The bbc, again.

for a long time, Trump has been saying that the main enemy out there is The Media. And he is correct.

If he could take out the BBC, it would be another Trump-triumph.
 
Last edited:
Here’s an idea, why doesn’t Trump just ban all BBC journalists from the US? If he feels that he has been wronged then that would be easier than a $1 billion court case. The BBC would still exist and Trump wouldn’t be on our screens so much; surely a double win for Wisbech…
 
Common Sense Club said:
Here’s an idea, why doesn’t Trump just ban all BBC journalists from the US? If he feels that he has been wronged then that would be easier than a $1 billion court case. The BBC would still exist and Trump wouldn’t be on our screens so much; surely a double win for Wisbech…
Click to expand...
Biden refused to speak to the BBC because he's Irish. Well, he isn't but he thinks he is.
 
Common Sense Club said:
Here’s an idea, why doesn’t Trump just ban all BBC journalists from the US? If he feels that he has been wronged then that would be easier than a $1 billion court case. The BBC would still exist and Trump wouldn’t be on our screens so much; surely a double win for Wisbech…
Click to expand...

I guess it's about making a point and standing up to the fake news media world and holding them to account for the misinformation that they spread.

It would also discourage other news channels and outlets from doing the same.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
That'll be a good legal defence - they could have distorted this speech even more but they didn't. It's as good as "they were right to do it because Trump is a bad man".
Click to expand...
The whole affair reminds me of the 80s dystopian Arnie movie "The Running Man".

Even knowing the storyline was a movie and not real life, the concept of government funded mainstream television deliberately fabricated to push ratings made my blood boil.

I am still trying to process that we are now seeing almost exactly that play out in real life on the principal state funded UK public service broadcaster.
 
Would Trump try to divert attention from other things by attacking the BBC?

You bet he would.

He issued another batch of late night pardons to his co-conspirators in his attempt to overturn the 2020 election report. Which was the whole point of the Panorama documentary.

Is there nothing this corrupt lowlife will do?

www.bbc.co.uk

Trump pardons Giuliani and others accused of plot to overturn 2020 election

He also pardons his former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows in a proclamation vowing to "end a grave national injustice".
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
Common Sense Club said:
Here’s an idea, why doesn’t Trump just ban all BBC journalists from the US? If he feels that he has been wronged then that would be easier than a $1 billion court case. The BBC would still exist and Trump wouldn’t be on our screens so much; surely a double win for Wisbech…
Click to expand...
He has already banned almost all of the MSM which doesn’t follow his line. Criticise him and you are out. The BBC will be next.
 
Put the Trump issue to one side. There is a clear and evident bias towards the left within theBBC as demonstrated by their reporting on Israel, Trans issues,race. They base everything they report ob social media activity and probably use algorithms to decide the content of news reporting. Where do you go to get reportage you can genuinely believe?
 
Common Sense Club said:
Here’s an idea, why doesn’t Trump just ban all BBC journalists from the US? If he feels that he has been wronged then that would be easier than a $1 billion court case. The BBC would still exist and Trump wouldn’t be on our screens so much; surely a double win for Wisbech…
Click to expand...
Just ban the BBC USA service which provides a lot of their income, the BBC only show Trump when they can be negative so if BBC " news " never reported on him it would make little difference to how much we see on UK screens.
 
Last edited:
totoshkin said:
Put the Trump issue to one side. There is a clear and evident bias towards the left within theBBC as demonstrated by their reporting on Israel, Trans issues,race. They base everything they report ob social media activity and probably use algorithms to decide the content of news reporting. Where do you go to get reportage you can genuinely believe?
Click to expand...
Unless you are there witnessing events with your own eyes, or networked to real people you know and trust, I do not think this exists in 2025 sadly.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
You can regard James O’Brian however you like but you cannot deny the evidence he presents. It’s there on screen. Argue with his conclusions if you wish, and can. Although I fail to see how anybody with more than half a brain could.

You won’t see the evidence unless you watch it. Only your prejudice can stop that.
Click to expand...
Is his show edited though?
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I also watched James O’Brien’s take on this tonight. It’s interesting, not only because it’s so obviously true, but also because he inserts a number of other clips from “that speech”. Clips which put those used in the Panorama documentary into greater context. If you really want to get to grips with this then do watch it.

Click to expand...

So James O'Brien did his own edit, which you also liked, so that helps a lot

Have you tried to listen to the entire speech as a whole and made your decision from that?
 
cryrst said:
So the chairman says it was an ‘error of judgement’ to edit the stories together.
No s*** Sherlock 😂
Click to expand...
How many more times will the BBC make the same statement, every scandal they just trot out the same excuses. They still haven't apologised to Trump if they don't they will face a massive lawsuit, even if they win it will cost a fortune in lawyers.

They have been sitting on this report since January, why? It should not have taken more than a few days to decide if the report had merit.

Who approved this program they need to be sanctioned.

I see today some of the media are going after Robbie Gibb, apparently as he is a Tory it's all his fault. It's worth having a look at the governors they are mostly centre left buying into the whole DEI if you read their mini bios. But apparently they have been bullied into this criticism by Robbie Gibb.

Maybe the board should be reconstituted so that each political party has 1 member at least then we do away with the pretence that they are impartial.
 
georgenorman said:
Is his show edited though?
Click to expand...
Not enough.
If Trump does sue and win it would be the equivalent of about 4.5 m license fees. How could they pay it?
Maybe they could crowdfund the case and rely on their more ardent supporters to cough up or rely on a few more repeats; neither Dad's Army or Morecambe & Wise have been on this week (so far).
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Not enough.
If Trump does sue and win it would be the equivalent of about 4.5 m license fees. How could they pay it?
Maybe they could crowdfund the case and rely on their more ardent supporters to cough up or rely on a few more repeats; neither Dad's Army or Morecambe & Wise have been on this week (so far).
Click to expand...
It can be quite difficult to sue in in the USA as libel is often covered by freedom of speech e.g. if I believe something to be true then even if it isn't it's fair comment. So you have to show malicious intent to win.

So my guess is the BBC lawyers will tell them it will be hard for Trump to win however it will be extremely costly for the BBC and unlikely that the judge will award costs as they are guilty in all but name. So unlikely a judge will sympathise with them because they refuse to apologise for a factual error.

Trump also has other levers including banning BBC USA.

My guess is the BBC would be plain stupid not to apologise to Trump as the odds of it ending well for them are low. Just suck it up grit your teeth and have done with it.
 
Badger11 said:
It can be quite difficult to sue in in the USA as libel is often covered by freedom of speech e.g. if I believe something to be true then even if it isn't it's fair comment. So you have to show malicious intent to win.

So my guess is the BBC lawyers will tell them it will be hard for Trump to win however it will be extremely costly for the BBC and unlikely that the judge will award costs as they are guilty in all but name. So unlikely a judge will sympathise with them because they refuse to apologise for a factual error.

Trump also has other levers including banning BBC USA.

My guess is the BBC would be plain stupid not to apologise to Trump as the odds of it ending well for them are low. Just suck it up grit your teeth and have done with it.
Click to expand...
It probably would be harder to win in America but I've read that the statute of limitations is a year here and two years in Florida so it would have to be there.
Yes, an apology or an expensive lawsuit wouldn't seem to be a hard choice.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
Not enough.
If Trump does sue and win it would be the equivalent of about 4.5 m license fees. How could they pay it?
Maybe they could crowdfund the case and rely on their more ardent supporters to cough up or rely on a few more repeats; neither Dad's Army or Morecambe & Wise have been on this week (so far).
Click to expand...
Professional liability insurance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top