Rachel Maddow's credibility and ratings at a low ebb following Mueller findings, critics say

  
Via:  vic-eldred  •  3 weeks ago  •  61 comments

Rachel Maddow's credibility and ratings at a low ebb following Mueller findings, critics say
“You don’t get tainted just by appearing [‘The Rachel Maddow Show’], but it’s better to err on the side of trying to maintain objectivity and caution.”

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


MSNBC's "The Rachel Maddow Show" has been hit with a serious one-two punch.

One day after finishing May with its worst ratings since Donald Trump took office, the lefty pundit's eponymous program faced a Vanity Fair bombshell report that the New York Times didn’t want its reporters appearing on Maddow's show, not because her ratings were down, but because she was too far left, even for them.

The New York Times had reportedly blocked its reporters from appearing on “Maddow” because the program is too partisan, with one insider from the Grey Lady's newsroom agreeing, telling Fox News “it rubs off” on any journalist who is too closely aligned to the far left.

“I do think Maddow, and others on MSNBC, have very strong opinions that affect their ability to tell stories in an accurate way sometimes,” the source said. “You don’t get tainted just by appearing [on the show], but it’s better to err on the side of trying to maintain objectivity and caution.”

The insider said colleagues at the paper are divided as to whether or not appearing on Maddow’s show would actually damage their reputations. Many of the Times’ top reporters are aware and “rightly sensitive” about the paper’s reputation of leaning left, the source said, and appearing on “Maddow” makes it hard to convince people otherwise.

A handful of journalists work for the both the Times and MSNBC, including Peter Baker, Nick Confessore and Jeremy Peters. All three of those reporters declined to comment when individually asked about Maddow. The Times did not immediately respond to a request for comment, either.

The paper did tell Vanity Fair that it was simply reinforcing an existing policy to be consistent with the paper’s standards. But Peters appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Friday, the morning after the news of a Times reporter being kept off Maddow broke. “Morning Joe” hosts Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough have a public feud with Trump, but haven’t pushed the Russia collusion theory as aggressively as Maddow.

Maddow has dedicated much of her programming since Trump took office to hyperventilating over whether or not Trump colluded with Russia. Since Attorney General Bill Barr's letter summarizing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report was released on March 24 indicating that a Trump campaign-Russia conspiracy didn’t exist, contradicting Maddow’s nightly narrative, her ratings have suffered.

Maddow lost nearly 500,000 viewers for her first episode following the release of Barr’s letter. Then she plummeted 13 percent in April compared to the same month in 2018, according to TVNewser, falling behind “Tucker Carlson Tonight” in the process. In May she averaged 2.6 million – her worst month since Trump took office – and a far cry from the 3.1 million viewers she averaged during the first quarter of 2019.

Rachel-Maddow1.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
A New York Times insider thinks it’s wise to err on the side of trying to maintain objectivity and caution and avoid Rachel Maddow. (Getty Images)

Accuracy in Media national editor Carrie Sheffield feels that Maddow has long “ignored basic journalistic, fact-checking practices and the presumption of innocence in our legal system by relentlessly pushing unproven conspiracy theories about supposed Russian collusion” and her “lapse in journalistic balance” is part of why Americans have declining trust in the national media and why some reporters appear to be distancing themselves from her show.

“This was a long time coming, and we hope MSNBC will allow for greater balance moving forward. We hope that Maddow's programming will include substantive fact-checking, balanced debate and dialogue, rather than an echo-chamber monologue that further divides Left and Right," Sheffield told Fox News. "Americans deserve better.”

Cornell Law School professor and conservative blogger William A. Jacobson told Fox News that “Maddow built her viewership on Russia collusion conspiracy theories dressed up as analysis,” and said the Mueller Report “destroyed” her credibility.

“MSNBC is standing by her because she still has a large viewership emotionally invested bringing down Trump,” Jacobson said. “That some reporters refuse to go on her show is important, but is unlikely to change her behavior. Maddow long ago carved out her faux-intellectual paranoid niche, and she's stuck in it."

DePauw University professor and media critic Jeffrey McCall agreed that Maddow is still enormously popular with her anti-Trump base.

“Her opinionated approach, however, should make hard news reporters and their editors take pause before being associated with her agenda-driven show,” McCall said. “Such regular journalists risk being associated with the political leanings of Maddow, which could be harmful to their credibility.”

"The Rachel Maddow Show” is currently the No. 3 program in cable news, and MSNBC is standing by its cash cow.
“For over a decade, ‘The Rachel Maddow Show’ has welcomed the best journalists from across the country and celebrated the hard work they do, day-in and day-out. This includes countless New York Times reporters and editors. That commitment to journalism is part of the DNA of the show,” an MSNBC spokesperson told Fox News when asked about the Vanity Fair report.

Maddow has emerged as a leader of the #Resistance, but her missteps on Mueller aren't the only time she has raised eyebrows. Maddow failed to ask Hillary Clinton whether or not she thought the Obama administration could have done a better job handling Russian interference, was called out by a media watchdog group for deceiving viewers when she ignored reports seemingly clearing Donald Trump Jr. of suspicions related to the much-hyped Trump Tower meeting, and famously disappointed viewers when a heavily promoted “scoop” about Trump’s taxes ended up being much ado about nothing.

Back in 2017, Maddow promoted a theory tying Trump to a tragic ambush attack that killed four American soldiers in Niger that was so outlandish that even the dependably liberal HuffPost criticized it as "so flimsy that it could be debunked by a quick glance at a map."

“Let’s be honest, Maddie’s brand has never been tethered to the truth or reality. She has been the National Enquirer of political coverage for years now,” conservative strategist Chris Barron said.


By Brian Flood


Article is Locked

Find text within the comments Find 
 
Vic Eldred
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

“Her opinionated approach, however, should make hard news reporters and their editors take pause before being associated with her agenda-driven show... regular journalists risk being associated with the political leanings of Maddow, which could be harmful to their credibility.”.....Jeffrey McCall


Once the false Trump-collusion narrative fell apart this was bound to happen. They lied to America for 3 years!

 
 
 
Cerenkov
1.1  Cerenkov  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

Will she cry again? I'd watch that.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Cerenkov @1.1    3 weeks ago

One can only imagine what they'll be like if/when Trump wins a second term and even better the Republicans win back the House & win a super majority in the Senate!

jrSmiley_24_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Dulay
2  Dulay    3 weeks ago

So your seed is Fox dissing MSNBC and whining about political bias. 

It drips with hypocrisy. 

Your seed links TVNewser and here is what they ACTUALLY say:

https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/q1-2019-ratings-rachel-maddow-lifts-msnbc-to-its-most-watched-quarter-ever/398379/

MSNBC was, once again, one of the most popular networks on cable television this quarter. It was No. 2 to be exact, only behind Fox News.
The network’s programming continues to deliver huge total audiences, and is by Rachel Maddow, who finished Q1 2019 as the No. 1 host on cable news among adults 25-54, the demographic which means the most to news advertisers.

Fox is on standard cable and MSNBC is on premium, you get what you pay for...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago
So your seed is Fox dissing MSNBC and whining about political bias. 

I thought it was pretty fair:

“MSNBC is standing by her because she still has a large viewership emotionally invested bringing down Trump,” Jacobson said. “That some reporters refuse to go on her show is important, but is unlikely to change her behavior. Maddow long ago carved out her faux-intellectual paranoid niche, and she's stuck in it."

That's the bottom line.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.1.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.1    3 weeks ago
I thought it was pretty fair:

You would. 

BTFW, why do you think that the opinion of securities attorney is relevant? Fox cites a partisan hack in an article whining about partisanship. 

That's the bottom line.

So your bottom line is a bias opinion from a securities attorney yet you posted your seed in News and Politics. 

BTW, the headline doesn't support your 'bottom line' and the article doesn't support the claim in that headline or your 'bottom line'. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.2  KDMichigan  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago
Fox is on standard cable and MSNBC is on premium, you get what you pay for

Yeah because every cable carrier is the same....

Seems to me you live in a area where the cable company likes to take advantage of those addicted to fake news.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.1  Dulay  replied to  KDMichigan @2.2    3 weeks ago
Yeah because every cable carrier is the same....

Where did I say that? 

Seems to me you live in a area where the cable company likes to take advantage of those addicted to fake news.

Seems to me that you don't recognize that in many rural areas, cable companies have monopolies. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.2.2  KDMichigan  replied to  Dulay @2.2.1    3 weeks ago
in many rural areas, cable companies have monopolies. 

And that has to do with what?

Where did I say that?

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

original

 
 
 
Dulay
2.2.3  Dulay  replied to  KDMichigan @2.2.2    3 weeks ago
And that has to do with what?

It has to do with the FACT that monopolies are designed to take advantage. 

I'm not surprised that you view a simple question as spin...

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.2.4  KDMichigan  replied to  Dulay @2.2.3    3 weeks ago
I'm not surprised that you view a simple question as spin...

Where was the question? 

You went from stating that you had to have premium cable to get MSNBC to, for WTF knows why, talking about rural areas and cable monopolies.

I can't think of anyplace I've lived that you had to get a cable upgrade to get MSNBC. FOX,CNN and MSNBC always come with standard cable. 

So what do you call going from stating;

Fox is on standard cable and MSNBC is on premium, you get what you pay for

To spinning all the way to; 

Seems to me that you don't recognize that in many rural areas, cable companies have monopolies.

I laid it out for you so you can stay focused. 

Maybe you should have stated that where you live MSNBC is a premium service which I highly doubt.

 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
2.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago
Fox is on standard cable and MSNBC is on premium, you get what you pay for...

So you end up paying more for MSNBC's bias and lies?  jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Greg Jones @2.3    3 weeks ago

The higher paid the consultant is, the smarter they automatically are.

C'mon Greg ..... you should know that.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.3.2  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.1    3 weeks ago

Since Hannity is the highest paid, your posit is ridiculous. 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.3.3  Dulay  replied to  Greg Jones @2.3    3 weeks ago
So you end up paying more for MSNBC's bias and lies? 

As opposed to getting FOX bias and lies for less? 

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.3.4  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @2.3.2    3 weeks ago

And your sarcasm detector needs some work ....

 
 
 
Dulay
2.3.5  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.4    3 weeks ago

So are you saying I should flag his comment for mocking? 

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.3.6  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @2.3.5    3 weeks ago

No, i'm saying your sarcasm detector needs some fine tuning. 

 
 
 
Dulay
2.3.7  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @2.3.6    3 weeks ago

So tune it more toward contempt than mockery, got ya. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
2.3.8  Sparty On  replied to  Dulay @2.3.7    3 weeks ago

.... lighten up Francis ..... get it?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago

D8LeQJFX4AI8SZx?format=png&name=small

 
 
 
Dulay
2.4.1  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4    3 weeks ago

What does ONE day in MAY have to do with the FIRST QUARTER ratings Vic? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.4.1    3 weeks ago
What does ONE day in MAY have to do with the FIRST QUARTER ratings Vic? 

One day?  It's part of a trend since Mueller delivered his report, wouldn't you say?

TV Newser (free registration required) reveals the continuing loss of a substantial portion of the viewership for both cable news networks in the third week of May:

CNN experienced its lowest-rated week since November 2015 in the 25-54 demo. Additionally, MSNBC marked its lowest-rated prime time week of the year in the demo. Rachel Maddow delivered her lowest-rated week of the year in both total viewers and the 25-54 demo.

 

"Both CNN and MSNBC are subsidiaries of large publicly-held corporations, AT&T and Comcast, respectively. It is time for the grown-ups at the corporate level to recognize that each of their subsidiaries have adopted a losing business strategy of focusing on left-wing propaganda, a declining market niche. Shareholders need to demand that existing management be replaced at both cable news operations. They have squandered their credibility and need to provide former viewers with visible evidence that they have learned their lessons.

The move of CNN’s New York operations from Columbus Circle to Hudson Yards has already been used as an excuse to lay off more than a hundred staffers, a typical move of companies in decline. But that cost-saving measure will not persuade former viewers to return, much less add new viewers. Firing Jeff Zucker, head of CNN who was promoted by AT&T and given broader responsibilities, would be a visible sign that corporate understands the need to change and to win back lost viewers."

"Hat tip: Roger Luchs"


https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/continuing_plunge_of_cnn_msnbc_ratings_reveals_that_fake_news_is_a_bad_business_strategy_.html

 
 
 
Dulay
2.4.4  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.3    3 weeks ago
free registration required

No thanks. 

Don't click or read the 'thinker'. 

BTW, the comment I replied to wasn't about last month. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.4.4    3 weeks ago
Don't click or read the 'thinker'. 

No?

BTW, the comment I replied to wasn't about last month. 

You were talking about May 31st, which was last month. I do love to hear everything contested, including the sun rising, so please tell us how May 31st is an outlier of May?


 
 
 
Dulay
2.4.6  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.5    3 weeks ago
You were talking about May 31st, which was last month.

Where in this thread did I say ANYTHING about May 31st Vic? 

I do love to hear everything contested, including the sun rising, so please tell us how May 31st is an outlier of May?

When you post bullshit about my comments, expect to be contested. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.7  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.4.6    3 weeks ago
Where in this thread did I say ANYTHING about May 31st Vic? 

I thought you would at least concede that you made the statement. Try post# 2.4,1:

"What does ONE day in MAY have to do with the FIRST QUARTER ratings Vic?"

When you post bullshit about my comments, expect to be contested. 

I don't deal in bullshit, I don't work for CNN.

I'll give you the last word so I can put this to rest.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.4.8  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.7    3 weeks ago
I thought you would at least concede that you made the statement. Try post# 2.4,1:

As opposed to bailing and ignoring the question completely and pretending it was never asked, as is the practice of all too many here? 

"What does ONE day in MAY have to do with the FIRST QUARTER ratings Vic?"

So in your world, asking you a question about your deflection is 'talking about May 31st'. Got ya Vic. 

I'll give you the last word so I can put this to rest.

Word.

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
2.4.9  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  Dulay @2.4.8    3 weeks ago

Rachel Maddow is battling Alex Jones for the Title. I think she will win without the help but you can never be too sure.

Great Job.

She's having a fake news super fan contest.

Who knows, with so few viewers its possible.

Anyone could win.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.4.10  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @2.4.9    3 weeks ago
Rachel Maddow is battling Alex Jones for the Title. I think she will win without the help but you can never be too sure.

Great Job.

She's having a fake news super fan contest.

Who knows, with so few viewers its possible.

Anyone could win.

I see you're back making inane comments rather than answering questions put to you hours ago.

Your comment is a perfect example of practice I spoke of in mine.

Well done. 

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
2.5  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Dulay @2    3 weeks ago
Fox is on standard cable and MSNBC is on premium

I get MSNBC in my standard cable package.

 
 
 
Dulay
2.5.1  Dulay  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @2.5    3 weeks ago
I get MSNBC in my standard cable package.

Congratulations. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

I think it is fair to say that the seeded article is a hit piece by Maddow's tv competition , Fox News. 

I don't often watch Rachel Maddow. It's not that I dont think she's any good, but there are other shows I would rather watch if I'm watching tv at that hour.  Chris Cuomo is more entertaining. 

 
 
 
MUVA
3.1  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

Fredo Cuomo is a joke Rachel Manface is unwatchable what a pair.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  MUVA @3.1    3 weeks ago
Fredo Cuomo is a joke Rachel Manface is unwatchable what a pair.

Hey, you talk just like Trump. You must be so proud. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago
I think it is fair to say that the seeded article is a hit piece by Maddow's tv competition , Fox News. 

Not really. It gives credit where credit is due

 
 
 
JBB
3.2.1  JBB  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2    3 weeks ago

Considering this is a hit piece on Maddow from Fox News... YES REALLY!

 
 
 
Sparty On
3.3  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago
I think it is fair to say that the seeded article is a hit piece by Maddow's tv competition , Fox News. 

So what if it is?

Most of the mass media is in a constant state of "hit piece" against their ONLY significant competition.    Fox news

The preponderance of venues like MSNBC are the ones driving the media polarization bus not the other way around.

 
 
 
lib50
4  lib50    3 weeks ago

Fox is now mostly pure WH propaganda, not news, which is why their viewers are the most ignorant - they are fed and believe Trump lies daily.  Pathetic.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/columnists/zurawik/bs-fe-zontv-fox-news-trump-propaganda-20180516-story.html

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2019/03/08/trump-fox-news-joe-peyronnin-jane-mayer-new-yorker

"Hannity was treated in Texas like a member of the Administration because he virtually is one. The same can be said of Fox’s chairman, Rupert Murdoch. Fox has long been a bane of liberals, but in the past two years many people who watch the network closely, including some Fox alumni, say that it has evolved into something that hasn’t existed before in the United States. Nicole Hemmer, an assistant professor of Presidential studies at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center and the author of 'Messengers of the Right,' a history of the conservative media’s impact on American politics, says of Fox, 'It’s the closest we’ve come to having state TV.'

"Hemmer argues that Fox—which, as the most watched cable news network, generates about $2.7 billion a year for its parent company, 21st Century Fox—acts as a force multiplier for Trump, solidifying his hold over the Republican Party and intensifying his support. 'Fox is not just taking the temperature of the base—it’s raising the temperature,' she says. 'It’s a radicalization model.' For both Trump and Fox, 'fear is a business strategy—it keeps people watching.' As the President has been beset by scandals, congressional hearings, and even talk of impeachment, Fox has been both his shield and his sword. The White House and Fox interact so seamlessly that it can be hard to determine, during a particular news cycle, which one is following the other’s lead. All day long, Trump retweets claims made on the network; his press secretary, Sarah Sanders, has largely stopped holding press conferences, but she has made some thirty appearances on such shows as “Fox & Friends” and 'Hannity.' Trump, Hemmer says, has 'almost become a programmer.'

 
 
 
KDMichigan
4.1  KDMichigan  replied to  lib50 @4    3 weeks ago
Fox is now mostly pure WH propaganda,

I wouldn't know I don't watch it but I'll take your word for it as you must be a viewer to form your conclusions.

I like your source of a left wing news source to substantiate your bias that Fox is bias. jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-yorker/

 
 
 
bugsy
4.1.1  bugsy  replied to  KDMichigan @4.1    3 weeks ago

He probably does watch it, and his handlers try to explain to him what he just saw in spin form to make it seem what he thinks he saw was the exact opposite of what he actually saw.

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉    3 weeks ago

Rachel Maddow is a fringe conspiracy theorist on par with Alex Jones. Actual journalists are running from the association before their careers are tainted.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5    3 weeks ago
Rachel Maddow is a fringe conspiracy theorist on par with Alex Jones.

Has Rachel Maddow been banned from Facebook or Twitter, and sued for making stuff up about  6 year olds murdered in their classroom?  Don't think so. 

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5.1.1  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1    3 weeks ago

No but the New York times banned their journalists from appearing on those two fake news networks.

jrSmiley_97_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.1.1    3 weeks ago

I dont think she ever had too many people from NYT on there. 

MSNBC used to be a straight news network , but when they saw the success Fox was having being the network of the right, they figured they could appeal to the other side. Somehow, I never see you criticizing Fox News, which has consistently been rated the most dishonest cable news channel. It's amazing how all your complaints fall in one direction, seeing as you are allegedly "non partisan" and all. 

 
 
 
Dulay
5.1.3  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.1.1    3 weeks ago
No but the New York times banned their journalists from appearing on those two fake news networks.

Prove it. 

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5.1.4  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  Dulay @5.1.3    3 weeks ago

Sealion the link:

New York Times reinforces policy prohibiting reporters from appearing on cable shows like Maddow

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/446302-new-york-times-reinforces-policy-prohibiting-reporters-from-appearing-on

Oh that was too easy and from the center left the hill?

Shamwow!

 
 
 
KDMichigan
5.1.5  KDMichigan  replied to  Dulay @5.1.3    3 weeks ago
Prove it. 

I'm sure you are not going to be informed of this watching Rachel Madcow, I just don't see her slobbering out in one of her rants that the New York times has banned its reporters from appearing on her show because she is to partisan.

 
 
 
Dulay
5.1.6  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.1.4    3 weeks ago
Oh that was too easy and from the center left the hill?

If it was so fucking easy, why didn't you post an article that actually supports your claims? 

Let's review them:

Actual journalists are running from the association before their careers are tainted.

Your 'too easy' article states that Enrich AGREED to appear on Maddow. 

FAIL!

Then you claimed: 

No but the New York times banned their journalists from appearing on those two fake news networks.

From your 'too easy' link:

It said Fox's "Hannity" and "Tucker Carlson Tonight" would also fall into that category, though Pompeo wrote that Times reporters might not appear on those more conservative programs commonly.

So it' not about 'two fake news networks', is it BF? 

FAIL!

Oh and BTFW, Enrich appeared on CNN's, Anderson Cooper on the same date the Times told him not to appear on Maddow.

So it's NOT a ban on ANY network, is it BF?  

FAIL! 

 
 
 
Dulay
5.1.7  Dulay  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.5    3 weeks ago

So you've got nothing. Got ya. 

 
 
 
Dulay
5.2  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5    3 weeks ago

What a load of utter bullshit...

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5.2.1  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  Dulay @5.2    3 weeks ago

She is the ambassador of conspiracy. Your fondness of her is not an argument. Liberal journalists are running from association.

The good news is Sham Wow is looking for someone to do their infomercials.

 
 
 
Dulay
5.2.2  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.2.1    3 weeks ago
She is the ambassador of conspiracy.

Again, bullshit. 

Your fondness of her is not an argument.

Nor is you hate for her. 

Liberal journalists are running from association.

More bullshit. 

The good news is Sham Wow is looking for someone to do their infomercials.

Did they already reject your resume? 

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5.2.3  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  Dulay @5.2.2    3 weeks ago
Did they already reject your resume? 

They were looking for someone more feminine, they turned us both down.

 
 
 
Dulay
5.2.4  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.2.3    3 weeks ago
They were looking for someone more feminine, they turned us both down.

How very misogynistic. 

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
5.2.5  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉  replied to  Dulay @5.2.4    3 weeks ago

Obtuse.

 
 
 
Dulay
5.2.6  Dulay  replied to  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉ @5.2.5    3 weeks ago

I understood your comment and replied appropriately. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
6  The Magic Eight Ball    3 weeks ago

progressives morals are regressive  (and they are being rejected)

their voice is growing weaker by the day.

such fun  :)

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
7  Goodtime Charlie    3 weeks ago

Every night, Rachel wears the same outfit, I think with the money she earns she could afford some new clothes.

 
 
 
Dulay
7.1  Dulay  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @7    3 weeks ago

Are you claiming that she has worn the same blouse and blazer for 10+ years? 

 
 
 
Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉
8  Badfish H҉a҉n҉d҉ ҉o҉f҉ ҉D҉o҉o҉m҉    3 weeks ago

I just received my telepathic tin foil hat transponder, what time do the communications start?

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



epistte


74 visitors