Hillary Campaign Issues CHILLING Threat to Conservative Websites… This Is SICK

[westwall]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

You mean like when the MSM lies about things and people? Do you agree that we the people should be allowed to sue NBC, CBS, and the like for when they lie?

 

[PredFan]

Well that's your opinion. Personally, knowing Hillary's sordid history, I'm pretty sure that her campaign did say it. She's the one who wanted to shit down half of the right wing radio shows by reinstating the fairness doctrine, and she's a member of the DNC who constantly attempts by any means possible to shut down all speech they don't like.

I believe them over you and any of your links, because it fits what I already know to be true.

My point again, is that it amounts only to pandering.

Trump has barred Washington Post reporters, and others, from his press conferences, has promised to open up the libel laws so he can sue, sue, sue, but Hillary wanting to shut down a white supremicist website is the most horrible thing ever.

You believe what you want to believe and truth be damned, is what you said. You deserve your piece of shit candidate.

Didn't read past "White Supremacist Website". Have the courtesy to know something about the subject.

I do. The National Enquirer has more credibility.

No, moron, you don't. You didn't say they lack credibility, you called them a White Supremacist Website. Thanks for demonstrating just how stupid you are. Dismissed.

 

[bripat9643]

Well that's your opinion. Personally, knowing Hillary's sordid history, I'm pretty sure that her campaign did say it. She's the one who wanted to shit down half of the right wing radio shows by reinstating the fairness doctrine, and she's a member of the DNC who constantly attempts by any means possible to shut down all speech they don't like.

I believe them over you and any of your links, because it fits what I already know to be true.

My point again, is that it amounts only to pandering.

Trump has barred Washington Post reporters, and others, from his press conferences, has promised to open up the libel laws so he can sue, sue, sue, but Hillary wanting to shut down a white supremicist website is the most horrible thing ever.

You believe what you want to believe and truth be damned, is what you said. You deserve your piece of shit candidate.

Didn't read past "White Supremacist Website". Have the courtesy to know something about the subject.

I do. The National Enquirer has more credibility.

No, moron, you don't. You didn't say they lack credibility, you called them a White Supremacist Website. Thanks for demonstrating just how stupid you are. Dismissed.

Dragonlady is one of the dumber douche bags in the forum.

 

[OKTexas]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

Show where I said that? See, you know that I did not, but you libel me with a lie and a slander.

Yes, whoever breaks those libel laws right or left or center or oktexas need to pay the price.

 

[jillian]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

*rofl*

 

[JakeStarkey]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

*rofl*

Yeah, OK is not OK when it comes to successful libel.

 

[OKTexas]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

Show where I said that? See, you know that I did not, but you libel me with a lie and a slander.

Yes, whoever breaks those libel laws right or left or center or oktexas need to pay the price.

Poor baby, did you get your panties in a twist because I lumped you in with the regressives?

Trump trying to destroy Free Press?

Donald Trump's Attempt to Destroy Press Freedom Is Reminiscent of 1930's Fascists

5. Threatening the media with libel. Last month, Trump vowed to make libel laws more punitive against the media if he becomes president. "I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money," Trump said during a campaign event in Texas.

A free society depends on a free press. Which is why demagogues and fascists like Trump seek to destroy press freedom.

So feel free to point out the differences between what the regressives reported about Trump and the conservatives reported about the hildabitch. I'm not seeing any regressives calling the hildabitch a demagogue or fascist.

 

[Spare_change]

No copy of the email here or at the link, so please post it.

From the link: "“Breitbart is something different. They make Fox News look like a Democratic Party pamphlet. They’re a different breed altogether — not just conservative but radical, bigoted, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic conspiracy peddlers who never have been and never should be anywhere near the levers of power in this country,” the email states."

If the sites are being threatened with libel suits, well, tough.

Libel? Did I miss that word anywhere in the tantrum by the Clinton camp? They never mentioned libel ... they only mentioned shutting it down.

 

[Spare_change]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Yes, it certainly should .... wonder why it hasn't been?

Could it be because they haven't lied? Maybe?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

Weren't you regressives beating up on Trump when he said it should be easier to sue the press when they lied, now here you are defending it. Hypocrite much?

Show where I said that? See, you know that I did not, but you libel me with a lie and a slander.

Yes, whoever breaks those libel laws right or left or center or oktexas need to pay the price.

Poor baby, did you get your panties in a twist because I lumped you in with the regressives?

Trump trying to destroy Free Press?

Donald Trump's Attempt to Destroy Press Freedom Is Reminiscent of 1930's Fascists

5. Threatening the media with libel. Last month, Trump vowed to make libel laws more punitive against the media if he becomes president. "I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money," Trump said during a campaign event in Texas.

A free society depends on a free press. Which is why demagogues and fascists like Trump seek to destroy press freedom.

So feel free to point out the differences between what the regressives reported about Trump and the conservatives reported about the hildabitch. I'm not seeing any regressives calling the hildabitch a demagogue or fascist.

You lied. End of story. The far right regressive crazies are crashing the campaign for Comrade Donald.

 

[mudwhistle]

You've been hearing that democrats are Stalinist. Here's the news that confirms it.

Hillary Campaign Issues CHILLING Threat to Conservative Websites... This Is SICK

Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign has issued a threat to a major conservative website that should have all conservatives — and anyone that believes in the First Amendment — very concerned.

The Daily Caller reported that Clinton’s campaign sent out a fundraising email with a serious threat to conservative news site Breitbart News. The email essentially said that the site has no “right to exist,” and threatened that if Clinton is elected, she will work to take down Breitbart, sites like it, and presumably their readers.

The email, which was sent Thursday and signed by deputy communications director Christina Reynolds, goes on to claim that the “regular conservative media” is fine, but that Breitbart is different.

“We’ve had a conservative media in this country for a while. I don’t always like what they have to say, but I respect their role and their right to exist,” Reynolds wrote.

The email goes on to malign Breitbart and references what likely sparked the email, Breitbart News Executive Chairman, Stephen K. Bannon, being appointed as chief executive of GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s campaign:

“Breitbart is something different. They make Fox News look like a Democratic Party pamphlet. They’re a different breed altogether — not just conservative but radical, bigoted, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic conspiracy peddlers who never have been and never should be anywhere near the levers of power in this country,” the email states.

Based apparently on Reynolds’ ill-educated assumptions about Breitbart and on her inability to deal with anyone that disagrees with her, Reynold’s goes on to threaten “these people,” referring presumably to Breitbart and by association those who read it:

“It goes without saying that we have to beat these people. But I want to beat them so decisively that their kind never rises again.”

The Democrat party is truly an enemy of free speech. Whenever Democrats are challenged with logic and facts, they throw around words like “bigot” and “racist” to try and silence dissenting voices. ​

Maybe the second amendment people will stop Hillary......I don't know. Just maybe.

 

[JBond]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

You lie on a daily basis about candidates, so quit whining like a little bitch.

 

[hazlnut]

You've been hearing that democrats are Stalinist. Here's the news that confirms it.

Hillary Campaign Issues CHILLING Threat to Conservative Websites... This Is SICK

Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign has issued a threat to a major conservative website that should have all conservatives — and anyone that believes in the First Amendment — very concerned.

The Daily Caller reported that Clinton’s campaign sent out a fundraising email with a serious threat to conservative news site Breitbart News. The email essentially said that the site has no “right to exist,” and threatened that if Clinton is elected, she will work to take down Breitbart, sites like it, and presumably their readers.

The email, which was sent Thursday and signed by deputy communications director Christina Reynolds, goes on to claim that the “regular conservative media” is fine, but that Breitbart is different.

“We’ve had a conservative media in this country for a while. I don’t always like what they have to say, but I respect their role and their right to exist,” Reynolds wrote.

The email goes on to malign Breitbart and references what likely sparked the email, Breitbart News Executive Chairman, Stephen K. Bannon, being appointed as chief executive of GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump’s campaign:

“Breitbart is something different. They make Fox News look like a Democratic Party pamphlet. They’re a different breed altogether — not just conservative but radical, bigoted, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic conspiracy peddlers who never have been and never should be anywhere near the levers of power in this country,” the email states.

Based apparently on Reynolds’ ill-educated assumptions about Breitbart and on her inability to deal with anyone that disagrees with her, Reynold’s goes on to threaten “these people,” referring presumably to Breitbart and by association those who read it:

“It goes without saying that we have to beat these people. But I want to beat them so decisively that their kind never rises again.”

The Democrat party is truly an enemy of free speech. Whenever Democrats are challenged with logic and facts, they throw around words like “bigot” and “racist” to try and silence dissenting voices. ​

Please post a copy of this email.

We can wait.

 

[mudwhistle]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

If that was the case, the media would be sued to Hell and back.

 

[jc456]

You've been hearing that democrats are Stalinist

No, I have never heard that...

never? really? I thought you've been in the forum for awhile. Never? That's a big word there.

 

[jc456]

It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

If that was the case, the media would be sued to Hell and back.

I'd say that's a slippery slope for the left and they'd slide right down.

 

[hadit]

[
It can and should be charged under libel laws when it intentionally lies about a candidate.

So you also think the lies about Zimmerman and Trump put out by CNN, MSNBC, PBS, and almot every MSM are actionable?

I think any media outlet that intentionally libels without proof should be prosecuted, yes.

Would that apply to Dan Blather's failed attempt to take out Bush?

 

[hadit]

"Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel."

Granted, in the internet age, ink is no longer used, but the sentiment is accurate. Silencing an opponent is more difficult than ever.

 

[hadit]

You've been hearing that democrats are Stalinist

No, I have never heard that...

never? really? I thought you've been in the forum for awhile. Never? That's a big word there.

You can avoid hearing things you don't like if you run to a safe place, cover your ears and chant very loudly.