Julian Assange Interview Sean Hannity in London 1/3/17

[AllBoxingAD]

Like what? You didn't seem to be able to list anything. Did he OFFEND YOU?

Offend me? Never.

His show is the most dishonest ive seen on Fox. He is there to push his idology, never to have a contructive conversation about anything.

Everybody does this to an extent but he is over the top with it. Thats not an exageration.

He takes defending the 'right' and blaming the 'left' to an unbearable level.

[1bad65]

His show is the most dishonest ive seen on Fox.

Any specific examples you can cite?

[Monaco Slim]

Offend me? Never.

His show is the most dishonest ive seen on Fox. He is there to push his idology, never to have a contructive conversation about anything.

Everybody does this to an extent but he is over the top with it. Thats not an exageration.

He takes defending the 'right' and blaming the 'left' to an unbearable level.

The left are ****S. Real satanic pieces of ****, the enemy of good.

[AllBoxingAD]

Any specific examples you can cite?

Sure.

He invited Tavis Smiley for Simley to promote his new book, but when Tavis got there, he couldnt put in two words about his book, Hannity kept steering the conversation away from the book and tried to make it about ***** and getting Simley to criticize *****.

Or how about the times Hannity invtied people to disuss *** and when they get there, all he wants to talk about is the violence in Chicago. Which is no way related to *** and shows that he is prepared to use a humanitarian crisis as a cheap diversionary tactic.

In both examples I gave, it shows you that Hannity isnt interested in actually discussing anything with his guests, he is only interested in pushing his ideology, and that makes his show a dishonest one.

[AllBoxingAD]

The left are ****S. Real satanic pieces of ****, the enemy of good.

Ok.

And who is 'good'?

Ive been asking myself that for a long time.

[Eff Pandas]

I like Assange & more importantly what he represents, but how would he know if Russians did or didn't hack any specific thing or not? I mean clearly someone hacked the DNC. They didn't f#cking hack themselves & leak info that would make them look corrupt & like *******s. So someone did it. Why not Russian hackers?

Or if he's saying it didn't influence the election how the f#ck would anyone even know that? I don't know how you'd even prove that enough people heard the DNC stuff & decided to take it out on Hillary or not take it out on Hillary in all the states to affect the election.

Didn't watch the video so maybe I'm missing something in the headline here so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken on Assange's take on this.

[1bad65]

He invited Tavis Smiley for Simley to promote his new book, but when Tavis got there, he couldnt put in two words about his book, Hannity kept steering the conversation away from the book and tried to make it about ***** and getting Simley to criticize *****.

Not an example of dishonesty, nor sourced.

Try again.

Or how about the times Hannity invtied people to disuss *** and when they get there, all he wants to talk about is the violence in Chicago.

Same as above.

Try again.


FYI, you don't get to define 'dishonesty' to fit your stance here. You have to provide examples of dishonesty.

Let me cite a few examples (which I'll source if asked):

1. NBC hid igniters under GM trucks to make it appear they had a design defect causing them to explode in crashes. NBC settled out of court with GM

2. Dan Rather accepted anonymous faxes from Kinko's done in MS Word as legit 1960s-era docs to try and say Bush lied about his 1960s military service. Rather was fired (or demoted) for his dishonesty.

Those are examples of press dishonesty. You need to cite something similar that Mr Hannity has done.

Good luck with that!

[1bad65]

Didn't watch the video so maybe I'm missing something in the headline here so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken on Assange's take on this.

You might want to read a video before commenting on it's contents.

For example, Assange pointed out that Podesta's password, which he foolishly gave to those phishing him, was "password". It doesn't take a foreign Government to hack people that ******.

[Rudyo]

Hannity is a conservative ideologue, when you view him as such instead of viewing him as a "newsman" like Baier or Shepard Smith it's a lot easier to get through his show. People are mistaken when they say that he is "dishonest" or "lying" about the news (I dislike Hannity as well). He doesn't claim to be unbiased.

Just like MSNBC and a good amount of the people on CNN. All honestly are ****. There are good news people at Fox though like Baier and Smith who I mentioned earlier.

[The Big Dunn]

Hannity is a conservative ideologue, when you view him as such instead of viewing him as a "newsman" like Baier or Shepard Smith it's a lot easier to get through his show. People are mistaken when they say that he is "dishonest" or "lying" about the news (I dislike Hannity as well). He doesn't claim to be unbiased.

Just like MSNBC and a good amount of the people on CNN. All honestly are ****. There are good news people at Fox though like Baier and Smith who I mentioned earlier.

This right here.