It would be in his character to try to destroy the Constitution and the rights protected by it.
As expected the Buzzfeed reporting about Trump directing Cohen to lie is BS
- Thread starter gwb-trading
- Start date
It would be in his character to try to destroy the Constitution and the rights protected by it.
The constitution doesnt protect slander, its pretty tough to say that shit like this is not malicious when every single fake news story just so happens to be anti Trump.
Most of the people left at this point on Trumps side are only there because they can see this hatchet job from the media for what it is.... Basically the only time id ever defend Trump at this point is when you put him against the media for who is more devious.
Id say the media is far more devious because they are pretending to be unbiased arbiters of truth, yet they routinely lie about Trump and run with lies about Trump in order to attack him.
When was the last time you saw the "Arbiters of truth" at CNN have to correct a pro Trump story? Oh wait that would require them to actually write a pro trump story, nevermind.
Oh:
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...venatti-arrested-for-beating-his-wife.327009/ started by Max E., Nov 14, 2018.
The constitution certainly protects "slander/libel". For latest, see Stormy's case dismissal and order to pay legal fees to Trump.
Last edited:
You misinterpreted me, i was saying it doesnt protect free speech when its slander, i.e. news outlets to not have the right to maliciously report negative shit about someone with the intent to cause them harm, and its pretty tough at this point for anyone with a brain to not come to the conclusion that what the media is doing is not malicious.
And I'm saying it's not libel if reported in "good faith". If Buzzfeed indeed had "sources" that lied to them, or Mueller is being coy with his non-dismissal dismissal, then it's too early to call libel.
Last edited:
news outlets do not have the right to maliciously report negative shit about someone with the intent to cause them harm, and its pretty tough at this point for anyone with a brain to not draw the conclusion that what the media is doing is malicious.
And you'd be wrong (to a large extent). Otherwise fox would've seized to exist two decades ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law
As I said earlier, I am fully willing to play the game of people standing by the Buzzfeed story.
That's fine. One of the reporters flat out stated that they had access to FBI 302 reports, the reports documenting fbi interview details. So let's accept that if you want. Then it is Mueller's arse or his staff that I want to see in a sling. Bill Barr needs to open an investigation and start polygraphing anyone who had access to the 302.s - especially since he just testified to the Senate that he would vigorously pursue any leaks in the department.
Giddy-up. Let's go. Might be able to bag Weisman if he is still on Muellers staff. I can't remember. So many clowns have been moved around to cover their arse, I cant remember who is still there. I am up for going down that road. Maybe we need a special counsel to look at just that so that it does not come across as interference. Yeh. Giddy-up.
That's fine. One of the reporters flat out stated that they had access to FBI 302 reports, the reports documenting fbi interview details. So let's accept that if you want. Then it is Mueller's arse or his staff that I want to see in a sling. Bill Barr needs to open an investigation and start polygraphing anyone who had access to the 302.s - especially since he just testified to the Senate that he would vigorously pursue any leaks in the department.
Giddy-up. Let's go. Might be able to bag Weisman if he is still on Muellers staff. I can't remember. So many clowns have been moved around to cover their arse, I cant remember who is still there. I am up for going down that road. Maybe we need a special counsel to look at just that so that it does not come across as interference. Yeh. Giddy-up.
FWIW, i also think Fox deserves to get sued for faulty reporting where there is intent, clearly they wanted to take Obama down, so intentionally faulty reporting about him should get the same result.
There is a reason they canned that asshat Glenn Beck, but the entire CNN network has turned into the Glenn Beck show in reverse.
Anyone who is seen as a "Legitimate" news source should be liable for the shit they report IMO, it would get rid of all the bullshit that makes it impossible to trust anyone anymore.
You need to source just about any political article these days with like ten different sources before you can trust it, is that really the environment you want to live in?
If a news wire does this kind of shit in the stock market they get sued out of existence, how often do you see them get the hard facts wrong? IMO its few and far between, the same kind of standard should apply for other reporting.