General discussion

Rachel Maddow & MSNBC "slander" sued by OANN

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/one-america-news-sues-rachel-012734579.html

One America News Network suing Rachel Maddow and her network MSNBC for twisting facts in order to slander the conservative OANN and completely American owned news network. Can the major media networks claim they are completely owned by Americans? Just check out the owners and CEO's of the majors.

Discussion is locked

Reply
Follow
Reply to: Rachel Maddow & MSNBC "slander" sued by OANN
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Rachel Maddow & MSNBC "slander" sued by OANN
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Their "lawsuit" is all over the place

Throw Something at the wall and see what sticks, comes to mind

One America News filed the federal defamation suit in San Diego.

The small, family-owned network based in San Diego is challenging Fox News for conservative cable and satellite TV viewers and has received favorable tweets from President Donald Trump.

The lawsuit contends that Maddow's comment on her July 22 MSNBC show were retaliation after OAN President Charles Herring accused cable television giant Comcast of censorship. The suit contends that Comcast refused to carry the channel because it "counters the liberal politics of Comcast's own news channel, MSNBC."


challenging Fox News?

Maddow's comment on her July 22 MSNBC?

Comcast refused to carry the channel?

TheRUMP supports them?....Suing FOX NEWS?.....THAT would have been MY "title" if I was posting this story.

- Collapse -
you seem to not understand

All you mentioned is of no effect, nor bearing on this. The case is if they were "slandered" or not. They were.

- Collapse -
I'm surprised

JP hasn't been hired or interviewed for a job with MSNBC or CNN as a 'foreign' correspondent yet since he has become a proficient conspiracy theorist right up there with Maddow, the queen of conspiracy theorists.

- Collapse -
RE: I'm surprised JP hasn't been hired or interviewed

Who told you I wasn't?

- Collapse -
RE:The case is if they were "slandered" or not.

I disagree.

Taken from YOUR link

The suit contends that Comcast refused to carry the channel because it "counters the liberal politics of Comcast's own news channel, MSNBC."

Suit contends?...Charges?

Sounds like THEY are more offended/slandered/upset by the fact that THEY couldn't get THEIR channel on Comcast.

RE:President Charles Herring accused cable television giant Comcast of censorship.

REALLY????? censorship?....Maddow wasn't censored was she? Seems like they are saying she said what she wanted AND they let her say it.

Perhaps he should have charged them with bias.

OAN is being refused access BY Comcast, and OAN is using Maddow's opinion as stirring stick.

Is it written somewhere that Comcast HAS to allow any networks on THEIR netwoork?

You own a vehicle?....Do you HAVE to let someone it in?

PS...The word "slander" was not included in the link you posted.

Post was last edited on September 11, 2019 4:19 AM PDT

- Collapse -
censorship

It's often "one sided" when used. As for your example of a vehicle, the answer is yes, if it's a city bus, you can't discriminate. That's something main stream media and their carriers need to learn, and abide by.

- Collapse -
RE: the answer is yes,

YOU own a bus?

I asked do YOU own a vehicle?

I see what you and OAN have in common.

- Collapse -
yes?

Not buying your oranges when I wanted apples.

- Collapse -
IF you want to compare a bus to Comcast

You go where Comcast (the bus) is going to take you(OAN) or not even let you on the bus because you are a trouble maker..

More "censorship"?

RE:Not buying your oranges when I wanted apples.

All I see is sour grapes......They won't let OAN on Comcast.....boo hoo.

Why doesn't OAN expand it's own empire and put Comcast out of business?

- Collapse -
Comcast should be...

...treated as a utility, just like electric power supply is.

- Collapse -
RE:Comcast should be treated as a utility

AND OAN should be treated as a utility also?

Since you made Comcast a utility....all it's parts should also be a treated as a utility.....

It's only fair, right? Not as FAR right as OAN,,,

- Collapse -
Don't be ridiculouse

That's like saying retail stores who use electricity from local utility become a part of it, or homeowners who get water from local utility become a part of that utility. No, they are using the service, but not owned by such.

- Collapse -
Since YOU want them to be a "utility"

They would have to be available to all sides of political opinion.

I know how you feel about conspiracies theories.

OANN is known for its pro-Trump content, promotion of conspiracy theories and criticisms of the mainstream media. The media watchdog site mediabiasfactcheck.com rates OANN towards the extreme side of right wing content.

I just checked their website...they CLAIM you can watch/stream OAN live without a contract on your desktop or phone. Who needs Comcast? OR Verizon? OR Direct TV?

ONE saving grace would be they tell 8 stories in 10 minutes....unlike other networks that flog the same story for 15 minutes or 8 hours.

Of course OAN repeats the same 8 stories on a 12 minute loop for 8 hours.

8 right wing zingers in 10 minutes. Go for it....fill you boot.

OAN don't need no stinkin' Comcast.

RE:No, they are using the service, but not owned by such.

Using THAT logic whatever Maddow said is not the concern of Comcast and should not have been mentioned in this lawsuit.

Keep talking/digging.

- Collapse -
The BIGGEST CONSPIRACY was....

"RUSSIAN COLLUSION!!!!!!" and other LIES spewed like vomit on America and the World, for years by the same main lame stream liberal media, while they now accuse others of being "conspirators". May one day they burn and rot in Hell.

- Collapse -
RE: May one day they burn and rot in Hell.

Someone just came back from Faith and Ales?

- Collapse -
RE: LIES spewed like vomit

CLEANUP AT 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE!!!!!!!!!

I'm interested in knowing how you know which side is lying.

I may be wrong, but I don't think you have access to any information that the American public doesn't have access to.

IF you do...you haven't provided it in SE.

Would DJT have you replace Bolton?

WHY?

2 people...1 brain? HE wants like thinkers.

DJT....NO naysayers or Nattering Nabobs of Negativity(Richard Nixon is your idol?) allowed?

I am not a crook?

DJT heading for Maryland tonight....ENJOY.

- Collapse -
"A House divided can not stand"

Of course the President doesn't want division in his House, so he needs those who support him and his policies which he was elected to perform.

Luke 11:17 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall.

- Collapse -
RE: Luke 11:17

Doug!……………You’re up!

- Collapse -
The biggest liar in chief.....BO

YOUR idol?????????? He was COVERED UP in yes-men/women at all times. ANYONE who didn't agree with him and his agenda were gone pretty quickly, and when they got caught publicly with their illegal activities, they were allowed to 'retire' with full pensions rather than have to face prosecutions.....why would you think Trump or any other president shouldn't be allowed to be rid of naysayers on 'his' payroll? At least when HE fires people, they don't get to keep their perks.

- Collapse -
RE:.why would you think Trump
.why would you think Trump or any other president shouldn't be allowed to be rid of naysayers on 'his' payroll?

I thought these people were "advisers"....(people that explain "what if situations/options")...IF you are going to surround yourself with people that tell you what you want to hear....those people aren't "advisers".....

They are puppets, and you are the ventriloquist.

Since they are on HIS payroll... the Trump Organization should be paying their wages and benefits,

DJT said it himself, a few days ago,,,,,,,,He takes his own advice......Who needs advisers or the expense of having advisers,,,,,,KJU from North Korea also has no advisers.
- Collapse -
As usual...babble

without substance. BO had plenty of people who were advisors and were terminated when they didn't agree with him. But that doesn't seem to matter to you....I can recall a number of financial advisors and Generals who were gone pretty quickly. As I said...those who stuck around with brown noses and got caught at a public level doing wrong were allowed to 'retire' with benefits. Those who didn't stick their noses up his **** were outright fired...some with public displays by BO to humiliate them.

- Collapse -
RE:As usual....babble without substance

Without substance?....Are you saying there is nothing of substance that comes from POTUS?

A reporter asked Trump yesterday if perhaps someone on his team talked him out of hosting the meeting. He replied:

No. Actually, in terms of advisors, I took my own advice. I liked the idea of meeting…. We had a meeting scheduled. It was my idea, and it was my idea to terminate it. I didn’t even – I didn’t discuss it with anybody else.”

Advisers?...He don't need no stinkin' advisers.

Perhaps the White House should be renamed to Babble On.

HE liked the idea of a meeting.

WE scheduled a meeting.

It was HIS idea. (to HAVE a meeting)

It was HIS idea to terminate it.

AND HE didn't discuss it with anybody else.

No wonder Moscow Mitch won't bring any bills forward until the Big Bopper puts something in writing...even then, it doesn't mean HE won't terminate without telling anyone.

- Collapse -
RE:those who stuck around with brown noses and got caught at
those who stuck around with brown noses and got caught at a public level


So you believe ALL those people still there have "brown noses" and just haven't been caught, YET?

CNET Forums

Forum Info