Fox wouldn’t be doing their job if they reported accurately and with an objective to inform. Nope. Gotta present this thing that was also true when Trump was in the white house as though it was decreed by Biden himself. A total affront to patriotic christians. And then he spit on a picture of Jesus.
Fox is an outrage generator.
Well, we should be outraged. This is as bad as wearing a tan suit or eating different mustard!
They’re a high-budget supermarket tabloid.
Joe should exercise a little Presidential Immunity and drop a bunker buster in their headquarters
Many say a president can do this.
When you’re president, they let you do it.
Just send Seal Team 6. Trump’s attorney swore in open court that it is legal as long as he kills most of the Senators too.
That’s an insane thing to suggest. Imagine actually living in a country that deals with internal disagreements like this. You’re on the wrong side of history here.
Fortunately, literally everyone else can that it’s sarcasm in reference to Trump’s legal team who suggested this route unironically.
think what you like
Yeah, if only he had suggested to shoot the journalists instead, which Trump LITERALLY did, then that’d be fine with you. Obviously.
Removed by mod
I’m more surprised the daily fucking caller actually retracted the story.
deleted by creator
I’m sure that’s how Fox is spinning it
Removed by mod
Ive always preferred Faux News
That would not be easy to understand for their target audience
Oh, FCC?
The FCC has no authority over cable, they can only regulate content on public airwaves.
So…what about all of these policies?
Sorry, I meant they generally have no authority over the content of cable broadcasts because it would violate the first amendment.
Example From the link you posted:
Section 505 states that cable operators or other multichannel video programming distributors who offer sexually explicit programming or other programming that is indecent on any channel(s) primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming must fully scramble or block both the audio and video portions of the channels so that someone who does not subscribe to the channel does not receive it. Until a multichannel video distributor complies with this provision, the distributor cannot provide the programming during hours when a significant number of children are likely to view it In 1996, the Commission adopted interim rules to implement Section 505 of the 1996 Act. The interim rules established the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. as those hours when a significant number of children are likely to have access to and view the programming. However, before the rules could take effect, Section 505 was challenged in the courts and a federal court in Delaware issued a decision (Playboy Entertainment Group v. U.S.) which determined that Section 505 is unconstitutional
