot to show for it, because admitting what a disaster it's been is too tough to digest. But come on. There isn't really an upside to Trump."
    Rachel83az likes this.
  10. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Right. No upside to Mr. Carlson, either.
  11. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    If a broadcaster's network boss says that broadcaster does not tell the truth, that nothing he says can be relied upon, is it still news?

    If that same broadcaster has demanded the firing of a news reporter for telling the truth, because the truth is hurting the brand and stock price, is that person still a credible source.

    Finally, if a poster wishes to insist on citing that broadcaster as a source of credibility, isn't reasonable to dismiss that poster instead of engaging him?

    Don't feed the troll.
  12. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Your argument is a most reasonable position, IMHO.

    My thought is that I have this probably irrational idea that perhaps the person could be convinced that getting news from such an unreliable source is a poor idea. My fear though is similar to the fear that was voiced by Rupert Murdoch, Tucker Carlson and other Fox celebrities, that is that folks that leave Fox move on to even worse options like OANN and Newsmax. I have this idea though that DegreeInfo members are more educated and perhaps even more intelligent than the typical news viewer. So maybe he could be convinced that accessing real news would give him an improved grasp on reality? There are printed sources that lean right and are much more accurate sources for real news.

    For example, here's many (looks like many dozens if not hundreds) right center choices.

    Just find one with HIGH accuracy ideally. For example,

    Not quit High but still not bad.
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2023
    Rachel83az likes this.
  13. Rachel83az

    Rachel83az Well-Known Member

    Plus, by not responding to ANY similar posts, it's all too easy to give the impression that DegreeInfo is a far-right echo-chamber that supports all of the crazy stuff that the far-right sources spew. That's going to attract the wrong kind of crowd. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want DegreeInfo to become a haven for racist idiots to talk nonsense. It's already veering dangerously close to that territory.
    Bill Huffman and Johann like this.
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    That sort of thing clearly violates the terms of service. Those people would be kicked to the curb immediately.

    If you're aware of any posts that promote racism, by all means, please report them.
  15. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Or...the political and off-topic threads could be taken down entirely. Of course, that would lower the overall number of clicks.
    Rachel83az likes this.
  16. Rachel83az

    Rachel83az Well-Known Member

    Like I said, it's close, not that it is. Everything, so far, is technically within the bounds of TOS. But that doesn't mean that people aren't dancing around the edge. There are a lot of threads started in the off topic and/or political forums that are almost certainly whistle-blowing to people who hold that sort of mindset. Links to articles that "innocently" ask questions like "ARE FROGS TURNING OUR CLOUDS GAY!?" and these threads so often dissolve into disagreements about whether MediaBiasFactCheck is good or not. And the original poster inevitably says something about "I didn't say that frogs are turning our clouds gay, I was just sharing this far-right heavily-biased source that is wondering if it's true. I'm just promoting the free flow of information!"

    It may not be against the TOS to do so, but using DegreeInfo to improve the SEO of those kinds of sites is... distasteful, IMO.
    Rich Douglas and Johann like this.
  17. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Agreed. Definitely distasteful. My take: disgraceful. Probably both.
    Rich Douglas and Rachel83az like this.
  18. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Last edited: Mar 17, 2023

Share This Page