Replies

I’ve lived this stuff but you’ve gone very deep into a line of thought to be rid of Sullivan and that’s a bold statement.

It’s a bold statement to say that nine SCOTUS justices were wrong on the same case. But then, what I’m telling you about Sullivan is only what Antonin Scalia said about it. And when Scalia was a freshman Justice, he wrote a solo dissent in the Morrison v. Olson case - and now the majority opinion is considered bad law, and Scalia’s dissent is considered probative.

IMHO, maybe more of the problem is the monopoly aspects which puts media and DNC Media into a few hands.

Wouldn’t it be easier from a legal standpoint to handle the problem on that route.

I see your point but I disagree with it. By all means make the antitrust case against “the media” - I’m 100% on board with that. But if you do sue on that ground, what is the tort?
IMHO the tort is the systematic promotion of the bias of journalism, by means of unlimited libeling conservatives.
The bias of journalism is that journalism is important. But inherently journalism is negativity towards society, and that inherently promotes big government.
Sullivan should, on reasonable grounds, be seen as wrongly decided. But the point is not that it’s wrong, the point is that it is the engine of political correctness. It means that journalists can lie about facts. Not just be wrong on this occasion or that, but systematically practice on the credulity of the public.
“The republican principle demands that the deliberate sense of the community should govern the conduct of those to whom they intrust the management of their affairs; but it does not require an unqualified complaisance to every sudden breeze of passion or to every transient impulse which the people may receive from the arts of men, who flatter their prejudices to betray their interests.” ― Alexander Hamilton
Sullivan gives “the MSM” license to "flatter [the peoples’] prejudices to betray [the peoples’] interests.”