Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, January 28, 2018

Callum Borchers, Washington Post: In the hours after the New York Times reported on Thursday night that President Trump tried to fire special counsel Robert S. Mueller III last June, journalists at other news outlets scrambled to confirm the story independently. By 11 p.m., Fox News's chief national correspondent Ed Henry had done so. "We're breaking tonight a source close to the White House telling Fox the New York Times is accurate," Henry said at the top of the network's late newscast. "The president did tell top officials last summer he wanted to fire Robert S. Mueller III. But a White House counsel, Donald McGahn, and other aides convinced the president not to do it." Henry might as well have gone to bed early, because on Friday morning Fox & Friends disregarded his reporting in a staggering display of pro-Trump sycophancy.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"staggering display of pro-Trump sycophancy" = Trump Propaganda

#1 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2018-01-28 09:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

i should've knwn to watch that night. i bet it was cac filled.

#2 | Posted by ichiro at 2018-01-29 12:16 AM | Reply

Yeah, this has been the story with Russiapublicans for decades now...

Drumpf OWNS them now!

#3 | Posted by chuffy at 2018-01-29 03:35 AM | Reply

#3 No he OWNS you! You just cant get enough of Trump or Fox, they in your head 24/7.

#4 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-29 11:05 AM | Reply

"... they in your head 24/7." - #4 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-29 11:05 AM

I suspect that OJ Simpson is in the heads of the family of Ron Goldman, perhaps even 24/7.

Doesn't make it a good thing.

#5 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-29 11:20 AM | Reply

You just cant get enough of Trump or Fox, they in your head 24/7.

#4 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018

I wonder who's in Trump's head 24/7? Maybe the name begins with "M"?

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-29 11:35 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

#3 No he OWNS you! You just cant get enough of Trump or Fox, they in your head 24/7.

#4 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Well, he is the president currently destroying the country and Fox is helping him do it.

So yeah, he should be in our heads 24/7 until we impeach him.

But I don't think that means he owns us. I think he means he is screwing us.

If you removed your head from his ass, you'd understand.

#7 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-29 11:55 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

#3 No he OWNS you! You just cant get enough of Trump or Fox, they in your head 24/7.
#4 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-29 11:05 AM | Reply

psst, apparently it is CLINTON VOTERS that are in YOUR head 24/7, rent-free, furnished; lots of hot air provided by you at no extra charge.

#8 | Posted by e1g1 at 2018-01-29 12:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sorry, I'm not the one obsessed with Fox news. I know how to operate a remote control. Funny how you Fox haters say you just can't bring yourself to watch it yet you know so much about it.

#9 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-29 12:06 PM | Reply

Sorry, I'm not the one obsessed with Fox news. I know how to operate a remote control. Funny how you Fox haters say you just can't bring yourself to watch it yet you know so much about it.

#9 | POSTED BY FISHPAW AT 2018-01-29 12:06 PM | FLAG:

It's not about whether you can change the channel. It's about whether Fox is a propaganda machine for an ugly, dangerous political movement in America.

#10 | Posted by cbob at 2018-01-29 12:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

#9 still haven't heard of the internet, have you?

Which is odd considering you're using it to grace us with your presence.

#11 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-29 12:42 PM | Reply

Funny how you Fox haters say you just can't bring yourself to watch it yet you know so much about it.

#9 | Posted by fishpaw

That is because we really enjoy late night comedy.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-01-29 12:59 PM | Reply

"Fox News Hits Peak Trump Sycophancy"

Again?

At some point, we have to stop using the term "peak".

#13 | Posted by TheTom at 2018-01-29 02:38 PM | Reply

we've reached Peak Trump? ...alarm!
youtu.be

#14 | Posted by ichiro at 2018-01-29 04:41 PM | Reply

#9 still haven't heard of the internet, have you?
Which is odd considering you're using it to grace us with your presence.

#11 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2018-01-29 12:42 PM | FLAG:

And like the television I don't have to go to their website. Do you? What is forcing you?

#15 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-30 10:02 AM | Reply

It's not about whether you can change the channel. It's about whether Fox is a propaganda machine for an ugly, dangerous political movement in America.

#10 | POSTED BY CBOB AT 2018-01-29 12:20 PM | FLAG: | NEWSWORTHY 1

And people can say the same about MSNBC. All you need to do is go back and forth at 9PM between MSNBC and Fox News and you will get 2 totally opposite takes on the same story. If you can't do a little research to decide which one is more credible than you have problem.

#16 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-30 10:06 AM | Reply

"If you can't do a little research to decide which one is more credible than you have problem."

And if you've done the research, and still choose to believe Fox News, you are the problem.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-30 10:14 AM | Reply

#17 Your problem is no matter what the research shows you still will only believe one side which is the real problem.

#18 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-30 10:25 AM | Reply

"And people can say the same about MSNBC."

Only Foxbots would though.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-30 10:37 AM | Reply

"Your problem is no matter what the research shows you still will only believe one side which is the real problem."

I follow the math. When I'm told it's "middle class tax cuts", and the equation clearly shows 80% goes to the richest, they're lying.

Do you believe they're lying, or not? Which "side" of that "problem" do YOU believe?

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-30 10:57 AM | Reply

When one side says the tax cut only benefits the rich and the other side says it benefits the middle glass as well after doing the research I would agree with the later. But since the later may show Trump did something positive for the middle class you would skip that research because there is no way in hell you would give him credit for anything. In other words he could sign legislation for open borders, tax the rich at 80%, tear down any existing walls and your response was that he was a loser and a liar because that's not what he campaigned on.

#21 | Posted by fishpaw at 2018-01-30 11:46 AM | Reply

"and the other side says it benefits the middle glass as well"

You've moved the goalposts to "any benefit at all". If you're happy with 20% of the newly-borrowed money, I guess that's okay. But calling it a "middle-class tax cut" is like saying the main ingredient in a Caesar salad is anchovy.

"after doing the research I would agree with the later."

Well sure, if ANY benefit is the barometer. But the deal is lousy: $100/month to borrow $24,000 for a family of four. Oh, wait, only 53% pay income tax? Make that $45,000 more of debt. Would you make that deal for your family?

Again, how is it a "middle class tax cut", when only 20% of the newly-borrowed money will go to the middle class?

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-30 11:58 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort