Sunday Talks: Doug Collins -vs- Chris Wallace…

House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins appears on Fox News to debate the insufferable gatekeeper of the swamp, Chris Wallace.

Despite the necessary obfuscation by Wallace, who is professionally trained to pretend not to know things, Collins points out the ridiculous proposition that republicans and the White House are required to respond to participation demands when the HPSCI impeachment report hasn’t even been produced.  The process construct therein highlights the purely political motive of the partisan Democrat agenda.  At this point it’s transparent.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Sunday Talks: Doug Collins -vs- Chris Wallace…

  1. Patricia Weir says:

    I’m sorry. I just don’t have the stomach for Chris Wallace ..

    Liked by 25 people

    • swissik says:

      Me neither so I came here.

      Liked by 10 people

    • RJ says:

      I dropped the Sunday so called news shows months ago. My skin has cleared up, my headaches are gone, I can now walk without the limp, my speech is no longer slurred, and I have stopped wetting myself at night while sleeping!

      I tell you…it’s a miracle! However, I do watch Maria Bart…and Lou Dobbs whenever I can.

      I like to live on the edge…

      Liked by 29 people

      • James Carpenter says:

        RJ. I’d call your experience hilarious.
        If it didn’t mirror my own so closely.

        Liked by 5 people

      • GB Bari says:

        It’s the best Rx anyone can prescribe.

        If anyone wants to watch TV on Sunday mornings watch some old Laurel & Hardy movies. They have roughly the same level of silliness as the House ‘Peach Fohty Fie” sham, but at least Hal Roach paid his actors to deliberately act goofy, and they are far more believable than any of Schiffty’s leakers and liars.

        Liked by 1 person

    • alonzo1956 says:

      I haven’t been able to watch Wallace for over a year. I’ve tried a couple of times and like you, I just can’t stomach him. When people like him maintain employment by spewing their nonsense, It is indicative of just how far the MSM has strayed from REALITY!

      Liked by 6 people

      • DaughterofLiberty says:

        I think it was mid-2016 for me. Moreover, I simply cannot stand his voice. Such pomposity. I’d rather watch the Sunday evangelical programs before getting up and going to my own church.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Alan Reasin says:

      I am there too.

      Liked by 2 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      He’s cringe worthy….


    • Last time I watched Chrissy was 2am Nov 9 as he got all choked up calling PA for Candidate Trump.

      Liked by 1 person

    • noswamp says:

      Wallace was a pussycat compared to how bad he treated other folks on here. I think he knows Collins would tear him upside and down if he were to pull a fast one.

      Chris Wallace=Swamp Gate Keeper.

      Liked by 2 people

      • GB Bari says:

        Yes I think everyone has missed a good performance by Doug Collins. I was actually surprised that Wallace did not interrupt Colins much at all. Collins was speaking at high speed and did not give Chrissy many breaks to insert one of his famous “But….” lines.

        Collins was loaded for bear, had excellent responses prepared, and delivered them very well!

        Liked by 3 people

    • roddrepub says:

      I haven’t watched FNS in I don’t know how long at least a couple of years!

      Liked by 2 people

    • John-Y128 says:

      Indeed same for Juan Williams, Donna Brazile & the other unfair, unbalanced opiners too!

      Liked by 1 person

      • zekness says:

        it’s a well designed feature of FOX news.

        does anyone remember

        hannity and combs?

        it’s the same idea..create “tension”…and let the other side present a failed argument to your target audience.

        the problem is: it’s dishonest and transparently a gimic
        it insults the intelligence of the target audience.
        it repeats the same kind of unethical journalism these main stream media corporate media groups ALL have designed.
        it replaces great opportunities to actually have a high level honest assesment and debate over legal and political realities..with low brow drivel.
        the interest of creating profitable click bait style drama becomes the new norm
        rewards guests and hosts for manufacturing false and misleading claims and innuendo

        basically…this stuff has been going on for a long time.

        fox isn’t a good place to find truths and serious discuss …journalism doesn’t exist there.

        out of 24 hours, you might get 5 minutes of truth.

        now, on occasion, they DO get great guests on..solomon, carter, powell..

        but then proceed to dictate the discussion angle and talk all over them.

        it’s shameful and stupid.


  2. gunrunner03 says:

    Collins handled Wallace handily.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Jan says:

      I am really glad that Collins is a good lawyer and ranking member. Jim Jordan is on House Judiciary, as is John Ratcliffe. if they can do as well here on Judiciary as the 2 of them did on Intel, plus get some additional help from other Republicans, we can hit more home runs.

      And NoNads is even more stupid than Schiff for brains. Ridiculous that the Dimms give the President and Republicans dates to submit for witness lists, etc., when they haven’t even seen the impeachment report from House Intel.

      NO DUE PROCESS to be seen here, folks. And note in order to have counsel there, the President must give up all privileges and cooperate in supplying witnesses and all documents subpoenaed.

      Liked by 13 people

      • Jerry Joe says:

        “And NoNads is even more stupid than Schiff for brains.”

        Mercy, would the nuns in grammar school have a lot of fun after writing this one on the chalkboard!!!

        Liked by 7 people

      • That failure of due process message needs to be hammered home, again.
        Its crazy time now for dual income parents, but the basic themes need to be repeated, and the repeat failures of the House Dems to provide transparency and at least facts, shows their desperation .ost of all, and reinforces the true motive- to dirty up POTUS again, and disenfranchise We The People.

        Even the Left MSM is getting nervous…keep hammering!

        Liked by 5 people

  3. Just Some Guy says:

    Sundance Thanks for giving us the summary of Chris Wallace interviews. I can not watch his propaganda with becoming disgusted and nauseous by it.

    Liked by 14 people

    • +1. I wait for the Sunday talkies as chosen here, for the smart commentary by Sundance putting it in context, including some very wise commenters, some of whom clearly have deep insight as to process and as yet undivulged content.context

      I would like to believe some strategic PR pros around Trump, if not POTUS or DonJr themselves directly, are reading The Last Refuge tweets, as a refection of what thoughtful flyover country is thinking, benefitting from others who contribute as above. Maybe even Hannity, if he and producers are capable of learning from Bartiromo what works.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. InAz says:

    My husband does not say much about politics, but this morning he said he really really hopes that the attorneys for President Trump will not appear in front of Schiff’s Kangaroo Court.

    He said the attorneys need to send the Commiecrats a letter stating that because the impeachment process they took is illegal etc, and saying the President is guilty and must appear to prove his innocence is full blown Communist tactics.
    Pound sand.

    Liked by 20 people

    • Cam Heck says:

      Liked by 3 people

  5. Wallace is presumeably part of the “dog meat” (marketing term) presented by Fox management to bolster the “fair but balanced” branding. So, like the other online “talent” he is simply the dummy, tv lingo for the on air face, reading what the production team has assembled. Wallace obviously has some evo involvement, following his fathers example, and perhaps believes his own PR as a tough ambush interviewer.

    I do see a change in style, slowly, as Fox execs realize they run the risk of becoming tainted asFake News. Thats translated in at least listening to his guests more…vs the more obvious propaganda elsewhere. Here Collins refusedto be suckered by Wallace’ hypothetical, and thats reassuring to me that the GOP is becoming more disciplined and prepared.

    That accrues to the GOP as a whole, and I hope the old guard is learning from the Freedom Caucus types. We will see.

    Liked by 7 people

    • WeMakeOurStandHere says:

      FOX execs don’t care about losing viewers or becoming tainted as fake news. All they care about is their bottom line and not having the skeletons in their closets revealed by their blackmailers and handlers. If revenues are down they just send the bill to George Soros, Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, the Rothschilds, etc.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Revelation says:

        Exactly. Its not about money. Look at how Disney has set fire to Billions by screwing up Star Wars with SJW nonsense.

        Their goal is propaganda and ideology. They have hundreds of billions to play with.

        Liked by 1 person

        • zekness says:

          nailed it…

          there are so many ways I have grown to really hate on disney..the “new” star wars agenda was the final nail for me.

          I show the original stuff to my kids..they like it far more than even this new stuff…good art and great story telling without the diversions into PC …always going to be a top sell for being ethically bound to the story..and just the story.

          I watch mostly only older movies now. I have become my parents. I know “get it”.



    • zekness says:

      anytime ANYONE suggests they need to reform their image with image and optics can be sure, it has never entered their mind to actually build success on simply telling the truth.

      this IS the problem with corporate handlers running news media groups.

      they have an allegiance to shareholders..and nothing else matters…window dressing doesn’t change the image….even beautiful stained glass windows.

      yeah, talking to you “bubble headed beach blondes at fox”.

      if this show was anything other than “news”…funny thing is I would actually watch it…just for the legs and pretty faces..

      think about that…

      yeah I know…alot of low information regular folk will find my suggestions insulting.

      if the shoe fits.


  6. Carrie says:

    Well I got through that, barely. Not only is there no report where Republicans can call rebuttal witnesses, but it’s just so annoying when Chris splices the testimony of 3 people who “believe” there was quid pro quo, when the evidence demonstrates the complete opposite. All of this is moot in any event, as the President has the support of the American people to root out corruption before handing over foreign aid. If anything, I think these hearings have done an amazing job showing the blatant hubris many State Department staff suffer from. They really are the most entitled bunch of sniveling bureaucrats and only succeed in blocking any actual progress. I’m sure most people would support firing 50% of the staff as a good beginning.

    Liked by 9 people

    • jrapdx says:

      Your comment closely mirrors my thoughts. It is notable that Wallace didn’t interrupt Collins that much, maybe because Collins was on the mark about the “impeachment process”. Wallace had his BS lined up before the interview but it seemed quite petty and irrelevant.

      Liked by 4 people

      • JC says:

        My impression as well, jrapdx.
        The ludicrous hypothetical garbage Wallace tried to pull near the end of the interview” was immediately challenged by Collins with such an intellectual poison arrow, Wallace had to wish he hadn’t asked the token nonsense.

        Liked by 2 people

        • jrapdx says:

          Yup, it was utterly transparent that Wallace was itching for a debate over the “evidence” the discredited “witnesses” were spewing in the clips. Collins wisely didn’t take the bait. After a couple more jabs, Wallace had to give it up. It’s getting increasingly tough for media swamp gatekeepers to defend the indefensible though Lord knows they keep on trying—and failing.

          Liked by 1 person

      • GB Bari says:

        Your comment is on the mark, IMO.
        You made me think a bit more after I posted a comment above about Wallace not interrupting as much as usual.

        I actually think Wallace might silently realize the folly of this impeachment, not that he wouldn’t like to see it successful. But when he is less aggressive and less disruptive, I think it signals that he knows his guest has the upper hand in the debate.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Sherri Young says:

          He might not wish to prod Doug Collins into action. Collins can land on someone verbally like a swarming plague of locusts. The man can give a high-speed verbal beatdown. He got into it with Nanzi on the floor of the House when Nanzi defamed PDJT the way she does during press conferences. The man knows the rules and won’t be intimidated by an old woman. The Dimm rep who was chairing the proceedings that day relinquished the gavel and walked away.

          Liked by 3 people

    • mikeyboo says:

      “I think these hearings have done an amazing job showing the blatant hubris many State Department staff suffer from. They really are the most entitled bunch of sniveling bureaucrats and only succeed in blocking any actual progress.”
      And there is real value in revealing these arrogant, dishonest gas bags for who they are-as opposed to who they think they are.

      Liked by 1 person

    • gerkmonster says:

      I am still appalled and the complete lack of coverage of Biden’s quid pro quo that he bragged about,was twice the size, and actually happened. It was not just something that somebody presumed.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. delighteddeplorable says:

    And look! Baghdad Bob surfaces! Perfect.


    • DaughterofLiberty says:

      You all know that his dad – Mike Wallace – prior to becoming a news reporter talking head, was a game show host, right? I’ve seen old b&w game shows with a very young Mike Wallace hosting.

      Liked by 2 people

  8. jrapdx says:

    Entertaining! Wallace is a notorious bag of hot air, but Collins was ready and deflated ol’ windbag quite effectively. So obvious when Wallace played clips from the prior “open” hearings: “witnesses” making assertions about “quid pro quo”. What Wallace didn’t show was witnesses being questioned by Republicans and admitting they had no actual knowledge of an impeachable offense.

    Also, Collins railed at the stupidity of requiring Republicans to provide names of witnesses to be called at hearings next week BEFORE Schiff issues a report. As usual Democrats are twisted to think Republicans will fall for these Alice-in-wonderland games.

    Bottom line is Collins was very clear that the Nadler-Schiff show is grossly unfair to Republicans and especially the President. Like Collins said the American people aren’t going to fall for it. Even many Democrats will reject the conclusions of a rigged process, notwithstanding the propaganda efforts of “swamp gatekeepers” like Wallace.

    Liked by 8 people

  9. JohnCasper says:

    U.S. Senator Doug Collins. Make it so.

    Liked by 9 people

  10. Genie says:

    Rep. Collins was superb at handling Wallace’s leading questions and hypothetical boobytraps. If you’ve had the misfortune to watch enough of Chris Wallace over the years, you can recognize his frustration and befuddlement during the split screen at 6:53 to 7:00.

    Liked by 3 people

    • bsdetector4u says:

      You’ll also notice every time Wallace runs into a dead end when interrogating a Republican, he defaults to, “We’re running out of time” and then changes the subject. What would be fun is to have one of the Republicans look at his watch and say, “Well, Chris, I guess we are” and walk off the set.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. milktrader says:

    If President Trump ordered three scoops of ice cream, tortured puppies and ate them with his obscene ice cream count would that be grounds for impeachment?

    How about if he murdered all his political rivals and ordered a nuclear strike on CNN headquarters? Would that be an impeachable offense.

    Anything to get impeachable offense and President Trump in the same sentence

    What a tool. Elmer Fudd of reporting

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Reserved55 says:

    “He (Trump) didn’t mention corruption”

    Chris, he most certainly mentioned corruption. The Biden’s, like you, are corrupt as hell.

    Liked by 3 people

    • BitterC says:

      I have been waiting for SOMEONE to respond to the “Trump never mentioned corruption on that phone call” with this. He mentioned the Bidens. That was how he brought corruption up. Why else would he have mentioned them?

      Liked by 2 people

  13. Pa Hermit says:

    Often wonder why no one has ever said anything about only covering half the story. Maybe I’m spoiled by listening (years ago) to “The Rest of the Story by Paul Harvey! You would think that some eager journalist would try something like that. That seemed quite popular at the time.

    Liked by 3 people

    • jrapdx says:

      Yes it was popular, no doubt because Paul Harvey was a great storyteller. In the current media/political climate “the rest of the story” would very likely just be the same ol’ propaganda, that is, the same “first part of the story” they wanted us to hear.

      At the root of it we simply need to have “news media” worthy of the name. Nothing new about that, we’re all nostalgic for the epoch when “equal time” was a requirement on TV and radio. Too bad such rules won’t be baked into law in the future, it would sure be a very good thing if it ever happens.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Pf1289 says:

        Nope. Do you really want to force radio stations that carry Rush Limbaugh to give 3 hours of time to a Liberal/socialist/commie? No one would listen (remember Air America?) and it would cost the station money and listeners. They may even cut Rush to not have to carry the commies.

        We don’t have a free press anymore. We have a corporate press controlled by a small group with an agenda. What’s covered, what’s not covered, and how it’s covered is decided by them. It has nothing to do with getting all the information to the people. Like Pravda was for the USSR when I was growing up.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. “Mock them! ”

    H/t: American Digets/IOTW

    Liked by 6 people

  15. Steve in Greensboro says:

    Sundance watches the Democrat Media (including Fox) so we don’t have to. Sundance, you have our eternal gratitude for enduring this suffering on our behalf.

    Liked by 3 people

  16. jeans2nd says:

    It would seem all the victims of Inquisitor Wallace are Freedom Caucus (aka Tea Party) guys, and all the “Intellectual” “educated” “elite” “panelists” are Establishment types (aka Never Trumpers).

    And yet, the only ones able to make a fool of Inquisitor Wallace are the Tea Party…
    beg pardon, Freedom Caucus guys.
    Now, isn’t that odd?

    Liked by 1 person

  17. mylabs5 says:

    So I’m wondering how much the ratings have to drop on Chrissy’s show before the old man steps in and bongs Jr on the ear for effing up a once great network built by Roger Ailes. It’s clear that the inmates are running the asylum at Fox now.
    Rupert, time to fire that miscreant of a son and get a real man to run the place. Kind of reminds me of the Joe/Hunter Biden debacle.

    Liked by 3 people

    • jrapdx says:

      I think you answer your own question. The people running the asylum are unlikely to notice things like mere ratings. Rather they’re paying attention to the “handlers” who are far more interested in propagating lies than facts, like viewership and the like. IOW the “inmates” have a totally different definition of “greatness” of their network than owners/executives of the past. It means a return to the former greatness just isn’t in the cards.

      Liked by 1 person

  18. pucecatt says:

    Wallace is a weenie.. Collins is smart enough to not fall into traps ..

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Val says:

    I still don’t understand:
    -How can they say “the President asked Ukraine to interfere with our elections”, if Joe Biden is not even the candidate chosen by the Democrats yet?

    -How can they say the President “conditioned the WH meeting and the money”, if Ukraine had both without doing anything back to the President?

    Liked by 1 person

    • zekness says:

      well that’s pretty easy to figure out.

      see, according to democrats, schiff specifically, you can be charged wtih conspiracy and obstruction, by refusing to acknowledge that you stole a horse that never existed, from a man who claims you never did steal his horse, and with witnesses that tell you the horse the democrats are referring to is alive and kicking and still and always has been safe and secure with its owner.

      this is the HorseSh^t show that schifftty has created out of thin oxygen free air.

      know how schiffttty got this idea any of this would work?

      he took his cues from the corrupt FBI cointel op that eventually decided they would hand flynn….when the law doesn’t support a crime…well, then don’t let that stop you from faking one up.

      this has got to destroyed..and jail time for these anarchists!


  20. Joe Dan Gorman says:

    Why do we keep going on these shows?

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Val says:

    Forgot to add, I do hope Gov. Kemp knows what he’s doing…as of right now, I’m really upset with him. Hopefully he’ll prove me wrong. Chris Wallace seems to like the woman, and that makes me even more suspicious of her.


  22. BitterC says:

    Collins did well, but it sure would be nice if someone from our side would say:

    “let’s take the hypothetical that Biden’s extortion WAS to end the ongoing investigation into Burisma that would have uncovered Hunter’s part in an oligarch’s money laundering scheme…..are you saying it would be inappropriate for Trump’s admin to look into such corruption?”

    But baby steps are better than nothing I guess. I object to the premise that Trump was wrong to want Ukraine co-operation in an investigation of US govt corruption. My blood boils everytime a so-called conservative or GOP politician says the convo with Zelensky was “inappropriate”

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Saml Adams says:

    The “Boogaloo” is looking like a better and better option. Clean this crap up once and for all.


  24. Dennis says:

    “Let’s do a thought experiment.” Journalism.


    • Genie says:

      Wallace ran out of time and could not ask his killer hypothetical boobytrap, “Candidate Trump once bragged that he could kill someone and still not lose voters. If Democrats discover President Trump has killed someone, do you agree he should be impeached?”


  25. Coast says:

    The only part worth watching is from 5:10 to 6:34.


  26. The Constitutional situation here has nothing to do with either a propaganda-besotted so-called journalist or a particular Representative.

    The Constitutional situation is very simply that the US House of Representatives now intends to, upon its own authority, declare… that the President of the United States is, in fact, guilty of a “high crime.” Having concluded this, the House then intends to punish said official (by Impeachment), all without a Trial.

    “And that, Ladies and Gentlemen,” is a concept that is very, very old: a “Bill (or Writ) of Attainder.” Several thousand enemies of an English king lost their lives to this very thing, and the Founders of our Country expressly forbade it … twice. (§1.9.3; §1.10.0)

    The United States of America has absolutely no need for “Star (Starr??) Chambers.” We have three co-equal Branches of our Government, one of which consists of just one (wo)man. “We, the People of the United States” are fully aware of the nature of this latest organized assault against the sacred principles of our system of government, and it shall not prevail against us.”

    Liked by 2 people

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Excellent post.
      Doug Collins is right Special Counsel Emperor Schiff should testify.
      See 4;44, 21:35,42:50, 56:00 (extended discussion)
      The Rules Committee specifically refers to Schiff as doing the job of the
      Special Counsel/Independent Counsel and his committee is a “Grand Jury”
      He is simultaneously Lawmaker, Law Enforcement Agent, Judge and Juror
      This is the SPECIFIC CONSTRUCT of the
      Nancy Pelosi IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY METHOD of Impeachment

      Honorable mentions:
      (24:30) “Classified briefings”.
      See for example Marie Yovanovitch testimony
      These depositions were SPECIFICALLY UNCLASSIFIED
      but designated “SECRET” per house rules:

      MR. GOLDMAN: This deposition will be conducted entirely at the unclassified level (pp11)
      (legal admonition to avoid 18 USC 793 that Schiff himself reaffirmed in every PUBLIC testimony)

      MR. GOLDMAN: Per the House rules for this deposition, no members or staff may discuss the contents of this deposition outside of the three committees, including in public.(pp 12)

      Also note the ONLY thing SCHIFF REDACTS in every transcript..

      (36:00) On Fishing Expeditions, the Appellate Courts and the RACE to beat SCOTUS


    • zekness says:

      THIS ! spot on.

      one of the many, reasons why I read commentators here at CTH…

      clear, factual, historically accurate,l aser focused, no BS, TRUTH..

      I really appreciate and respect the honesty here.

      I think most people DO have an interest in these discussions…

      but they are presented with “information” from main stream media that simply isn’t interested in diving into the substance of these issues.

      the press almost without exception has been a failure to perform its responsibilities that were assumed to be protected by 1A. It’s an abomination now.


  27. The leftist dim approach uses the false / misleading premise every time. Rep Doug Collins was having none of it. Masterful recasting of the assertion so the argument can proceed forth with the objective of getting at the truth.


  28. Skidroe says:

    Can anyone tell me what the TV ratings are with Maria Bartiromo vs Chris Walrus?


  29. Today’s letter from White House to Nadler regarding impeachment sham via The Hill.

    Disappointing – IMO – as it focuses on the abject thuggery of the democrat’s “process”, rather than the absolute legal deficiency in their theory that the President did anything inappropriate, much less impeachable in the first place.

    Another letter to follow before Nadler’s “deadline”


    • GB Bari says:

      IMHO, the WH absolutely did the correct thing in only addressing & destroying the credibility of the sham process and completely avoiding any debate about the president’s guilt or innocence or what is impeachable vs not impeachable. That debate should only occur in a lawfully sanctioned hearing or trial.

      Liked by 1 person

  30. Devil in the Blue Drapes says:

    “Let me entertain a thought experiment…”.

    That must’ve strained Wallace’s pea brain beyond it’s limit.


  31. ChampagneReady says:

    Oct 31, 2019 …….. Pelosi

    “These rules are fairer than anything that have gone before in terms of an impeachment proceeding,”

    So Wednesday, we’ll have 3 witnesses for us and we’ll let you have one of yours.


  32. dave casper says:

    Chris, the perfect example of “doing evil” when your in a position to do so much good.
    Not stupid, but foolish, so foolish.


  33. Sam Gompers says:

    Chris straight up lied about the contents of the July 25th call. He said there was no mention of anything but Joe and Hunter Biden.


  34. Tom Hansen says:

    I used to be an avid viewer of FNC but not now. When it comes to Fox personalities, my interest has been becoming much less as time goes by. FNC has definitely changed their news presentations where there content has become more main stream fake media than their previous conservative positions in their news formatting.

    Only Harris Faulkner, Trace Gallagher, and Shannon Bream are the only news anchors I now watch on FNC. Hannity has been the only opinion host I watch, but even he is getting irritatingly old due to his constant interruptions of his guests, his juvenile name calling and labeling of people, and his incessant discussions of talking about himself.

    FNC is like tasting crackers that have gone stale. Leaves a bad taste.


  35. Sherri Young says:

    I saw on Twitter a week or two ago that the attorney for Schiff’s committee and Chris Wallace’s son are best friends.


  36. A Call for Honesty says:

    There is one way to deal a decisive blow to this kind of “lawfare” – itself a misleading term. The court needs to be guided by the ancient Judeo-Christian teaching (Deuteronomy 19:15-21). This is a just response to people making false accusations. The accuser must spell out what punishment he expects the accused to receive before giving his testimony. When his testimony is proved to be false, he will then receive the punishment he wants imposed on an innocent victim.

    “The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. . . And the rest shall hear and fear, and shall never again commit any such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity. It shall be LIFE FOR LIFE, EYE FOR EYE, TOOTH FOR TOOTH, HAND FOR HAND, FOOT FOR FOOT.”

    This is real justice!

    Liked by 1 person

  37. zekness says:

    facebook policy of NOT removing obvious Political figures for LYING…

    wonder what their policy is for media figures?

    case in point: chris wallace…Is this journalism.? Does he represent or in any way profits from a political tone? is this politics, or just opinion? we know the answer….it’s biased opinion.

    Facebook policy normalizes fake media. And it’s goal is of course, to build a very profitable venue to forward fake news and acceptable “news”.

    what is fox news position on the matter of allowing political fabrications? How is it possible that chris wallace continues on fox? same reasons as facebook? money?

    the reason I bring this up to examine not necessarily the kinds of misinformation and narrative spin that takes place from politicos and their synchophants, but to showcase how journalism is truly dead in all the most “popular” venues and has been replaced by a goal of establishing a profit AND the paid influence for interests that have no goal of maintaining ethical duties to report facts and remain unbiased.

    I just watched a pretty good Center of National Security debate (fordham) put on by Cspan…”history of presidential misconduct”…lots of good discussion..recommended. Not in agreement with everything stated, but it’s an interesting debate. This particular guest from rutgers was doing some really powerful straighshooting on this matter of the state of “news”.n (jackson Lears “rebirth of a nation” author)


  38. zekness says:

    all the hand waving…all the stupid “media” people like chris wallace and people like him…including american voters who are just too stupid and lazy to actually take 2 minutes to search for themselves what the truth is.

    QPQ, did it happen?

    ask the person who was on the other end of the phone and had engagements directly with all foregin policy officials, INCLUDING rudy.

    that name is Zelensky?

    the president of Ukraine.

    what does HE say happened?

    I’ll remind everyone that immediately after he was officially inaugurated, zelensky went on a worldwide tour to get acquainted with issues and make relationships.

    AT EVERY SINGLE PRESSER IN EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY HE VISITED, he was asked at least once, and mostly by several different news people about QPQ, bribery, exortion, blackmail.

    know what he said consistently?

    never happened.

    why isn’t fox news or any other media group even showing those pressers?

    this is the problem people….the media groups KNOW these things. They do not want to report on this, because it ends the “fuel” they need to continue drawing ad revenue and interest on “unfolding impeachment saga”…

    like any good media, fox peddle crisis because it sells and has established and normalized manufacturing drama.

    I am going to find these videos and transcripts and news releases from zelensky.

    These are all open source.

    It proves the media isn’t interested at all in reporting the very evidence that debunks the entire impeachment premised,

    hand waving to sell ad space

    think about that!!!

    how do we end these media groups….they need to be starved to death and sent packing…like any other business that commits fraud.

    how do we make them fail properly?


  39. Catherine says:

    When Chris Wallace started cherry picking what he would/would not show or discuss on his program, I tuned him out and changed channels. That was nearly three years ago. If FOX goes the way of the lame-stream media then I’m going to stop watching FOX … period.


  40. zekness says:

    just thought it was timely to drop this here:

    this “narrative bending” scheme is very obvious…CBS shows ITS colors too.

    maybe can go work for CBS..seems like a good fit..morons needed.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s