Trump’s Weekly Fox Show? It Could Present Some Interesting Political and Legal Issues

There was an awkward moment this morning on Fox when President Donald Trump announced that he would have a regular appearance on Fox and Friends every week at this time. That came as obvious news to the hosts who repeatedly told the President that there is no such understanding. The exchange, however, raises a legal question of whether such a regular show with the President would run afoul of federal laws requiring equal time for political candidates. The answer is likely no but it is not clear if Joe Biden would relish a regular segment on Fox since he has largely avoided such interviews.

In fairness to President Trump, the hosts said that they wanted to do another segment. However, Trump responded  that “We’ve agreed to do it once a week in the morning, and I look forward to it.”  Host Steve Doocy said “I haven’t heard that” and later said “You may want to do it every week, but Fox is not committed to that. We’re going to take it on a case by case basis.”

 

The segment raises some interesting legal and political issues. The equal-time rule mandates that U.S. radio and television outlets should provide an equivalent opportunity to opposing political candidates. That has been a policy since the Radio Act of 1927. However, equal time is more of a rule that controls the selling of political advertising. It is less clear and more aspirational when it comes to interviews.

The Communications Act of 1934 is the basis for the FCC rule:

Section 312 [47 U.S.C. §312] Administrative sanctions.

(a)   The Commission may revoke any station license or construction permit –

(7)   for willful or repeated failure to allow reasonable access to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for the use of a broadcasting station, other than a non-commercial educational broadcast station, by a legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office on behalf of his candidacy.

(f)   For purposes of this section:

(1)   The term “willful”, when used with reference to the commission or omission of any act, means the conscious and deliberate commission or omission of such act, irrespective of any intent to violate any provision of this Act or any rule or regulation of the Commission authorized by this Act or by a treaty ratified by the United States.

(2)   The term “repeated”, when used with reference to the commission or omission of any act, means the commission or omission of such act more than once or, if such commission or omission is continuous, for more than one day.

The Federal Communications Commission abolished The Fairness Doctrine in 1987.

Even without the “Fairness Doctrine,” media organizations try to follow the equal-time rule. However, an interview is not the purchase of broadcasting time.  It would be hard, particularly with a sitting president, to mete out equal time when the media has to cover official acts and presidents mix political and policy elements in their public comments.

Moreover, even if Fox were bound by strict equal time obligations, it would mean that Fox would commit to a weekly Joe Biden segment. In truth, that would be a dream come true for Fox and a nightmare for many Democrats.  So long as Biden is offered equal time, the rule is effectively satisfied. Fox could argue that, unlike the defunct Fairness Doctrine, it can insist on the candidates themselves rather than surrogates for offering equivalent time and opportunity.

 

164 thoughts on “Trump’s Weekly Fox Show? It Could Present Some Interesting Political and Legal Issues”

  1. It’s the Biden Comedy Hour with Sleepy Joe pulling a gaffe a minute. Guest stars include Mad Maxine Waters with hair styling advice. Cowgirl Shelia Jackson Lee on riding buffaloes. Hank “Guam is tilting” Johnson with travelogues and a special appearance by Nancy Pelosi with today’s secret word “hypocrite.” Story telling with Adam Schiff and even a surprise appearance by Jeffrey Epstein talking about island hopping!

  2. PEW RESEARCH: U.S. STANDING LOW AMONG ALLIES

    TRUMP’S HANDLING OF PANDEMIC CITED

    President Trump defended his handling of the coronavirus pandemic during an interview with Fox News over the weekend, arguing that he took “tremendous steps” early in the outbreak, which “saved probably two or two and a half million lives.”

    But much of the world appears to think otherwise. In a new poll of 13 nations released Tuesday, a median of 15 percent of respondents said the United States had handled the pandemic well, while 85 percent said the country had responded poorly.

    The data, released by Pew Research Center, suggests that the international reputation of the United States has dropped to a new low in the face of a disorganized response to the novel coronavirus. The country leads the world in virus-related deaths.

    International affairs analysts say it may be difficult to repair the damage to the United States’ standing overseas. Among some traditional allies like Germany, views of the United States have declined to the lowest levels since Pew began tracking them nearly two decades ago.

    “I still think there is admiration for the United States, but it may be waning very quickly — especially if Trump gets reelected,” said Sudha David-Wilp, a senior transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund in Berlin.

    Pew surveyed 13 foreign nations, all wealthy democracies, along with the United States this summer.

    After Trump entered office in 2017, Pew found much of the world to hold a negative view of the U.S. leader, with views of the United States overall dipping in many nations.

    But Pew’s latest polling suggests that the pandemic, an unprecedented global crisis, has caused views of the United States among its closest peers to slide even further.

    In contrast, many respondents had positive perspectives on their own countries: Nearly three-quarters of people polled said their own governments had done a good job handling the crisis.

    Internationally, the U.S. rating was significantly lower than the ratings for the World Health Organization, which the Trump administration has dubbed “corrupt,” and China, the epicenter of the initial outbreak, which Trump said “sent us the plague.”

    In at least seven nations, including key allies like Britain and Japan, approval ratings for the United States plunged to record lows. In Germany, just 26 percent of the respondents held a positive view of the United States — the lowest rating since 2003, the year of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

    Among the countries surveyed, Belgians had the lowest estimation of the United States: Just 24 percent of Belgians said they had a positive view.

    Pew has only recorded lower ratings twice: Both times in Spain during the administration of President George W. Bush, when 16 and 23 percent of the Spanish population had a favorable view of the United States in 2003 and 2006, respectively.

    Edited from: “Global Views Of U.S. Plunge To New Lows Amid Pandemic, Poll Finds”

    The Washington Post, 9/15/20

    1. And, of course, we always center our policy decisions on what a bunch of Euros think. They’ve done so well on many fronts like immigration, Virus response and their economies and thus are in a wonderful position to judge us. And the Japanese? Oh the very word conjures up competency in every respect especially US real estate purchases, nuclear disaster response not to mention world domination. Banzai! /sarc off

            1. It appears our NATO allies are following U.S. leadership and contributing more towards defense expenditures. Of course they would naturally grumble that our current leadership won’t tolerate a continuance of their expenditure shortfalls. It’s more like an international welfare-to-work policy and as we know, that’s not always popular with entities that have built their existence on the dime of others. Now if our NATO allies were actually rejecting U.S. leadership, they would pull out of the alliance and/or demand the U.S. pull out. Is there a movement to do just that?
              https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2019_11/20191129_pr-2019-123-en.pdf

              1. European nations. Why is US there? To keep them from slaughtering each other like they’ve done so many times before.

                That’s perhaps the real purpose not opposing the USSR’s rump state Russia

                  1. the gaming strategy for risk is pretty simple if you’ve seen it played enough times. kind of like monopoly. risk on the computer makes it even more obvious. if all sides play with that same strategy, it mostly just comes down to who gets the best rolls of the dice

                    i like chess but if you want a more complicated game, the next step up is Go or Weiqi

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_(game)

          1. Turks aren’t our allies even though they technically are. They’re trying to gin up a war with NATO ally Greece.
            I wish Soros would get to work on getting rid of Erdogan instead of Trump, lol

    2. Did WaPo do a poll of the Libyan people to see how they feel about the US and Obama?

      Or for that matter, the Syrian people.

      Or any of the people in the 7 different countries that Obama bombed during his 8 years in office.

          1. TRUE:

            “Trump has dropped more bombs and missiles than George W. Bush or Barack Obama did in their first terms, and there are still roughly as many US bases and troops overseas as when he was elected….

            Trump has shrouded his war-making in even greater secrecy than Obama. The US military has not published a monthly Airpower Summary since February 2020, nor official troop deployment numbers for Afghanistan, Iraq, or Syria for nearly three years. But the United States has dropped at least twenty thousand bombs on Afghanistan since Trump came to power, and there is no evidence of a reduction in bombing under the peace agreement the administration signed with the Taliban in February. Some US troops have been withdrawn under that agreement, but the remaining 8,600 are still being replaced as their tours end, keeping US troop strength at about the same level as when Obama left office.

            Trump made a great show of repositioning US troops in Syria in October 2019, leaving the United States’ Kurdish allies in Rojava to confront the Turkish invasion alone. But there are still at least 500 US troops in Syria, and Trump deployed 14,000 more US troops to the Middle East in 2019, including to a new base in Saudi Arabia.

            Trump has vetoed every bill passed by Congress to disengage US forces from the Saudi war in Yemen and to halt the sales of US-made warplanes and bombs, which the Saudis use to systematically kill Yemeni civilians. He created a new conflict with Iran by pulling out of the nuclear deal, and in January 2020, he capriciously flirted with a full-scale war on Iran by ordering the assassination of Iran’s General Qasem Soleimani and Iraqi military commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis in Iraq…”

            https://www.2lt.com.au/trump-who-vowed-to-end-wars-has-dropped-more-bombs-than-bush-or-obama/

            1. Book, Thanks! I had forgotten what a good job President Trump is doing. So many things to remember. You left out smashing ISIS and negotiating historic peace treaties.

            2. Sure, that’s why Trump has been nominated for not one, but two Nobel Peace Prizes in a short period and it is being suggested that Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and other Arab and Muslim countries will be stepping up to join the peace agreement with Israel. Go drink some more Kool aid.

              1. “Adolf Hitler was nominated for the peace prize in 1939 by a member of the Swedish parliament.” – BBC

                https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34277960

                “Have there been controversial nominations before?

                While the award’s most famous recipients include Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela and Mother Teresa – all who won the prize – the broad criteria for nominations means that past nominees have included highly unorthodox, and controversial, selections.

                Adolf Hitler was nominated for the peace prize in 1939 by a member of the Swedish parliament. Reportedly submitted in satire, the nomination was withdrawn soon after. A few years later, the Soviet leader Josef Stalin was nominated for the same award, twice, garnering nods in 1945 – for his efforts ending WW2 – and again in 1948.

                After nominations are submitted, the recipient is selected by a five-person Nobel Committee, which is appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. The winner of the 2021 prize will not be announced until October of next year.”

                1. Let’s highlight this, too.

                  “A few years later, the Soviet leader Josef Stalin was nominated for the same award, twice, garnering nods in 1945 – for his efforts ending WW2 – and again in 1948.”

                  I would agree that awarding the prize to Obama was a mistake. It would be another mistake to select Trump.

            3. Book, your source is a joke.

              Obama’s State Department, CIA, NSA, and DIA, started color revolutions in Libya, the Ukraine, and Syria.

              Libya was destroyed as a result, and is now the largest slave market in the world.

              Syria was almost destroyed, until Russia unexpectedly entered the war theater, and caught Barry and his foreign policy advisers with their pants down around their knees.

              In the meantime, here’s how well your fellow Democrats are doing with their idiotic defund the police move in Minneapolis:

              “With violent crime on the rise in Mpls., City Council asks: Where are the police?”

              https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/09/15/with-violent-crime-on-the-rise-in-mpls-city-council-asks-where-are-the-police

              “Other council members said officers are telling residents that they are overworked and understaffed.

              Arradondo said around 100 officers have left the department or have taken leave since the beginning of 2020. That’s more than double the usual number of officers who either step down from the department or who are inactive each year.

              Council members in wards which usually don’t see high levels of violence say their constituents are feeling “terrorized.”

              Apparently the “violence interrupters” that the Minneapolis City Council members wanted to use to replace the Police department, are not working out.

              Stupid is, as stupid fvcking does, Bookie. This same scenario is happening in major cities all over the country with Democrat Mayors. It’s even worse in major cities in States with Democrat Governors.

              Stupid is, as stupid fvcking does, Bookie.

              1. Rhodes, the full blown civil war in Libya was not begun by the US. Read a newspaper sometime.

                No one of national stature in the Democratic Party favors defunding the police. Biden wants to spend more federal money on COPS programs, which were a successful component of the mid-90s crime bill he was instrumental in passing.

                You can just keep lying Rhodes as I enjoy the opportunity to repeat the truth.

          2. Fact check: TRUE.

            Data:
            https://www.afcent.af.mil/Portals/82/Documents/Airpower%20summary/Airpower%20Summary%20-%20December%202017_Released.pdf?ver=2018-01-15-023307-640
            https://www.afcent.af.mil/Portals/82/Documents/Airpower%20summary/31%20January%202015%20Airpower%20Summary.pdf?ver=2016-01-13-143737-040

            That leaves out 2009, which wasn’t among the 4 highest years under Obama, and 2020, which so far is averaging 464/month.

            So it’s over 75,800 for Trump vs. 75383 for the 4 highest years under Obama.

    1. Do a fact check on this or research it yourself. The reason for decreased forest fires in Canada is three fold. They banned ATV’s from the forest in Apri and May when things got dry, they have had a significant decrease in the number of campers due to C-19 that leave campfires unattended and they have had substantially more rain in some provinces due to the weather pattern changes that has caused the dry conditions out west.

      1. Do you work for the Babylon Bee? If not, then my fact-checking will begin with you. Prove your claim. To be true, you’d have to prove ATV use caused the fires, same with unattended campfires from areas that also had Covid-19 reductions and your weather pattern theory that has remarkably left everything north of the US-Canadian border free of wildfire conditions.

        Ready. Go. And good luck.

        1. Never been north, Olly? Didn’t know it’s wet up there? All that snow in Canada keeps the soil moist well into summer. In fact, if Global Warming keeps trending as it has, Canada could wind up one of the most desirable countries in the world. It will have abundant water and vast tracts of undeveloped land. If I was a young billionaire I’d be buying land in Canada.

          1. If global warming was real, the proponents wouldn’t have to lie about the data. It’s really that simple. And anyway, we’re already extinct per climate “scientist” Al Gore.

            1. Essentially a giant firebreak.

              Yeah, that must be it. Well that and the fact it rains far more on one side of that break than the other. On the U.S. side, just 50 feet or so south of the Canadian tree line, it’s a virtual desert in comparison, with millions of more people invading with ATV’s and unattended fires. That climate change is a fascinating phenomena.

            2. LOL except for that one park on the border between Seattle/ Vancouver where there is no fence and the illegals sneak back and forth whenever they feel like it

              Peace Arch park I think is name.

          2. “If I was a young billionaire I’d be buying land in Canada.”

            In light of the fact that the The Grand Solar Minimum is just beginning, that would ensure that you would not remain a billionaire for very long.

        2. Here is an excerpt from the following article.

          “Canada has experienced a lower than average number of wildfires this year thanks in part to COVID-19 restrictions, as well as cooler temperatures and wetter conditions compared to the United States, where devastating and record-setting wildfires have been raging across large swaths of the west coast this year.

          A ban on fires and off-highway vehicle (OHV) restrictions through April and May, as part the province’s COVID-19 response, also helped lower the number of wildfires, she said.

          Campfires that are not fully extinguished can often result in a wildfire, while a buildup of debris such as grass and moss can ignite in the exhaust of an OHV where temperatures can heat up to more than 200C degrees. These are preventable fires and the public is encouraged to be more cautious when they are out in forested areas, Story added.

          “We can’t quite measure exactly how many fires we’ve prevented, but it would probably be safe to say that we avoided a lot with having less people out in the forested areas,” she said, noting that between 65 and 70 per cent of Alberta wildfires are caused by humans in any given year. This year, that figure was 79 per cent. The rest are caused by lightning.”

          https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/how-weather-covid-19-spared-canada-from-wildfires-like-those-in-the-u-s-1.5105000

          1. Ron, we should also note that Washington is more populous than British Columbia. With 7.6 million people, Washington would rank as Canada’s 3rd largest province (it’s America’s 13th largest state).

            So even by U.S. standards, Washington is moderately big. British Columbia, by contrast, has 4.6 million people. That’s enough to rank as Canada’s 3rd most populous province. But that population is strictly medium size by the standards of U.S. states.

            1. So a question. Do you agree with the original comment that climate change ends at the border or that the reduction of fires in Canada is due in some ways to other factors.

              Right now I am not debating climate change, I am debating reasons for fire differences in the two countries this year

              1. Ron, I think populations factor in Climate Change and its related consequences. More people means ‘more people in areas with sensitive ecosystems’.

                  1. Ron, the world’s population has more than doubled since 1950, which explains a lot. It took all of history for the world to reach its 1950 level. Then in just 70 years, that population has more than doubled. That doubling has huge ramifications with regards to burning of fossil fuels, the burning and cutting of forests, burns from oil and gas wells, loss of wetlands, grasslands, etc.

                    1. All of what you said, I agree with. And why I do agree that all countries with more than a certain percentage of world population, maybe 5%,’should be partners in a worldwide agreement addressing anything that is identified by scientist contributing to climate change and other environmental issues like the tremendous plastic waste problem .

                      And I dont mean anything like the brain fart from Paris that’s required America to reduce certainties pollutants substantially now while Cina, the largest polluter could continue to increase through the 30’s and not get back to 18 levels until sometime around the 50’s. The agreement should require equal treatment like anything being based on percent of worlds population. If China has 35% of the population, any first year total decreases would require China to contribute 35% of that decrease.

                    2. Ron, the Paris Accord required nothing of the US or anything else except a commitment to set and work toward goals. In that sense it was weak, but strong in that every country in the world signed it and agreed to the goal.

                      CO2 emissions are cumulative, and therefore the Industrial Revolution and progress since, which we and most of the West benefited from , stored huge amounts of CO2 which count toward our contribution to the problem. Additionally, while we are no longer the worst contributors in total quantities, we are far and away the worst relative to China, India , and other developing countries in current per capita contributions of CO2. The Vox article David posted on this about a week ago was excellent on the subject, providing many graphs.

                      On a plus note, a recent study showed that developing countries may follow our path to development with significantly less polluting due to new efficiencies from advanced technologies.

                      In any case, we have no standing to lecture other countries on CO2 emissions though we all should be encouraging and hectoring each other to set and reach goals which ill affect us all. We especially don’t have standing for this after dropping out of the Paris Accords. We gave up leadership there and in other international affairs which Biden will quickly reclaim. We need to look to the future, not the past.

                    3. The Paris Accords was an agreement between nations because a Paris Climate Treaty would have required Senate ratification and Obama knew that. The way it was written, too many senators opposed. In the attached it says

                      “Those plans were technically referred to as intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs). By December 10, 2015, 185 countries had submitted measures to limit or reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 2025 or 2030. The U.S. announced in 2014 its intention to reduce its emissions 26–28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. To help accomplish that goal, the country’s Clean Power Plan was to set limits on existing and planned power plant emissions. China, the country with the largest total greenhouse gas emissions, set its target for the peaking of its carbon dioxide emissions “around 2030 and making best efforts to peak early.”

                      Now if they peak in 2030, 14 years of increases, what year would they be back to 2016-17 levels once they began to decrease?. Even if they began earlier than 2030?

                      And Obama thought once he put America on the unfair path of reduction and giving the Chinese an industrial break, there would be no turning back. And that would have happened with most anyone except Trump who puts America First when it comes to the worlds economy.

                      https://www.britannica.com/topic/Paris-Agreement-2015

                    4. meet the collapsitarians, the doomers. perhaps climate change activists have under-appreciated the problem and are in their own form of denialism. perhaps the tipping point has already been reached and a series of cascading effects will ensue.

                      https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-51857722

                      if that were the case, then social resources would more reasonably be aimed at adaptation not mitigation.

                      it is possible that both sides of the aisle could come together on infrastructure improvements that would, at the very least, help adapt to climate change problems such as improved roads, bridges, dikes, levees, flood control measures, and so forth.

                      if adaptation legislation is held captive to mitigation schemes, then nothing will get done in time.

                      we are firmly on track to accomplish very little of necessary adaptations, if indeed the prognostications are correct.

                    5. Perhaps Kurtz, but it’s not an either/or black/white situation and things be bad or worse. If worse. we can look for major dislocations of populations as flooding and even worse, changing of arable land locations without relation to existing political boundaries. Mitigating and fixing things depends on how broke they are.

                    6. it seems to me that the paris accords will fail. i suspect most agree this is likely. let’s just accept the premises of global warming for sake of this exercise.

                      so if that doesnt work, what else could work, if the global warming premises are correct? achieving a carbon neutral posture would entail a necessary large drop in population and also a significant change to energy consumption habits in the west. both.

                      consider some of the other consequences besides just lower carbon emissions. both the drop in energy consumption that would be expected of western nations would have a big negative impact on economies.

                      and a big drop in population would have a big negative economic effect too. stagnation of population growth in aging Japan provides a study.

                      the current world monetary system operates on debt based currencies that require growth to function well. and if they did not work well, trouble.

                      it is hard to see how these things could be achieved without majors wars.

                      Of course a nuclear exchange between india and pakistan would not only kill many millions quickly, it would also kick up a big dust cloud that would reduce temperatures, and cause famine, and consequential major depopulation events. ie dieoffs. Now such a war is possible and the question comes, will any powerful bad actors ever decide it is desirable. Gee, I hope not. But the possibility exists.

                      What else could achieve a rapid depopulation that would possibly set back the clock from doom? Without the possible fallout like the preceeding?

                      A smaller doom, say, a global pandemic outbreak of a lethal pathogen like smallpox that would slay 1/3.

                      smallpox can be engineered with small difficulty now using CRISPR technology.

                      Gee, one hopes that nobody with sufficient power and intention to rectify global warming seizes up on that idea. Trust me I didn’t come up with it, I heard it somewhere else. again, hope not, but the possibility exists.

                      So here’s a few scenarios if you take global warming seriously.

                      1. the nations get it together and it all works out in time. ha, ha, Not likely. but even this best case has losers and winners. I wont expand on that.

                      2. nations do not curb warming timely, there are increasing bad effects which lead to authoritarian responses, which help it work out on time. or maybe we get the authoritarian systems without a sufficiently fast response. may play into further possibilities:

                      3. a smaller sized nuclear war takes care of the population problem but maybe goes too far and then destroys everything

                      4. a global pandemic, of a serious pathogen with lethality far greater than COVID, takes care of the problem

                      5, scenarios 3 & 4 would trigger a monetary collapse anyways, but even without them, there could be a global monetary collapse and worldwide economic chaos and ‘the big reset” allow a low growth economic system to be implemented, necessarily, the populations of the “global north” take a nasty haircut in “lifestyle” now this one is very very possible

                      6. artificial generation intelligence is achieved inside the warming time frame and comes up with a whiz bang solution we mere mortal never considered. it all works out. now i think we will get to AGI but seems more likely to me the one who has it in hand will use it to take over the world before they worry about fixing it first. or maybe AGI once it comes takes over the world itself and “fixes” the problem fast by triggering 3 or 4 or 5.

                      Seems to me that if global warming continues as predicted with the various negative outcomes, in only 1 and 6 does the West not get a major haircut. Catastrophes are likely, authoritarian systems are likely, and monetary reset is likely. Or, worse yet, nuclear war or a global pandemic that is a real kick in the pants.

                      winners don’t wait to win, they get strong today so they can win tomorrow. winners today who see these things, then will do what?

                      They will posture to take control of emergent authoritarian systems, and also to leverage emergent catastrophes and disasters, and will front-run and exploit emergent monetary crises.

                      Kinds of explains the world economic forum agenda and Geo Soros in a nutshell. Imagine that. He won’t live to see it play out, but he’s laid the pattern of how the world may just develop like it or not .

                      The only way it doesn’t play out like 1-7, is if global warming does not materialize .Obviously that is the scenario Republicans have bet the farm on. I wonder if that is wise. Maybe in the 4 year time frame it is, but Im not so sure it works farther out. If global warming worsens, it almost certainly does not. I suspect I am not the only person who can reckon that.

                      Ergo, I predict that it will not only be the playbook of Soros and his allies in Democrat party to pursue the last three pronged strategy, but also their rivals
                      (to take control of emergent authoritarian systems, leverage emergent catastrophes and disasters, and will front-run and exploit emergent monetary crises.)

                      Leads us exactly to where we are today. I hope this makes it clear why I say we need to get past enlightenent notions of individual liberties and so forth. they are almost certainly done, the goose is cooked on that fantasy, and the question will become only who holds the help as the stronger forms of government arise by absolute necessity.

                      if that is the game, then every bit of posturing and preening about liberties and all that is fake. Indeed, perhaps it explains precisely why it is so fake.

                    7. Ron, so for your premise to be true we have to accept that the other 180+ countries were in on a plot by our president to unilaterally destroy our economy while they just watched because no one takes climate change seriously or considers it an existential threat.

                      Yeah, that’s the ticket.

                    8. BTB, I can only say you should be a journalist because you can turn words into comments that have no relationship to the subject.

                      I never said other countries were screwing us intentionally. I did not say that China designed the accords to screw us.

                      So here is what I believe!
                      Obama believed in global climate change
                      Obama wanted a climate agreement before he left office.
                      Obama believed the political position that agreements signed by presidents are not changed by incoming presidents who have new agendas
                      Obama wanted America to be the “leader” in combating climate change
                      Obama wanted America to set an example
                      Obama administration gave him targeted decreases and he proposed that to the climate group.
                      All the other countries thought that good.
                      China looked at their economy and situation and decided their best course of action
                      China found they would be better off agreeing to a decrease after 2030, allowing their country to work toward decreases that would have the least impact on the economically, unlike the USA.

                      So my comment that Obama screwed us with agreeing to decrease immediately and by 28% or whatever the number by 2026-27, while allowing China to increase is based on the above!

                      Stop with the obnoxious “better than thou” attitude putting words into print others have not written. If your unclear as to the persons position, ask. Knowing the facts helps keep one from looking like the back side of a donkey.

                    9. Kurtz, your Soros conspiracy nonsense aside, the future could be very bleak and the choices stark, but our best chance is combating the specific problem while protecting the system, not upending it. We in the west are the primary beneficiaries of that system and there is still hope for the future, if shrinking while we waste time on side trips with backwards looking and unserious poseurs like Trump. We have until 2100 until population is expected to peak at 11 billion – we went from 5.5 in 1987 to about 8 billion now, so that increase is slowing – and with advanced technologies, development in the 3rd world will not be as polluting per unit as was our Industrial Revolution

                1. “Climate Change”

                  What happened to “man-made global warming”?

                  Is that like the difference between a “used car” and a “pre-owned vehicle”?

                  1. Sure Rhodes – I’ll help you out.

                    Given the confusion – usually purposeful – of some who struggled with the fact that among short term consequences of global warming were chaotic conditions resulting in extremely cold effects, and to make it simple for these simple minds, the accepted term for the condition of overall global warming was to rename it climate change.

                    Anything else?

                    1. to make it simple for these simple minds, the accepted term for the condition of overall global warming was to rename it climate change.

                      And the simple minds gobbled it up. This way, the alarmists will be able to point to any significant weather event, whether it be extreme cold, extreme heat, drought, excessive rain and say they are validated. Your problem is credibility. If you knuckleheads had left science to scientists and not made everything a political football, you might be taken seriously. That ship sailed long ago.

                    2. Olly, you need to read what scientistrs say about Climate Change, not what somebody on Fox News told you they say.

                      “There is currently a strong scientific consensus that the Earth is warming and that this warming is mainly caused by human activities. This consensus is supported by various studies of scientists’ opinions and by position statements of scientific organizations, many of which explicitly agree with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) synthesis reports.

                      Nearly all actively publishing climate scientists (97–98%[1]) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change,[2][3] and the remaining 2% of contrarian studies either cannot be replicated or contain errors.[4]….

                      National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed current scientific opinion on global warming. These assessments are generally consistent with the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

                      Some scientific bodies have recommended specific policies to governments, and science can play a role in informing an effective response to climate change. Policy decisions, however, may require value judgements and so are not included in the scientific opinion.[26][27]

                      No scientific body of national or international standing maintains a formal opinion dissenting from any of these main points. The last national or international scientific body to drop dissent was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists,[28] which in 2007[29] updated its statement to its current non-committal position.[30] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions…..”

                      You can read the statements from virtually every scientific organization in the world on the topic at the link.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change

                    3. you need to read what scientistrs say about Climate Change, not what somebody on Fox News told you they say

                      I do. And given your track record of being wrong on nearly everything, you’re the last person I would ever take a recommendation from.

                      The key to understanding the fraud is a changing timeline for temperature, fires, Winters, growing seasons, and sea level, all cherry picked for maximum impact.

                      Central Bank Fearmongering Blue Ribbon Contenders

                      European Parliament: $24 Trillion in Damages
                      Bank of England: 9 Meter rise in seal level (29.53 feet).
                      To decide who wins the blue ribbon, first let’s do a simulation.

                      10 Meter Rise in Seal Level

                      Mercy!

                      The above Alarming Map shows what might be left of Florida when the sea level rises by 10 meters.

                      Caney said 9 meters but the average elevation of Florida is allegedly only 6 feet. The highest elevation is only 312 feet.

                      Mark Carney Wins Fearmongering Blue Ribbon

                      I give Mark Carney the Central Bank fearmongering Blue Ribbon because people can understand the concept of Florida being three feet underwater.

                      In contrast, no one understands $24 trillion. Besides, that estimates will soon be $250 trillion or higher due to Fearmongering Inflation.

                      Fearmongering Lesson

                      None of the above tops AOC who says World Will End in 12 Years: Here’s What to Do About It

                      Here’s a lesson for you climate fearmongers: Never put a time frame on your prediction that is shorter than your expected life or you will be ridiculed until you die.
                      https://www.thestreet.com/mishtalk/economics/fed-s-core-mission-now-includes-climate-change

                  2. Excellent question 😂

                    I will use that in the future.

                    Climate change has occurred for millions of years. Man made global warming began when democrats made it a campaign issue. Seems to me I remember my science teacher educating us on the ice age and when that receded, was that man made global warming?

                    1. Ron, scientists refer to anthropogenic climate change and anthropogenic global warming as a subset of all climate change and warming. Anthropogenic = has a human origin.

                      Climate change has occurred for millions of years, but anthropogenic climate change started when we began taking buried hydrocarbons in the form of coal, petroleum, natural gas, etc. (a.k.a “fossil fuels”) out from underground and burning them, thereby adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

                      Unrelated, I saw this and it’s related to our previous discussion:
                      “White House nixed Postal Service plan to send facemasks to every household in US [in April]: report”
                      https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/516893-white-house-nixed-plan-to-send-facemasks-to-every-household-in-us-report
                      FWIW, the Project: America Strong initiative mentioned in that article (a) started later and (b) ran out of masks.
                      This Administration is so often incompetent.

                    2. CTHD, Sorry, but I cant buy into the issue with face mask and not sending them. The people that are going to wear them are wearing them, the people who won’t are not. They would just put them on the shelf and let them rot.

                      And then we would have stories about how the Trump administration took face mask from people and medical workers who needed them and wanted them and gave them to people who had no intention of wearing them and they wasted 10M, 20M 30M masks, whatever the number.

                      I have been tracking our counties cases by zip code off the states covid website since this began. I am also tracking active cases which most states will not publish. We have had 6,694 cases on our county and have 523 active cases. In my zip code we have had 123 cases with 9 still active. (They do followup to determine active or over the virus) We have had 5,178 of those cases in seven zip codes. All in the minority area of the city. That is 77% of the cases. Unless I am at Red neck Emporium (walmart) where almost 50% of the whites are not wearing a mask or wearing them under their chins because they were caught and told to put one on, most all of the people I see at the grocery stores, auto part stores and building material stores not wearing a mask are the blacks and the Hispanics. More Hispanics ignore them than the blacks, I do see some older black men and women wearing them. And our community health department is giving out free mask to those sections of town since that is were all the cases have occurred for the most part.

                      And when one segment of the population is being hit so hard by unemployment, this is another reason to wear one. As long as the state has the numbers we have, the governor is not going to open up any more business, keeping these people unemployed.

                      So again, blame Trump, blame conservatives, but I blame stupidity and not giving a damn. With the number of cases of this crap in the minority section of town, most of the residents there either have had it, someone in their family has had it or they know someone who has had it. If they will not wear one now, they never will.

                      And that goes for college campuses also where cases are sky rocking, (over 1000 cases in 2 weeks at one of our state schools) because students won’t wear them and their parties.

                      I don’t know were you live, maybe a solid blue state where people follow government suggestions more than my state.

                    3. Again, Ron, Democrats are much more likely to wear them than Republicans because Trump turned it into a partisan issue. Neither of us knows whether it would have played out the same way if Trump and health professionals has joined together to ask everyone to wear them, if Trump and other Republicans had consistently modeled wearing them, and if it was a combined bipartisan political + nonpartisan medical professional effort to encourage people to wear them.

                      I take it that you have nothing to say about when anthropogenic climate change actually started and why.

                    4. “I take it that you have nothing to say about when anthropogenic climate change actually started and why.”

                      I have no idea. Need to research.

                    5. CTHD. “I take it that you have nothing to say about when anthropogenic climate change actually started and why.”

                      I briefly look at the information concerning these changes in global temperatures and find there are three main reasons for the increase, Increased use of fossil fuels, increased deforestation and some other minor changes. One interesting fact is the deforestation has lead to an increase of 3 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere that has not been removed by trees. That is enough to remove the CO2 from twice as many cars than there is in the United State today. It is also equal to the total emissions from Western Europe, including Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, all the Scandinavian countries, and Finland.

                      This number is also about 10%-15% of the total CO2 put into the air in total. Another 20% is due to livestock raised for food for the most part. That leaves about 65% from industrial use from electrical generation to industrial production.

                      So now that we have the numbers, please go back to my original comments that began this thread. I said I believed that global warming was happening, but that the earth has increased in temperature for millions of years.. But I also said that IF the United States wanted to enter into any agreement to reduce the output of CO2, it should not be some asinine agreement like Obama signed that put most of the decrease in the first 10 years on the United States and NONE on China until they began decreasing in 2030 and not be back to there previous levels until 10-20 years later. (I shared that info in a previous comment)

                      If the USA has to increase 28% and we contribute 15% of the global output. then China, at 28% of the world output should reduce by 52% during that same time frame.

                      What idiot would sign an agreement to cause increased product cost, industries moving out, increased fuel cost and unreliable sources of energy in the United States over 10 years and allow China to increase their output over that same period from a starting point almost twice as large as the USA. They get to continue increasing output from an unsatisfactory starting point and not be back to the unsatisfactory starting point for year to come. That is just lunacy and anyone that agrees with it is a lunatic also.

                      As for transportation, competition and technology is heading the way without government interference. Ford announced today they will have an F150 truck on the road in 2022 that has more horsepower, more torque and faster acceleration than any gas powered truck on the road. It will probably be $15,000-$20,000 more than the Gas engine, and if they thing can go more than 500 miles before a charge, most likely it will sell well. And as sales increase for EV’s, the prices will stabilize, somewhat like all technology.

                      And please dont tell me the government should give a tax break to the rich asses that can buy these expensive vehicles. The left wants to tax the rich on one hand, but then give them their money back when they buy Tesla’s and other expensive EV’s , through SALT deductions for owning huge expensive homes or high blue state taxes. That the middle class supporting luxury.

    2. Olly, this was predicted five years ago by scientists warning about the effects. What you’re seeing in real time is exactly what they said would happen.

      Right now there’s more potential hurricane producing tropical storms in the Atlantic than they have names for.

      Invasive species are migrating north to due to warmer weather than normal.

      There’s no longer a question of when it’s already here. Now it’s a question of how bad it will get.

  3. Why not? Early on, Trump called into Morning Joe every morning for 5 to 10 minutes of talk . . . Joe and Mika were delighted! . . . and Trump got a few hundred thousand $$$ – worth of free air time!

  4. No, Trump should not appear weekly on any news program, unless his opponent has equal air time.

    It’s too bad that Trump does not release fireside chats like Dennis Prager, communicating directly with the public in a manner outside of his usual Tweetstorm. I think he needs to connect more with people who don’t know anything about what he has accomplished, or what he’s really like. The Tweets are not often helpful.

    1. No, Trump should not appear weekly on any news program, unless his opponent has equal air time.

      Well that was the laydown answer. Get back to us when Biden has been denied equal airtime.

  5. Follow-Up To Previous Turley Columns:

    INSPECTOR GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE SENTENCING IN STONE CASE

    The Justice Department inspector general’s office has begun investigating the circumstances surrounding the sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, a longtime friend of President Donald Trump’s, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

    The investigation is focused on events in February, according to the two sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Stone’s prosecutors have said that is when they were told to seek a lighter sentence than they had previously considered.

    Attorney General William Barr ultimately intervened to override the prosecutors’ recommendation of seven to nine years and to ask for a lighter sentence. All four prosecutors quit the case as a result.

    One of the prosecutors, Aaron Zelinsky, testified before Congress in June that he was told by the office of the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., to recommend a lighter sentence than he otherwise would have because of Stone’s close personal relationship with Trump.

    Zelinsky said the U.S. attorney at the time, Timothy Shea, was “receiving heavy pressure from the highest levels of the Department of Justice to cut Stone a break, and that the U.S. Attorney’s sentencing instructions to us were based on political considerations.”

    The career prosecutors had recommended the longer sentence in accordance with a 2017 policy put forth by Trump’s first attorney general, Jeff Sessions, which requires prosecutors to seek the maximum sentence called for under the guidelines unless there are significant mitigating circumstances.

    A source familiar with the matter said comments Zelinsky made during his testimony triggered the inspector general’s office to open an investigation. It is not known how far the office has proceeded in its investigation, whom it has interviewed or whether it has found any evidence of wrongdoing.

    A federal jury convicted Stone of seven felonies after a trial in which prosecutors accused him of lying to Congress and intimidating a witness. They said he was trying to protect Trump by misleading a congressional investigation into ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

    The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility began an inquiry into what happened around the time of Stone’s sentencing, including whether there were leaks to the media, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

    But the recent involvement of the department’s inspector general carries additional weight, because the inspector general’s office is independent, and it is required to report to Congress and to post findings of misconduct publicly. If it is warranted, the inspector general can refer a case to a U.S. attorney’s office for prosecution.

    Edited From: “Justice Department Internal Watchdog Is Investigating Roger Stone’s Sentencing, Say Sources”

    NBC News, 9/14/20

  6. Take a little liver and put it on a hook. Throw it to the bottom of the pond and watch the sucker fish glob on. It’s easy to see if you recognize the pattern. He controlles the narative of his detractors.

  7. Jumping Joe should just a nightly showing of classic Three Stooges films on CNN each night when Trumpeter is on.
    Moe! Larry! Cheese!

  8. JT writes:

    “The Federal Communications Commission abolished The Fairness Doctrine in 1987.

    Even without the “Fairness Doctrine,” media organizations try to follow the equal-time rule….”

    No they don’t. WTF is wrong with you. Ever listen to talk radio in America?

    1. And dont forget about cable tv. All the democrats show on the alphabet news, Republicans on Fox and a few minor right wing programs. Who wants to answer hard important questions when friendly media can lob snowballs?

  9. “is not clear if Joe Biden would relish a regular segment on Fox since he has largely avoided such interviews.”

    😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Really, Biden taking and answering questions?

  10. If such a regular appearance would be illegal….that would probably make it even more attractive for our criminal President.

      1. Young…..LOL…good question…..and what about during the debates!?? Last night, someone showed a photo of Biden answering questions. There was a small, thin black wire near his ear.

        Hope your book writing is going well.

            1. Thanks, but more like the person the real Renaissance men kept trying to kill. The flying was during my days off tapping the blast furnace and it is odd trying to fit the two activities together.

              Early on in training I flew into town to buzz a restaurant where my girlfriend was having lunch. When I got back to the field my landing was jerky so I went around for another landing. The owner of the flight operation drove out and blocked the runway with his car. I hopped over him and began to land again and thought maybe he was trying to tell me something so I went up again to try to guess what it was. Maybe the wind changed. I looked at the windsock but couldn’t see it because I forgot to wear my glasses. I flew over and buzzed the windsock, two passes before I could see it. Yup, it’s the wind. Then I landed on the right runway. More like that.

              1. Young, sounds like poor piloting skills to me. Didn’t the airport have an ATIS to listen to? Needing glasses to see the windsock? Really?

                I’m a pilot myself and I find it hard to believe that you didn’t already figure out which runway was in use at the time you decided to land. The only things I can think of is there was no traffic at all and the airport was a small uncontrolled airport where you broadcast your intentions in the local frequency.

                If the owner of the flight operation had to drive on the runway it only means he either had no radio communication with you or you were not on the right frequency. If that had to happen you weren’t being very thorough in your flight planning. Smh.

                1. You’re a pilot? wow. your stock’s gone up svelaz. I was selling you short because of all your um comments. I guess I’ll have to take a closer look, valued partner in dialogue!

                2. Svelaz– It was more than 50 years ago and I had only a few hours. You are correct in thinking that it was a relatively small field and the plane, a tail dragger similar to a Cub, had no radio. The wind changed direction while I was flying and I came in to land on the same runway from which I departed. As I said I was lucky, not smart. I have since gotten a commercial license with instrument rating.

                  1. Young, LoL! That makes much more sense. I’ve been a private pilot with multi engine rating and ifr. Been flying since 1992. Right out of high school.

                    Can’t say I get to fly tail draggers that much. Did get a chance at flyin a carbon cub two years ago. THAT is a nice way to fly.

                    Currently flying a 337 skymaster.

                    1. Svelaz– I envy your continued flying. I haven’t now for some years and my medical isn’t current.

                      You are right about tail draggers being a nice way to fly. My two primary trainers were an Aeronca Champ and a Piper Cub. Neither had radios or anything but a compass and looking out the window for navigation. Both are basically powered kites but truly give you the feel of flying and, when young and stupid, tempt you to do things you shouldn’t.

                      My first solo spin was in the Cub. My friend did her first solo spin in the same plane and back on the ground we learned we both thought the same thing before initiating it: “I wonder if I am going to die today?” Then carburetor heat, throttle back, nose up and when you feel the first hint of a stall full left rudder, stick back to the seat and over you go. Next thing you are in a spin and heading down. Wouldn’t try it in a Skymaster though.

                      Glad to hear from you.

  11. “FoxNews is not going to deny Biden the opportunity to be interviewed on any of their programs.”

    Olly, do you consider what happens on Fox & Friends interviews? Trump talks as long as he wants and they nod their heads no matter how untruthful or ridiculous. When Trump does submit to an actual interview like from Chris Wallace or Bob Woodward, the result is devastating.

    1. Trump talks as long as he wants and they nod their heads no matter how untruthful or ridiculous.

      FoxNews is not unique in regard to how interviews are conducted with candidates.

        1. Fox & Friends is not the show I look for hard-hitting interviews. I believe their format is more casual, akin to the 3 major networks in that time slot.

            1. Here’s a question for you Enigma.

              ABC’s George Stephanopoulos is hosting a townhall in Philadelphia with President Trump tonight. Tonights townhall comes after Trump’s California trip, two Nevada rallies, today’s Israel/UAE/Bahrain peace treaty ceremony earlier at the White House (that much of the MSM is ignoring). And now Trump is showing up to an ABC voter q & a in Philly.

              Here is the blurb about the townhall:

              Sep 14th, 2020

              ‘Seven weeks before Election Day, ABC News will host a town hall with President Donald Trump and uncommitted voters. ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos will anchor the event, which will provide uncommitted voters a chance to ask the President their important questions before voting. The town hall will take place at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, PA and will be held in accordance with state and local government regulations, as well as guidelines set forward by health officials. The ’20/20′ special event airs on Tuesday, September 15, from 9:00- 10:30 p.m. ET| 8:00- 9:30 p.m. CT on ABC. Senior Executive Producer Marc Burstein is the executive producer.

              ABC News offered to host a similar town hall with Democratic presidential nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden. ABC News and the campaign were not able to find a mutually agreeable date.’

              DId you catch that? Joe Biden unable to find the time. What the hell is that about? Curious to hear your thoughts about it.

        1. Enigma. So you are saying it is ok for blacks to vote their group interests? I think it is.

          As a white person, I claim the same right. I will vote my group interests.

          But do you think it’s ok for me to vote my white group interests? Do you allow white folks respect for voting their interests?

          Or is it only ok for blacks to vote their interests?

            1. impressive that you admit the legitimacy of voters considering their own interests.
              I don’t agree with your second comment, personally, I think trump is good for the interests of native born black workers too.
              but I suppose my opinion of that is about as compelling as your opinion about women, since I am not black and you are not a woman
              and yet isnt it fantastic that we are free to tell other groups where their interests lie in our system of free speech and democracy!

              Enigma, you made a graceful reply. with more people like you America would have greater legitimacy. bravo enigma, have a nice evening

    2. Sir. There many counter points first and foremost has President Trump helped the Black population at all? Many have indicated he has, to name just two are Bod Woodson of the Woodson Institute and Candis Owens who just released a book. I do not believe President Trump has any other regard for all Americans than success in their individual endeavors or lives.

      1. When he found out that black, brown, and the elderly were most likely to die from COVID-19 he went directly into his push to open up the country. Coincidence or not giving a damn about any of the above?

        1. That sounds like a talking point to me, without reason. What are you saying, that the President is a Racist? Are you that si`ne qua non against the President that you think he would purposely go against black, brown or elderly? REALLY. Census number as of today: Pop= 328,239,523 , Census breakout by Population % W=76.3%, Hispanic 18.5%, B 13.4%, CDC by percentage of cases W=41.7; H=29.9; B= 18.7, Deaths W=51.5%; H 16.6% B=21.7%. I could not find any data as to reasons for disproportion in numbers except what has been previously posted about underlying conditions. The CDC does not track economic data about cases or deaths which might contribute to the ultimate outcome, or insurance other factors. But to place blame unto President Trump and others within the Government? “COME ON MAN”.

          1. In addition to underlying conditions (which are partially due to a disparity in health care), minorities make up a disproportionate percentage of essential workers so when he dictates that the economy stay open, it isn’t the patrons of his country clubs being exposed. The case can be and has been made that Trump doesn’t really care about anyone. According to witnesses, his slow response to COVID-19 was partially due to his misguided belief that only Democratic-controlled states were seriously affected. As to whether he’s a racist, go back to his full-page ad in the NYT caling for the death of the Central Park Five (who were innocent by the way) and his multiple acts of discriminating against minority renters in his properties (marking applications “C” for colored soi they could be later rejected). The list goes on but you’ll either accept the premise or reject it, up to you.

            1. Sorry but trying a new defence for your hatred of President Trump doesn’t fly. Now your including the Central Park Five what a true shame, no problem will ever be solved with narrow minds.

              1. Young questioned whether I was calling Trump racist. I wasn’t in this instance but he has a long history, including reports from his family members if you don’t wish to take my word. What’s the non-racist explanation for “C” for colored?

                1. Joe Biden has said and DONE far more “racist” things that are well documented over his many decades in public life, far more than anything than Trump or even Trump’s “family” has ever said or done. Yet you overlook ALL of that racist condescension from Joe Biden’s own mouth because you think the Democrats have your best interests so you keep on voting for them? What a dupe you are. The Democrats count on the stupidity of the American people to keep voting for them. Good job proving them right.

                  1. Joe Biden would never have conceived of permanently separating brown children from their families. He wouldn’t refer to all of Africa as shithole countries and toss paper towels to Puerto Ricans after a massive hurricane. He wouldn’t’ be working overtime to keep minorities.
                    Having said that, I have no illusions as to who and what Biden is, he might have been my fifth choice among the Democratic candidates. Yet there is no comparison to Trump who is willing to sacrifice his own followers by holding indoor rallies with few masks.

                    1. The comment about shithole countries was said in a private meeting not meant for public to hear. It is unfortunate that Democrats stoop so low as to leak comments taken completely out of context from a private conversation hashing out issues. Some countries around the world are shithole countries, literally, you squat over a hole. Those leaks were Democrat hit jobs. If you ever got wind of some of the things said by other politicians, including Joe Biden, during private meetings you would hear far worse than comments Trump has made. With Trump what you see is what you get. He doesn’t pretend to be someone he’s not like so many politicians do.

                      Obama’s policies did separate children at the border. Obama built the cages, it was his policy. Joe Biden’s crime bill?? Tossing paper towels is a playful moment that was insignificant. It’s not like he did ‘the wave’ while enjoying a baseball game with a brutal dictator in Cuba while dozens were massacred in a Brussels terror attack, or took 60 seconds to get off the golf course from yet another of his vacations to speak about the horrifying beheading of an American by ISIS before turning right around resuming his golf game. Tossing paper towels? To use Joe Biden’s words, Come on, maaaan! Trump’s rally-goers are handed masks and sanitizer when they enter and it is up to them whether they choose to wear a mask or not. At least Trump is out engaging with voters who want to be there and he is constantly answering questions from the press. Can’t say the same about Hiden Biden.

                    2. Trump is literally killing and making sick his own supporters, and you justify it. What’s the latest count on Secret Service agents who got COVID-19 at Trump rallies? How’s Herman Cain doing?

                    3. Lest I forget. You seem to be saying Trump’s comments about shithole countries weren’t racist because the public wasn’t supposed to be aware he made them. Mary Trump reveals a lot of other choice words he uses when just among family and friends. There are reportedly Apprentice tapes that Mark Burnett won’t release documenting the same thing. Those are allegations though, I’ll just stick with “C” for colored.

                    4. Trump held a rally. Herman Cain chose to attend knowing his high risk medical conditions. We don’t know if that was where and how Cain contracted the covid. Could have been on a plane, in a store, no one knows. Perhaps Herman Cain might have contracted covid if he had attended one of the many George Floyd funerals? Or perhaps one of the many BLM marches with hundreds or even thousands together in the streets? Or perhaps one of the many large funerals and services for Lewis? Wearing a mask does not protect you from getting the virus.

                    5. Why don’t you ask Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Hershell Walker, Burgess Owens, Kanye, and many others who have known and worked with Trump over the decades if they think Trump is a racist. Then ask them if they think Biden is a racist….Joe Biden who was mentored by a grand wizard from the KKK and an admirer of segregationists. Biden’s troubling history of bad policies, cringeworthy comments and actions are far more difficult to overlook than anything Trump has said or done.

                    6. “who is willing to sacrifice his own followers by holding indoor rallies with few masks.”

                      As opposed to Biden and Harris supporting Defund the Police while the BLM/Antifa rioting is occurring around the country?!

                      But keep up the BS about masks at Trump rallies, enigma. That’s a definite loser move.

                    7. Rhodes, you lying j..koff.., Bden is not calling for defunding the police and in his platform – remember them? You don’t need one when you’re in a personality cult – calls for more federal money for COPS programs, a successful part of the mid 90s crime bill he was instrumental in passing.

                2. National Association for the Advancement of COLORED People. Not racist at all.

                  Saying ‘people of color’ sounds kind of stupid, don’t you think?

              1. Trump doesn’t GAF about you Kurtz, white or not.

                “(CNN)….. “I’m on a stage and it’s very far away,” Trump told the Las Vegas Review Journal when asked whether he was nervous about getting Covid-19 from the indoor rally. “And so I’m not at all concerned.” He went on to add: “I’m more concerned about how close you are, to be honest.”…”

                1. Biden doesn’t GAF about you By the Book. They are now counting on their voters to vote for their ticket because Kammy wears cool shoes. Or as one put it, “rocking the Timba’s’ as she hopped off her private jet to go talk about climate change. How sad that Biden and the Dems think their voters are that stupid.

                  But their voters ARE that stupid….that’s how Biden can run a presidential campaign that avoids tough press questions, avoids the voter’s questions at townhalls. Joe Biden avoids avoids avoids…..hides hides hides….lies lies lies….intentionally lies in his ads and outright deceives voters and gets away with it because of a complicit biased press corps? Unbelievable. His running mate doesn’t answer tough questions either, but she wears cool shoes, so…vote for her! She called it the “Harris administration” in a telling slip of the tongue. What a ticket. What an embarrassment.

                  Here’s a hint Joe Biden: voters are NOT as stupid as you count on.

                2. Let’s show the voters about how dishonest and deceptive Joe Biden and his campaign is….they are avoiding scrutiny, avoiding engaging with press, avoiding engaging with voters, lying to voters, and intentionally deceiving the voters. That is not how you go about EARNING votes for a presidential election. But this garbage is what the Democrats and Joe Biden and their corrupt biased media want you to believe and vote FOR? It’s unbelievably disgusting the campaign Joe Biden is running. Disgraceful. Disqualifying.

  12. The exchange however raises a legal question of whether such a regular show with the President would run afoul of federal laws requiring equal time for political candidates.

    FoxNews is not going to deny Biden the opportunity to be interviewed on any of their programs.

    Is there any law requiring a neutral, mental and physical health evaluation of a candidate for elected office? Isn’t there a provision under the Elder Abuse laws that require legal intervention if there is concern an individual is a victim of undue influence?

    1. Olly, are you referring to Trump’s mental state? Yesterday, while touring fire sites in California, Trump declared he doesn’t think Science really knows what’s happening with Climate Change. This statement was immediately hailed as being another pandemic-like denial.

  13. The only way we’re going to lose this election is if the election is rigged. Remember that. It’s the only way we’re going to lose this election, so we have to be very careful.

    I cannot lose. If I do lose, the election was stolen. Anyone protesting my effort to hold onto power is an insurrectionist. And sometimes, “there has to be retribution.”

    Now we sent in the U.S. marshals for the killer, the man that killed the young man in the street. Two and a half days went by, and I put out “when are you going to go get him.” And the U.S. marshals went in to get him. There was a shootout. This guy was a violent criminal, and the U.S. marshalls killed him. And I’ll tell you something — that’s the way it has to be. There has to be retribution.

    “I am going to start by saying that the Democrats are trying to rig this election because it’s the only way they are going to win.”

    “Be poll watchers when you go there. Watch all the thieving and stealing and robbing they do.” He added that after they vote, his supporters should “make sure it counts” because the “only way” Democrats can win is by “doing very bad things.”

    Donald Trump

    Yeah, let’s get this buffoon on the air.

    On Sunday, Michael Caputo, the assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, warned of left-wing insurrectionists and “sedition” within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during a video he hosted live on his Facebook page. After predicting victory for President Trump in the upcoming election, Caputo warned that Joe Biden wouldn’t concede. “And when Donald Trump refuses to stand down at the inauguration, the shooting will begin,” he said. “The drills that you’ve seen are nothing.”

  14. Maybe the President is trying to draw Joey out to a program that will toss some hardballs? One thing for sure the President knows how to get into people’s head.

    1. Indeed, and getting out is a big motivator in this election. Tell the truth. Wouldn’t you love a week to go by where you weren’t forced to think about the President?

      1. Me, I have loved having a leader who was eye to eye with me as much as Trump has been.

        Book, will you join me in celebrating the two recent peace accords between Israel and Arab nations, an achievement for world peace, facilitated by Trumpian diplomacy?

        Will you also join me in wishing well the Afghan peace talks which Secretary Pompeo refers to in this announcement?

        https://twitter.com/SecPompeo/status/1304766751251595264

        Blessed are the peacemakers!

Leave a Reply