Judge Napolitano says FreedomWatch cancellation was NOT because of message & stop sending emails

Dear Friends--

Many of you are not happy with the cancellation of FreedomWatch, and you have sent emails to my Fox colleagues expressing that unhappiness. In television, shows are cancelled all the time. Two of my former shows have been cancelled, and after each cancellation, Fox has rewarded me with more and better work. This cancellation--along with others that accompanied it--was the result of a business judgment here, and is completely unrelated to the FreedomWatch message. It would make a world of a difference for all of us, if you would KINDLY STOP SENDING EMAILS TO FOX.

I am well. Your values are strong. I will continue to articulate those values here at Fox. But the emails many of you are sending are unfairly interfering with my work and that of my colleagues here. The emails even violate our values because they interfere with the use of private property. I have accepted the cancellation decision with good cheer and a sense of gearing up for the future. You should as well.

As a favor to me, and as I have asked this past weekend, PLEASE STOP SENDING EMAILS TO MY COLLEAGUES AT FOX ABOUT THE CANCELLATION OF FreedomWatch; and please stop NOW.

All the best, apn.

www.facebook.com...

www.facebook.com...


I highly doubt the message had nothing to do with the cancellation... one of the only shows on MSM covering the likes of Ron Paul oh just so happens to get cancelled in the middle of the caucases especially considering it was praised by its viewers so they decide to cancel it ?

I have not sent any email.

But this makes me think about it...

I wonder if this will help, or not??

Originally posted by kawika
I have not sent any email.

But this makes me think about it...

I wonder if this will help, or not??

It won't help, because Fox' job is to make you think what they WANT you to think, not tell you the truth and report the news as it is

I will keep on sending them emails about their Ron Paul disinfo and blackout constantly, even after the election......they deserve it

I'll be showing this to my kids in 2030.

right...like they would say "yes, it was censorship"....

bomb them with emails!!!

and watch

Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism

Instead of emails maybe some of you a should have gotten some friends to watch the show because its ratings were beyond terrible. Its kind of hard to claim they were trying to stop the message when nobody was watching anyway.

Your values are strong... The emails even violate our values because they interfere with the use of private property

Since when did the public interest go up for sale

I might put them on some mailing lists...

How about the Dems list, I get so much junk mail from them...

reply to post by seenavv

The emails even violate our values because they interfere with the use of private property.

I'm trying to figure out what the hell that even MEANS.

reply to post by NightGypsy


I think he means they have so much junk mail they can not find the important mail, making the computers (private property) useless.

Just a guess...

That note sounds just like the judge.

Well, if the emails are causing Judge Napolitano and Fox News a problem, perhaps the Judge should be blaming Fox for that. This is what happens when people are repeatedly lied to and manipulated over a period of time and finally realize how corrupt the entire system is. They will make assumptions about something (such as a show cancellation) before they know all the details because the media and our government never fail to betray our trust every time we turn around.

This is just the beginning. After a while, people are gonna be so pissed, they won't even CARE about reasons and facts....they will be fed up and ready to rumble. The government is corrupt, the elections are rigged, the media is a farce, people are dying needlessly, we are in economic ruin....... THAT JUST ABOUT COVERS IT.

The Judge and Fox are asking the public to stop BITCHING because it's causing disruption? Good luck with that.

Well that facebooklink says one post "sad news" and then says a quote fm jefferson about not remaining silent, and now he wants the email traffic to stop?! Well thats fine because i wouldnt email fox if they were the last news channel on earth and i found a crashed space craft.

Originally posted by filosophia
Well that facebooklink says one post "sad news" and then says a quote fm jefferson about not remaining silent, and now he wants the email traffic to stop?! Well thats fine because i wouldnt email fox if they were the last news channel on earth and i found a crashed space craft.

Haha! Exactly! It's not like they even give a damn what the public thinks about anything anyway! The only good it does is maybe provide a little satisfaction for the complainer that they voiced their grievances. LOL

Andrew Napolitano has not been a Judge for decades, and has no right to the honorific anymore.

He quit in 1995 after 8 years on the bench because he wasn't any good at it and could see no opportunity for advancement to higher benches.

He has been a political activist/ commenter/ propagandist for twice as long as he was a Judge. Why does he not call himself a 'pundit'? He has been more successful at that for much longer than he ever was as a Judge.

Do not mistake this post as an attack on Napolitano's views, because it isn't. I don't agree with his views, he is wrong on a whole lot of things, but he is entitled to them. What he is no longer entitled to is the title 'Judge', and this post is an attack on the general misuse of inflated honorifics to imply authority where it is not deserved.

Had he retired from the bench after a long career contributing to a profession he loved, then he might have earned the right to carry the title with him into retirement. But he didn't, he decided there was something other than the bench that interested him more and quit. That's fine, I'd rather not have someone on the bench who hated his job. Quite frankly, his demonstrated misunderstanding of the law explains fully why he was unhappy on the bench, and why the bench is better off without him. Sounds like a win-win situation for both.

But to now try to capitalize on that career, that just wasn't good enough for him and which he never quite grasped the workings of, is the height of hypocrisy.

And just so you know, the same applies to all those ex-military folk who continue to use their rank, long after they have been kicked out of the military, too. In that case, it is not only immoral, but strictly speaking, illegal.

Follow Napolitano or don't follow him. Agree with him or don't agree with him. I don't care. Just don't call him a Judge.

I find it a bit crazy people are all up in arms over Judge Nap's show cancellation.

He was allowed to have his show in the first place, don't forget that. It was probably ratings that cut the show off or a consensual decision between him and his superiors.

reply to post by rnaa


Especially among Marines, "once a Marine, always a Marine".

Not every military job is that way, but some are.

I think the Judge title is probably just marketing though.

reply to post by kawika

Especially among Marines, "once a Marine, always a Marine".

Not every military job is that way, but some are.

I think the Judge title is probably just marketing though.

Retired Military of all services are entitled to use their rank in social contexts. They cannot use it for commercial purposes such as new employment signature blocks. They will undoubtedly use it for official military purposes such as representing the military at school fetes.

Honorably discharged but not retired are not allowed to use their rank. They may, for example, mention in the body of a letter their former rank, but they cannot use it as an honorific on a signature line or greeting.

Dishonorably discharged are not permitted to use the rank they embarrassed, period.

Please note that I specifically said 'kicked out'. There is at least one dishonorably discharged person "out there" who continues to use the rank of "Commander" against DoD rules. He also continues to wear the uniform that is no longer his to wear.

Further, it is incorrect to imply that the rules for Marines are any different to other services in this regard:

source

May One Use A Rank as Veteran, If Not Retired?
Is my son-in-law abusing the use of the title: SSGT, USMC, even if including "Vet" on return address labels such as this one:
SSGT Todd S. Miles, USMC, VET
124 Rivington Avenue
Fairmont, AL 34567-8901

He was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps several years ago after serving two years state-side on active duty and then a couple of years stateside in the reserves at which time he "got out". He claims once a Marine always a Marine and uses that as justification to use his former rank and service affiliation on correspondence ... such as in the return address on envelopes. He receives no income related to his military service since he "got out."
I appreciate the fact that he served his country in the Marine Corps, but is this legal, appropriate and/or otherwise proper? I don't desire that my daughter's friends and/or relatives to be laughing behind their backs if this form of address does not fit into at least one of those descriptions.
-- Ben Packard

Dear Mr. Packard,
Use of one's former rank by non-retired military personnel is not a prescribed usage of the Department of Defense.
The way he presents his name is clear ... he is a veteran and not an active duty Marine (thus not impersonating one) ... and he's also clear that he is not a retired Marine.
On an invitation to an official Marine function he would formally be Mr. Todd S. Miles.
-- Robert Hickey

However, as I said above, I was talking about people who have been kicked out, not retired or honorably discharged.

Use of Rank by a Deserter?
Our county courthouse proudly displays personal bricks on a Walk of Honor with the names, years of service, branch of service of veterans.
There is a brick that displays a person’s name with the information USMC and the years he was supposed to have served in the Marine Corp. This person was dishonorably discharged as a deserter.
Since he was in fact a member of the Armed Forces and did produce the required DD214 to gain a place on our Walk of Honor is he doing anything illegal?
It is a shame the county employee that verified the information did not check his papers closer.
My husband did serve this country as a Marine and it is offensive to me to see the bricks even on the same sidewalk..
-- S P.

Dear S. P.:
What he's essentially doing is impersonating a veteran. However I doubt it is anything the Department of Defense will pursue.
If he were to defraud the DoD of benefits due to veterans or retirees ... that would be clearly illegal and they would be all over him.
Maybe there is someone at the court house who is "the keeper of the walk" who could remove a brick that was found to be inappropriate?
-- Robert Hickey

reply to post by rnaa


Maybe you'd prefer that judge who got her own tickets dismissed. lol