The Rebel News Thread

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
76,683
88,637
113
Actually JC is correct here, Tucker took her and Giuliani to task on November 19, 2020.
This was said after the interview:
"That's a long way of saying we took Sidney Powell seriously, with no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work and we simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention.
But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-rudy-giuliani-sidney-powell-election-fraud
Shockingly, watching this 2 years later Tucker seems like a real normal broadcaster.
Yeah, but read the entire shitpile, bullshit, full of crap article. Tucker questions Powell and throws her under the bus - but only so Tucksy can asslick Giuliani even harder without looking like America's hardest-licking, most ass-sniffing asslicker (which of course he is.)


A lot of Americans believe this election was rigged. They're not saying that because they're crazy and they're not just saying it because they're mad. They mean it, and that's a potentially fatal problem for this country. Elections aren't merely "central to democracy", elections are democracy. Voting is the way the public expresses its will. It's all people have. If elections don't work, our entire system doesn't work.

GIULIANI PRESSES TRUMP ELECTION CASE IN FIERY NEWS CONFERENCE

Everything in this country depends on fair elections, and it's obvious even now that we don't have them when access to basic information is restricted and weaponized by a partisan billionaire class. Google and Facebook are far greater threats to our system than Russia has ever been, and we need to fix that immediately.

But back to Thursday's press conference, which Giuliani kicked off by saying the Democrats stole the election by means of coordinated fraud in a number of states. Giuliani did not conclusively prove that, but he did raise legitimate questions and in some cases, he pointed to what appeared to be real wrongdoing. At one point, Giuliani held up an affidavit from a worker in Detroit called Jessy Jacob alleging fraud in that city's polling places.

GIULIANI: She was assigned to voting duties in September and she was trained by the city of Detroit and the state of Michigan. She was basically trained to cheat. She said that "I was instructed by my supervisor to adjust the mailing date of these absentee ballot packages to be dated earlier than when they were actually sent in. The supervisor made that announcement for all workers to engage in that fraudulent practice." That's not me saying that. That's just American citizens saying that under oath.

What Giuliani said is correct. This is the sworn statement of an American citizen made under oath and under penalty of perjury, so you cannot dismiss it out of hand. Jacob goes on to say that her supervisor told her not to check the photo IDs of voters when they arrived. She says she saw city employees coaching voters on who to vote for, as well as voters voting more than once.

WAYNE COUNTY GOP MEMBERS TRY TO RESCIND VOTES TO CERTIFY ELECTION, CLAIM DEMS BULLIED THEM

Is any of that provable? Is it true? Well, we should find out, not because Michigan is a swing state, but because voter fraud is a direct attack on our democracy.

But the media don't want to know. They're not interested. If you watched the coverage after the press conference today, you saw credentialed reporters, some of whom we know and like, actually, refuse even to acknowledge it.

No mention whatsoever of the contents of what they described as "what he says are sworn affidavits." Giuliani says that the Jacob affidavit has been made public, but they can't be bothered to check. Instead, they launched new editorials about how dishonest and crazy Rudy Giuliani is, as if their job was to rebut Rudy Giuliani.

But that's not their job. Their job is to explain what just happened, preferably with some detail so that viewers at home can make up their minds. They didn't do that. Behavior like this does not help anyone and diminishes the news media's tiny remaining reserve of credibility. It certainly doesn't inform the public

Giuliani claimed that voters in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh were allowed to change their ballots after the fact -- a process known as "curing the ballots" -- by the Democratic secretary of state, while Republican counties were not. That's checkable.

He said dozens of Republican voting inspectors in Pennsylvania weren't allowed near mail-in ballots and have signed affidavits saying so. That's another easily checkable claim.

Giuliani said that mail-in votes are easier to falsify and harder to verify than traditional voting. That's clearly true, everyone knows it's true, and it's a major problem. Pretending otherwise is a lie.

Then Giuliani got to the way votes are counted in this country. The process is mostly electronic. Giuliani suggested that electronic vote counting is an invitation to fraud, and he's right. That's why Canada, for example, doesn't do it.

Attorney Powell on election legal challenges that remain active in several states Video
All of which brings us to the bombshell at the center of today's press conference that was delivered by Powell, who also serves as Gen. Mike Flynn's lawyer.

For more than a week, Powell has been all over conservative media with the following story: This election was stolen by a collection of international leftists who manipulated vote tabulating software in order to flip millions of votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. The other day on television, Powell said of Trump that when the fraud is finally uncovered, "I think we'll find he had at least 80 million votes." In other words, rigged software stole about seven million votes in this election.

On Sunday night, "Tucker Carlson Tonight" texted her after watching one of her segments. What Powell was describing would amount to the single greatest crime in American history. Millions of votes stolen in a day, democracy destroyed, the end of our centuries-old system of self-government. Not a small thing.

Now, to be perfectly clear, we did not dismiss any of it. We don't dismiss anything anymore, particularly when it's related to technology. We've talked to too many Silicon Valley whistleblowers and we've seen too much after four years on the air. We literally do UFO segments, not because we're crazy or even interested in the subject, but because there is evidence that UFOs are real and everyone lies about it.

There's evidence that a lot of things that responsible people dismiss out of hand as ridiculous are, in fact, real. The louder the Yale political science department and the staff of The Atlantic magazine scream "conspiracy theory," the more interested we tend to be. That's usually a sign you're over the target. A lot of people with impressive-sounding credentials in this country are frauds who have no idea what they're doing. They're children posing as authorities. And when they're caught, they lie and then they blame you for it. We see that every day. It's the central theme of our show and will continue to be.

TRUMP CAMPAIGN DROPS LAWSUIT CHALLENGING MICHIGAN VOTING RESULTS

That's a long way of saying we took Sidney Powell seriously, with no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work and we simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention.

But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests. When we kept pressing, she got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they also told us Powell had never given them any evidence to prove anything she claimed at the press conference.

Powell did say that electronic voting is dangerous, and she's right, but she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Actually JC is correct here, Tucker took her and Giuliani to task on November 19, 2020.
This was said after the interview:
"That's a long way of saying we took Sidney Powell seriously, with no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work and we simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention.
But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of polite requests."
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-rudy-giuliani-sidney-powell-election-fraud
Shockingly, watching this 2 years later Tucker seems like a real normal broadcaster.
Then the question becomes when and why did he switch to backing the big lie?
He might have had a moment of sanity in Nov 2020 and the Dominion texts show he knew the big lie was bullshit but he's also spent the last two years claiming the election really was stolen.

Tucker is back to pushing the big lie, though he tries to avoid saying that he believes it to be true. Thank Dominion.
On Monday’s show, though, Carlson opened by saying the January 6 protesters “believed that the election in which they had just voted had been unfairly conducted — and they were right. In retrospect, the 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy. Given the facts that have since emerged about that election, no honest person can deny it.”

Clearly Tucker knows the big lie is false but is still pushing it, he also hates rump according to the texts.
Which means he's towing the narrative that Murdoch wants pushed, likely Murdoch can afford a couple of billion in court costs as the cost of keeping control of the base and party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

PeteOsborne

Kingston recon
Feb 12, 2020
2,134
1,952
113
kingston
Then the question becomes when and why did he switch to backing the big lie?
He might have had a moment of sanity in Nov 2020 and the Dominion texts show he knew the big lie was bullshit but he's also spent the last two years claiming the election really was stolen.

Tucker is back to pushing the big lie, though he tries to avoid saying that he believes it to be true. Thank Dominion.
On Monday’s show, though, Carlson opened by saying the January 6 protesters “believed that the election in which they had just voted had been unfairly conducted — and they were right. In retrospect, the 2020 election was a grave betrayal of American democracy. Given the facts that have since emerged about that election, no honest person can deny it.”

Clearly Tucker knows the big lie is false but is still pushing it, he also hates rump according to the texts.
Which means he's towing the narrative that Murdoch wants pushed, likely Murdoch can afford a couple of billion in court costs as the cost of keeping control of the base and party.
Ratings and the base.
Like i said in the final sentence in my post, his reporting 2 years ago is much different from his circus now.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
Agreed, but I think we may interpret this statement differently when considering the accuracy of his current reporting.
He is not "reporting " anything. He's opinion side of Fox. He gets paid for his pov on issues.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,483
4,902
113
He is not "reporting " anything. He's opinion side of Fox. He gets paid for his pov on issues.
Actually, recently, to my surprise, he has done some in depth investigative reporting, or more likely, have read the data from a great investigative team.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
Actually, recently, to my surprise, he has done some in depth investigative reporting, or more likely, have read the data from a great investigative team.
Carlson has always been middle of the road conservative- and even that is wrong description. A long time ago, they'd call him a liberal.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
Yup, just have to sell your integrity.
Sure, if you opine against what you stand for. Carlson is careful and pretty honest- all good ones are.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: mandrill

PeteOsborne

Kingston recon
Feb 12, 2020
2,134
1,952
113
kingston
Sure, if you opine against what you stand for. Carlson is careful and pretty honest- all good ones are.
He did have integrity at one time, if memory serves he was fired from CNN for showing both sides of a story.
Before that he actually was a journalist writing for some high profile media including New York Magazine, Reader’s Digest, and The Wall Street Journal.
Some time after he started at FOX he seemed to loose his integrity.
Being honest is the opposite of repeatedly saying things as true that are not, when you know they are not true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mandrill

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
Some time after he started at FOX he seemed to loose his integrity.
Being honest is the opposite of repeatedly saying things as true that are not, when you know they are not true.
It depends where you stand on issues, I suppose. Before Carlson, some hated O'Reilly with just as much passion and Bill was straight up, middle of the road Republican (although he styled himself as Independent).
 

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
76,683
88,637
113

mandrill

Well-known member
Aug 23, 2001
76,683
88,637
113
Sure, if you opine against what you stand for. Carlson is careful and pretty honest- all good ones are.
His program on testicle tanning was cutting edge investigative journalism at its finest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

mitchell76

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2010
22,221
8,805
113
Sounds like he was just loitering there and was asked to move it outside and was then arrested for refusing to move along.

The "prayer meeting" is just the hook for Rebel News. You can't just go to government buildings and fuck around and refuse to leave. You'll get arrested.
This is the total opposite, of what's going on in Florida, with the book bannings etc. IMHO, the mayor of Calgary, has similar beliefs to Biden??

 

mitchell76

Well-known member
Aug 10, 2010
22,221
8,805
113
Sounds like he was just loitering there and was asked to move it outside and was then arrested for refusing to move along.

The "prayer meeting" is just the hook for Rebel News. You can't just go to government buildings and fuck around and refuse to leave. You'll get arrested.
Reimer just can't stay away from these LGBTQ events. That's why he got arrested.

 
Toronto Escorts