Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is great stuff, notice how cowardly this network is when someone goes off script and dares to tell the truth. They cut them off and end the interview.....LOL
The guest proved to be incompetent and could not establish himself as a helpful correspondent, by deliberately railroading the very first question.
The anchor was most polite in simply saying thank you and have a nice day.
He could have been politely reminded that the question was about the Benghazi tragedy, and if he was uncomfortable contributing a thought or two instead of railroading, he'd be free to excuse himself with a thanks.
he was a hostile guest.
Last edited by stargazzer; 11-26-2012 at 10:58 PM..
The guest proved to be incompetent and could not establish himself as a helpful correspondent, by deliberately railroading the very first question.
Lefties cannot do anything but, railroad an honest question put forward which requires truth in a very embarrassing circumstance.
The anchor was most polite in simply saying thank you and have a nice day.
He could have been politely reminded that the question was about the Benghazi tragedy, and if he was uncomfortable contributing a thought or two instead of railroading, he'd be free to excuse himself with a generous thanks for dropping by.
gotta always be ready for the leftie railroad...never answer a railroad...let em puff himself out. or excuse the goof.
And in other ridiculous assertions, fox news has just received communications from the green cheese man in the moon.
The guest proved to be incompetent and could not establish himself as a helpful correspondent,
You mean, helpful to Fox's agenda.
Quote:
Quote:
He could have been politely reminded that the question was about the Benghazi tragedy,
Next time trying following the interview. The question wasn't about the Benghazi attacks but rather McCain's recent backpedalling on his initial adamant objection to Susan Rice's nomination as Secretary of state asking "what do you make of that?" So Hicks statement that the Benghazi attack had been over-hyped was a perfectly appropriate response the question asked. Not only that, but in the production meeting Hicks was asked the same question by Scott's producers and Hicks gave the same answer that he gave on the air.
Quote:
he was a hostile guest.
Oh so now "guests" are supposed to be tools of the interviewer. Hicks couldn't have been more calm and professional. Now I know that giving a counter view isn't something that Fox is used to, but it is pretty much standard journalism. Maybe Fox should just rely on its own mouth pieces and leave experts to the other networks.
Next time trying following the interview. The question wasn't about the Benghazi attacks but rather McCain's recent backpedalling on his initial adamant objection to Susan Rice's nomination as Secretary of state asking "what do you make of that?" So Hicks statement that the Benghazi attack had been over-hyped was a perfectly appropriate response the question asked. Not only that, but in the production meeting Hicks was asked the same question by Scott's producers and Hicks gave the same answer that he gave on the air.
Oh so now "guests" are supposed to be tools of the interviewer. Hicks couldn't have been more calm and professional. Now I know that giving a counter view isn't something that Fox is used to, but it is pretty much standard journalism. Maybe Fox should just rely on its own mouth pieces and leave experts to the other networks.
The guest could not establish himself as a competent correspondent and railroaded the question put to him, which was....
Top GOP officials are now putting pressure directly on the WH with respects to a cover-up, Sen McCain seems to be backing away from blocking the possible Susan Rice appointment, what do you think ..?
Answer from guest....a non-specific charge against Fox with respects to politicizing news.. ( railroad> Fox news has nothing to do with the above explained update and question. He didn't even specify an example, it was the typical disgruntled things arn't going my way nonsense. The media would have known his overall stance, it was laughable I remember as he was excused..
(For your information : Susan Rice is in the hot seat for saying the video was "in fact" the cause of the tragedy. She has full access and would have known there was "NO" evidence the video was the reason.
Where is her evidence which allowed and justified the adamant declaration that a video clip caused the attack ?.. She is fully responsible for her words. Communication is her job.
It was known in hours to be AQ, including knowledge fully known in the ME..( they watched it live in the WH
Also...what country would promote an individual to any position who could believe a home video could cause a planned out attack like this..? and go on Nation-Wide TV without going through her access notes which had all the correct intel and saying it was factually due to a clip..?
She is responsible for what she says together with her privileges. Her access is part of her job. She has some very serious questions to be asked. She is untrustworthy and incompetent....how many other situations and to whom has she insisted something was "a fact" when it was completely false ? A proven irresponsible communicator.
The Fox anchor clearly referred to this issue with the question as explained above.....None of this has anything whatsoever to do with the Television station.
The guest had to be excused for an inability to answer the question . He never did answer the question...Why don't you or someone here answer the question. My answer is simple...what do I think in opinion ? Completely expose all lies and negligence, all parties regardless, thoroughly and without any reservation but then again, I don't know what their plan is so, as Ive said all aong, I have good confidence in the experts.
The only option left for him if he wants to maintain the prestige of a writer, is to return to the Fox Station and apologize for railroading the question and, slashing out at the station itself for whatever personal reasoning with such un-prof incompetency.
Last edited by stargazzer; 11-27-2012 at 03:21 AM..
The guest could not establish himself as a competent correspondent and railroaded the question put to him, which was....
Top GOP officials are now putting pressure directly on the WH with respects to a cover-up, Sen McCain seems to be backing away from blocking the possible Susan Rice appointment, what do you think ..?
Answer from guest....a non-specific charge against Fox with respects to politicizing news.. ( railroad> Fox news has nothing to do with the above explained update and question. He didn't even specify an example, it was the typical disgruntled things arn't going my way nonsense. The media would have known his overall stance, it was laughable I remember as he was excused..
(For your information : Susan Rice is in the hot seat for saying the video was "in fact" the cause of the tragedy. She has full access and would have known there was "NO" evidence the video was the reason.
Where is her evidence which allowed and justified the adamant declaration that a video clip caused the attack ?.. She is fully responsible for her words. Communication is her job.
It was known in hours to be AQ, including knowledge fully known in the ME..( they watched it live in the WH
Also...what country would promote an individual to any position who could believe a home video could cause a planned out attack like this..? and go on Nation-Wide TV without going through her access notes which had all the correct intel and saying it was factually due to a clip..?
She is responsible for what she says together with her privileges. Her access is part of her job. She has some very serious questions to be asked. She is untrustworthy and incompetent....how many other situations and to whom has she insisted something was "a fact" when it was completely false ? A proven irresponsible communicator.
The Fox anchor clearly referred to this issue with the question as explained above.....None of this has anything whatsoever to do with the Television station.
The guest had to be excused for an inability to answer the question . He never did answer the question...Why don't you or someone here answer the question. My answer is simple...what do I think in opinion ? Completely expose all lies and negligence, all parties regardless, thoroughly and without any reservation but then again, I don't know what their plan is so, as Ive said all aong, I have good confidence in the experts.
The only option left for him if he wants to maintain the prestige of a writer, is to return to the Fox Station and apologize for railroading the question and, slashing out at the station itself for whatever personal reasoning with such un-prof incompetency.
So... why is McCain backing off of his criticisms of Rice?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
