Trump Goes After The 1st Amendment

[hadit]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”


MOD EDIT: Please don't post entire articles.


Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

Is there really no understanding that it is illegal to publish another individual's income tax information without their permission? This isn't a First Amendment issue. Sad that wasn't glaringly obvious from the beginning.

 

[hadit]

If Donald Trump thinks the media will back off out of fear of being called names by him then he is in for a big surprise.

Yeah we know the Goebbels leftist media hack wing of the DNC won't stop lying... shocker.

the Orange goon will be mocked and disrespected 24/7/365 ..that white orange goon is not worthy of any respect at all

Orange Mucus Trump a mother ****** who has offended and insulted

POW S
Gold Star Families
women
Mexicans
Muslims
the disabled

Sure is a whinny little ***** when he gets mocked LOL

And yet he's still going to be your president. Tissue?

 

[FA_Q2]

Silly far left drone!

Twitter is not TV, no matter how you want to spin it.

I can watch videos on many devices, but that does not make them a TV.

So you finally going to be an adult and admit you were wrong?

I didn't say videos. I said tv. Can you watch TV programming on your computer?

So I will take it as a no that you will not be an adult and admit you were wrong!

You said twitter was TV, so no backing down now.

Be an adult and admit you were wrong!

If it broadcast live network television programming, it is a media platform. There is no argument here. End of story. Give up dude. You didn't even know about Trump's Network.

This really does not support your original assertion though - that we may see state run media with Trump.

Twitter, YouTube, e-mail, Facebook, myspace and many others do indeed represent new outlets for media to be broadcast. There is a fundamental difference in an outlet used to reach your audience and what a news or media network represents. A network is far from simply using media to broadcast your own message. I have several friends that have their own YouTube channels, almost everyone I know has a Facebook page and literally everyone I know actively uses e-mail. None of them would qualify for having their own network or own a media outlet. I take it though from the way that you made your point that you seem to think that this is new - IOW during Obama's tenure we did not have state run media 'like Russia' as you were charging may well happen under Trump. Are you not aware that Obama also has a Facebook, e-mail and twitter outlet? He has made web pages for the dissemination of positive propaganda for several of his initiatives as well such as the ACA. Suddenly using those outlets to spread your own message is state run media like Russia?

Your original contention is rather silly in its charge - Russia state run media does not exist because the Russian state puts out information under any platform. It exists because no one else can put out information to the contrary on those same platforms. When Trump tries to take down media organizations for putting information out there contrary to the state story then such a charge can be made. Otherwise, it is false fear mongering based on nothing.

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.

The media networks have 'de-lagitimized' themselves. Trump has done nothing more than tap into the deep mistrust they have cultured by becoming nothing more than talking points for their chosen political target audience. Trump did not create the asinine atmosphere that is practiced by FOX, CNN and the rest of the alphabet soup. They are no longer legitimate not because Trump pointed the hypocrisy out, they are not longer legitimate because they no longer care about journalism.

That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

 

[hadit]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”

But Trump has undermined the press by limiting its access to him, while surrogates have made the absurd claim that facts simply don’t exist anymore. The incoming commander in chief has also suggested that Americans who burn flags should lose their citizenship and do jail time. That would be a clear violation of the constitution, as the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag burning was constitutionally protected speech.

The New York Observer, which is owned by Trump’s son in law and close adviser, Jared Kushner, also published an op-ed this week calling on the FBI to investigate nationwide protests ― a form of constitutionally protected free speech ― following Trump’s victory.

Trump’s statement that Muslims should be banned from entering the United States is also an attack on the First Amendment, along with several other constitutional protections.

But perhaps more disturbingly, there’s been logic emerging from the Trump team that anything Trump does is protected by the office of the presidency.

When he explained the potential conflict of interest with his business, for example, Trump said “the law’s totally on my side, the president can’t have a conflict of interest.”

Kellyanne Conway, another of Trump’s campaign managers, said that his spreading misinformation on Twitter constituted presidential behavior simply because he specifically engaged in it.

“He’s the president-elect, so that’s presidential behavior,” she said.

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

How is trump not talking to the media obstruction of the first amendment? Wow, spot on lib talking points

Reporters have an inflated sense of their own self-importance.

 

[FA_Q2]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”


MOD EDIT: Please don't post entire articles.


Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

Is there really no understanding that it is illegal to publish another individual's income tax information without their permission? This isn't a First Amendment issue. Sad that wasn't glaringly obvious from the beginning.

I think it was and that is why there is almost no one talking about the pointless conjecture that the OP put out there.

 

[hadit]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”


MOD EDIT: Please don't post entire articles.


Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

Is there really no understanding that it is illegal to publish another individual's income tax information without their permission? This isn't a First Amendment issue. Sad that wasn't glaringly obvious from the beginning.

I think it was and that is why there is almost no one talking about the pointless conjecture that the OP put out there.

The current rage is all about fake news. This OP is a good example.

 

[Lewdog]

I didn't say videos. I said tv. Can you watch TV programming on your computer?

So I will take it as a no that you will not be an adult and admit you were wrong!

You said twitter was TV, so no backing down now.

Be an adult and admit you were wrong!

If it broadcast live network television programming, it is a media platform. There is no argument here. End of story. Give up dude. You didn't even know about Trump's Network.

This really does not support your original assertion though - that we may see state run media with Trump.

Twitter, YouTube, e-mail, Facebook, myspace and many others do indeed represent new outlets for media to be broadcast. There is a fundamental difference in an outlet used to reach your audience and what a news or media network represents. A network is far from simply using media to broadcast your own message. I have several friends that have their own YouTube channels, almost everyone I know has a Facebook page and literally everyone I know actively uses e-mail. None of them would qualify for having their own network or own a media outlet. I take it though from the way that you made your point that you seem to think that this is new - IOW during Obama's tenure we did not have state run media 'like Russia' as you were charging may well happen under Trump. Are you not aware that Obama also has a Facebook, e-mail and twitter outlet? He has made web pages for the dissemination of positive propaganda for several of his initiatives as well such as the ACA. Suddenly using those outlets to spread your own message is state run media like Russia?

Your original contention is rather silly in its charge - Russia state run media does not exist because the Russian state puts out information under any platform. It exists because no one else can put out information to the contrary on those same platforms. When Trump tries to take down media organizations for putting information out there contrary to the state story then such a charge can be made. Otherwise, it is false fear mongering based on nothing.

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.

The media networks have 'de-lagitimized' themselves. Trump has done nothing more than tap into the deep mistrust they have cultured by becoming nothing more than talking points for their chosen political target audience. Trump did not create the asinine atmosphere that is practiced by FOX, CNN and the rest of the alphabet soup. They are no longer legitimate not because Trump pointed the hypocrisy out, they are not longer legitimate because they no longer care about journalism.

That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

 

[FA_Q2]

So I will take it as a no that you will not be an adult and admit you were wrong!

You said twitter was TV, so no backing down now.

Be an adult and admit you were wrong!

If it broadcast live network television programming, it is a media platform. There is no argument here. End of story. Give up dude. You didn't even know about Trump's Network.

This really does not support your original assertion though - that we may see state run media with Trump.

Twitter, YouTube, e-mail, Facebook, myspace and many others do indeed represent new outlets for media to be broadcast. There is a fundamental difference in an outlet used to reach your audience and what a news or media network represents. A network is far from simply using media to broadcast your own message. I have several friends that have their own YouTube channels, almost everyone I know has a Facebook page and literally everyone I know actively uses e-mail. None of them would qualify for having their own network or own a media outlet. I take it though from the way that you made your point that you seem to think that this is new - IOW during Obama's tenure we did not have state run media 'like Russia' as you were charging may well happen under Trump. Are you not aware that Obama also has a Facebook, e-mail and twitter outlet? He has made web pages for the dissemination of positive propaganda for several of his initiatives as well such as the ACA. Suddenly using those outlets to spread your own message is state run media like Russia?

Your original contention is rather silly in its charge - Russia state run media does not exist because the Russian state puts out information under any platform. It exists because no one else can put out information to the contrary on those same platforms. When Trump tries to take down media organizations for putting information out there contrary to the state story then such a charge can be made. Otherwise, it is false fear mongering based on nothing.

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.

The media networks have 'de-lagitimized' themselves. Trump has done nothing more than tap into the deep mistrust they have cultured by becoming nothing more than talking points for their chosen political target audience. Trump did not create the asinine atmosphere that is practiced by FOX, CNN and the rest of the alphabet soup. They are no longer legitimate not because Trump pointed the hypocrisy out, they are not longer legitimate because they no longer care about journalism.

That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

 

[Lewdog]

If it broadcast live network television programming, it is a media platform. There is no argument here. End of story. Give up dude. You didn't even know about Trump's Network.

This really does not support your original assertion though - that we may see state run media with Trump.

Twitter, YouTube, e-mail, Facebook, myspace and many others do indeed represent new outlets for media to be broadcast. There is a fundamental difference in an outlet used to reach your audience and what a news or media network represents. A network is far from simply using media to broadcast your own message. I have several friends that have their own YouTube channels, almost everyone I know has a Facebook page and literally everyone I know actively uses e-mail. None of them would qualify for having their own network or own a media outlet. I take it though from the way that you made your point that you seem to think that this is new - IOW during Obama's tenure we did not have state run media 'like Russia' as you were charging may well happen under Trump. Are you not aware that Obama also has a Facebook, e-mail and twitter outlet? He has made web pages for the dissemination of positive propaganda for several of his initiatives as well such as the ACA. Suddenly using those outlets to spread your own message is state run media like Russia?

Your original contention is rather silly in its charge - Russia state run media does not exist because the Russian state puts out information under any platform. It exists because no one else can put out information to the contrary on those same platforms. When Trump tries to take down media organizations for putting information out there contrary to the state story then such a charge can be made. Otherwise, it is false fear mongering based on nothing.

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.

The media networks have 'de-lagitimized' themselves. Trump has done nothing more than tap into the deep mistrust they have cultured by becoming nothing more than talking points for their chosen political target audience. Trump did not create the asinine atmosphere that is practiced by FOX, CNN and the rest of the alphabet soup. They are no longer legitimate not because Trump pointed the hypocrisy out, they are not longer legitimate because they no longer care about journalism.

That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

 

[FA_Q2]

This really does not support your original assertion though - that we may see state run media with Trump.

Twitter, YouTube, e-mail, Facebook, myspace and many others do indeed represent new outlets for media to be broadcast. There is a fundamental difference in an outlet used to reach your audience and what a news or media network represents. A network is far from simply using media to broadcast your own message. I have several friends that have their own YouTube channels, almost everyone I know has a Facebook page and literally everyone I know actively uses e-mail. None of them would qualify for having their own network or own a media outlet. I take it though from the way that you made your point that you seem to think that this is new - IOW during Obama's tenure we did not have state run media 'like Russia' as you were charging may well happen under Trump. Are you not aware that Obama also has a Facebook, e-mail and twitter outlet? He has made web pages for the dissemination of positive propaganda for several of his initiatives as well such as the ACA. Suddenly using those outlets to spread your own message is state run media like Russia?

Your original contention is rather silly in its charge - Russia state run media does not exist because the Russian state puts out information under any platform. It exists because no one else can put out information to the contrary on those same platforms. When Trump tries to take down media organizations for putting information out there contrary to the state story then such a charge can be made. Otherwise, it is false fear mongering based on nothing.

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.

The media networks have 'de-lagitimized' themselves. Trump has done nothing more than tap into the deep mistrust they have cultured by becoming nothing more than talking points for their chosen political target audience. Trump did not create the asinine atmosphere that is practiced by FOX, CNN and the rest of the alphabet soup. They are no longer legitimate not because Trump pointed the hypocrisy out, they are not longer legitimate because they no longer care about journalism.

That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

Edit: BTW, stating the dems have tried it is not a tangent - it is a solid point that such a sentiment is and has been out there without any movement to a state run media situation. The only reason that this objection is taking root now is Trump and how polarizing his election was not to mention that any criticism of Trump has been taken as valid criticism lately no matter how absurd.

 

[jknowgood]

And soon we will be like Russia with state run media.

That pretty much what we have now. Dingle berry.

 

[Lewdog]

You are totally missing what is going on. Trump (and Russia) have taken the first step by working to delegitimize the MSM and basically the regular media channels, and the work to use the new media channels with his own network, showing that the regular way can not be trusted to get his "true" message across.
That's just the first step to taking over the MSM and making it state run. The next step would be to use that delegitimization as a reason to then place strict government imposed regulations on it, in order to legitimize it. He then moves his network to the regular markets... pushing it as the only "true" source for legitimate news... and next thing you know the rest of the networks start to go under and you have only a few networks left. Just like Russia.

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Breitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

 

[jc456]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”

But Trump has undermined the press by limiting its access to him, while surrogates have made the absurd claim that facts simply don’t exist anymore. The incoming commander in chief has also suggested that Americans who burn flags should lose their citizenship and do jail time. That would be a clear violation of the constitution, as the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that flag burning was constitutionally protected speech.

The New York Observer, which is owned by Trump’s son in law and close adviser, Jared Kushner, also published an op-ed this week calling on the FBI to investigate nationwide protests ― a form of constitutionally protected free speech ― following Trump’s victory.

Trump’s statement that Muslims should be banned from entering the United States is also an attack on the First Amendment, along with several other constitutional protections.

But perhaps more disturbingly, there’s been logic emerging from the Trump team that anything Trump does is protected by the office of the presidency.

When he explained the potential conflict of interest with his business, for example, Trump said “the law’s totally on my side, the president can’t have a conflict of interest.”

Kellyanne Conway, another of Trump’s campaign managers, said that his spreading misinformation on Twitter constituted presidential behavior simply because he specifically engaged in it.

“He’s the president-elect, so that’s presidential behavior,” she said.

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

How is trump not talking to the media obstruction of the first amendment? Wow, spot on lib talking points

Reporters have an inflated sense of their own self-importance.

well for one thing, they aren't news reporters any longer. They only provide editorials.

 

[jc456]

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Greitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

could you try again in english?

 

[Lewdog]

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Greitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

could you try again in english?

I'm sorry, you can't read English?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

With a little over a month until Donald Trump takes office, the president-elect and his allies have already begun to attack the guarantees of the First Amendment, signaling how imperiled the fundamental freedoms of the Constitution could be under a Trump presidency.

Trump has long shown contempt for the media and, as he prepares to take power, he and his allies haven’t held back.

On Thursday, Corey Lewandowski, who is Trump’s former campaign manager and expected to have a role in a Trump White House, said that New York Times editor Dean Baquet should be in jail because the paper published parts of Trump’s tax return during the campaign.

“We had one of the top people at The New York Times come to Harvard University and say, ‘I’m willing to go to jail to get a copy of Donald Trump’s taxes so I can publish them,’” Lewandowski said, according to Politico. “Dean Baquet came here and offered to go to jail — you’re telling me, he’s willing to commit a felony on a private citizen to post his taxes, and there isn’t enough scrutiny on the Trump campaign and his business dealings and his taxes?”

“It’s egregious,” Lewandowski added. “He should be in jail.”

Even after winning the presidency, Trump has had an almost myopic focus on the Times, criticizing the paper’s coverage of him. He has pledged to sue the newspaper, though, when he met with its staff, he called it “a great, great American jewel. A world jewel.”


MOD EDIT: Please don't post entire articles.


Donald Trump Will Be President In Just Over A Month And The Constitution Is Already Under Attack

I fear this is only the beginning. Trump is far more thin-skinned than Nixon.

Shitting Bull, is is LEGAL to publish the tax returns of others without permission?

Like most Communists, you have no idea what the 1st Amendment is. You've never read the bill of rights or Constitution.

The 1st does not grant anyone right to break the law. I cannot publish details of your EBT account, you social security number, or other details of your life in the press without your permission.

 

[FA_Q2]

And the rest of this is pointless conjecture. Again, come back when the first law regulating them is proposed by Trump.

Interestingly enough, this second step has never AFAIK been proposed or backed by the right at all. HOWEVER, the current leadership on the left (Pelosi) has indeed backed this very idea thought the reinstatement of the fairness doctrine - something that she has expressed as needed for awhile.
The Fairness Doctrine

The main reason that it really was never even brought up is Obama has been fairly clear that he does not support such a move. Indeed, what you are proposing has had a lot more traction on the left than it has ever had on the right yet now is when you state it is likely to happen.

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Greitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

You think that Trump supporters are going to the daily KOS? You are, once again, fixated on 'Trump supporters.' This is not a problem pertaining to one side of the political isle.

And, yes, the MSM has clearly lost its legitimacy on its own. Are you honestly going to say that this process started with Trump?

 

[Uncensored2008]

If Donald Trump thinks the media will back off out of fear of being called names by him then he is in for a big surprise.

The DNC media won't back off, but they have destroyed any credibility they had left.

Anyone who would believe the NY Times without independent verification is a ******* fool. The MSM is fake news, they report what will promote the party. They do not report the facts.

 

[Lewdog]

Damn straight this is when I propose it is going to happen. No one, and I mean NO ONE has gone to the lengths Trump has to talk negatively about the MSM. And NO ONE has worked to build their own network as an alternative to the rest of the entire MSM like he has. and NO ONE who is friends with Russia has had Russia work with him in delgeimitizing the MSM with them.

Quit looking at this as a Trump supporter, and look at it as a ******* citizen of the United States.

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Greitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

You think that Trump supporters are going to the daily KOS? You are, once again, fixated on 'Trump supporters.' This is not a problem pertaining to one side of the political isle.

And, yes, the MSM has clearly lost its legitimacy on its own. Are you honestly going to say that this process started with Trump?

Nope, it started with the craze of people wanting to be famous, and that made them start making up lies and doing stuff to get on television...

 

[jc456]

Uh huh.

You realize that I am not a Trump supporter, right? I have stated all over these boards why I would never have voted for Trump.

You should try and look at this objectively. Your outburst of 'look at this as a ******* citizen' makes me doubt your ability to do so but one can try.

Ok, you're not a Trump supporter. Ok. Got it. Then Look at the bread crumbs and tell me where I'm flawed. Don't take a tangent saying that the Dems have already tried it. Look at what Trump is doing. Tell me where I'm wrong.

Edit: I'll be honest, I've barely read any of your posts...so I had no idea that you weren't a Trump supporter.

I already told you where you went wrong. Trump is taping into a sentiment that already exists - not creating it. They anti-media sentiment exists because of their own actions. For the most part Trump is actually correct - you cannot trust the media in general these days because they are to interested in playing the narrative that their audience wants them to hear rather than reporting actual fact. Almost nothing that is called news these days actually is.

Trump is not the source and will not be the driver of network news' downfall. It is going to fall under the weight of a consumer that prefers to be vindicated over informed. He is not increasing its speed either - the fact that his message resonated as it did should tell you that we are already at that point. State run media, by the way, is NOT the direction that this is going - it is trusted even less than the major networks. Where this is going is the direction of the daily KOS and Brietbear (no idea how that is actually spelled) - with an audience that consumes only fringe stories that reinforce existing biases.

The only reason it is going the direction of the DailyKOS and Greitbart is because that is where the Trump supporters are going, NOT the majority of the nation.

The MSM has not delegitimized itself. It may have done some of itself, but a huge reason in part of the most recent fall was due to them accepting news that came from Russian backed fake news Trump bots. And there is where your position is flawed.

could you try again in english?

I'm sorry, you can't read English?

not your version