It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: buster2010 Last time I checked the American people owned the federal government. It is called public land for a reason. SO don't be selling public land to china or anyone else for that matter, unless voted on by the public, not the federal government. Let we the people decide.
So ... taking this scenario to the logical end ... we don't accept anything, anyone says, because they could be or probably are lying, and we decide what we want the "truth" to be based on our own preconceived notions and only accept evidence that reinforces those opinions?
originally posted by: seasoul
Fortunately now legal experts like Jeanine Pirro are coming forward and speaking out.
originally posted by: imwilliam
For my part, I'm going to be reluctant to accept what anyone says without being able to verify it. I'm going to be skeptical about anyone's opinion/statements being objective. I'm going to ask if there is any ulterior motive(s) for statements that are made and whether evidence is legitimate or if it's germane to the issue. I'm going to view everything critically. In the end I may just say "I don't know" or that I'm certain about some elements, but not others. I don't see your suggested outcome as logically following from that.
However; if you, or anyone else, chooses to decide what you want the "truth" to be; based on your own preconceived notions, and only accept evidence that reinforces your opinion, that's up to you, and you're responsible for it.
originally posted by: MrPenny
originally posted by: seasoul
Fortunately now legal experts like Jeanine Pirro are coming forward and speaking out.
Once she signed a contract with Fox News, "legal expert" no longer applied. It is simply "on-air talent" now. She's there to draw in viewers and perpetuate the propaganda.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
As pointed out earlier, Ms. Pirro was a "judge" on her reality TV show for longer than she was a county judge. She was rejected by the voters of New York for AG and chose instead to retreat to the realm of imaginary law rather than the real world.
Passing the bar doesn't automatically make anyone a legal expert, and even if that did (it doesn't) their opinions are particularly suspect when they are paid by an infotainment network shamelessly shilling for a political party.
originally posted by: WarminIndy
So because she's on Fox that means she doesn't know the real world?
originally posted by: WarminIndy
I'm sorry, but she still has a law degree, that fully gives her the right to dispense legal advice. As long as she has the degree and license, she can say what she wants about the legality, on air or not. She passed the bar, and I am sure you didn't, so therefore, she is a legal expert.
originally posted by: MrPenny
originally posted by: WarminIndy
I'm sorry, but she still has a law degree, that fully gives her the right to dispense legal advice. As long as she has the degree and license, she can say what she wants about the legality, on air or not. She passed the bar, and I am sure you didn't, so therefore, she is a legal expert.
Everyone has the right to dispense legal advice. But you're right that having the education and credentials tends to add credibility to a person's opinion. When it's legal stuff, what is said from the bench and in chambers usually means something. However, people who are paid to appear on television and who are expected to entertain and keep people tuning in, automatically take a big hit to "credibility".
All of them...across the board. I'm trying to show you something here....listen up. She looks like a failure as a judge....at least to me anyway. And she's paid to appear on television and appeal to a very narrow segment of the population. It has to be very narrow...cause they're all looking down a vary slim tunnel.
If you have any ability to think critically, you know Fox New and Roger Ailes are definitely not attempting to be "journalists".
originally posted by: MrPenny
I've felt this way ever since I watched Fox News and it's "correspondents" spout demonstrably false crap in the service of a distinct ideology.
I did not need CNN, or any other echo-chamber, to form my opinion.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
No one needs anything but eyes and ears to determine the bias of FNC.
To pretend anything else at this point in time is simply ludicrous.
Chances are that for about 40-47% of the American population that's perfectly fine.
For the rest of us ... not so much.
originally posted by: WarminIndy
But you are ok with the bias on the other side.
So bias is fine as long as it is what you approve.