Posted on 02/29/2016 6:58:09 AM PST by LouD
Donald Trump’s distinctive rhetorical style — think of a drunk with a bullhorn reading aloud James Joyce’s Finnegans Wake under water — poses an almost insuperable challenge to people whose painful duty is to try to extract clarity from his effusions. For example, last week, during a long stream of semi-consciousness in Fort Worth, this man who as president would nominate members of the federal judiciary vowed to “open up” libel laws to make it easier to sue — to intimidate and punish — people who write “negative” things. Well. Trump, the thin-skinned tough guy, resembles a campus crybaby who has wandered out of his “safe space.”
Trump is a presidential aspirant who would flunk an eighth-grade civics exam. More than anything Marco Rubio said about Trump in Houston, it was Rubio’s laughter at Trump that galled the perhaps bogus billionaire. Like all bullies, Trump is a coward, and like all those who feel the need to boast about being strong and tough, he is neither....
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
And so if it takes a law to overturn Sullivan, as the 16th Amendment overturned the Pollack ruling, I will be right there supporting our Constitution
Nope, you got it wrong. Trump said something to the effect that when newspapers wrote untrue things, damaging things against a person, then that person could and should sue the paper for damages. And I think he used the NY Times as a prime example.
I guess the difference is I trust the courts. Why is it OK to sue someone that tells damaging lies about in any other area of life but not if they are published by the press?
People don’t have the time or resources to track down every statement in the press. You may be just fine checking every statement I am not sanguine about the entirety of Americans. I think the current state of affairs supports my contention.
There are plenty of unpopular truths. Trump is telling them. Reporters used to tell them and did the country a service. Now they shape the truth to control us. They are like lawyers lying about the opposing side knowing they may get overruled but the damage is already done and has advanced their agenda.
I think that there is an obligation for the press to get the stories and report them truthfully. Lying has consequences and exposure to consequences may result in a gain to the press as well as to America.
You said...
“This isn’t government dictating speech, it is holding the media accountable”
Who do you want holding them accountable? I’ve heard the left use the same argument from lefties when it comes to Rush’s show.
Scalia October 11, 2011 on New York Times vs. Sullivan USSC decision in 1964:
“Now the old libel law used to be (that) you’re responsible, you say something false that harms somebody’s reputation, we don’t care if it was told to you by nine bishops, you are liable,” Scalia continued. “New York Times v. Sullivan just cast that aside because the Court thought in modern society, it’d be a good idea if the press could say a lot of stuff about public figures without having to worry. And that may be correct, that may be right, but if it was right it should have been adopted by the people. It should have been debated in the New York Legislature and the New York Legislature could have said, ‘Yes, we’re going to change our libel law.’ But the living constitutionalists on the Supreme Court, the Warren Court, simply decided, ‘Yes, it used to be that … George Washington could sue somebody that libeled him, but we don’t think that’s a good idea any more.’”
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/justice-scalia-reflections-on-new-york-times-v-sullivan
Bullcrap! I’ve been listening since he started running. Have read his position papers.
I’ve also watched the many successes of the GOP (great conservatives, all)as they oppose Obama tooth and nail; Oh wait, that actually hasn’t happened?
The injured party would bring suit.
The Fairness Doctrine is slime proposed under a fair name to steal our freedoms. There is no resemblance to an acknowledgement that the Freedom of the Press retains the responsibility to fact check and that if the “facts” they tell are false and damage is done there need to be consequences.
You said..
“I guess the difference is I trust the courts. Why is it OK to sue someone that tells damaging lies about in any other area of life but not if they are published by the press?
People don’t have the time or resources to track down every statement in the press. You may be just fine checking every statement I am not sanguine about the entirety of Americans. I think the current state of affairs supports my contention.
There are plenty of unpopular truths. Trump is telling them. Reporters used to tell them and did the country a service. Now they shape the truth to control us. They are like lawyers lying about the opposing side knowing they may get overruled but the damage is already done and has advanced their agenda.
I think that there is an obligation for the press to get the stories and report them truthfully. Lying has consequences and exposure to consequences may result in a gain to the press as well as to America.”
Wow
Given enough time, the Trump backers sound more and more like the left than they would ever be willing to admit. You don’t trust people in making their own decisions? The left argues that. You trust the courts to decide what’s best for us? The left argues that.
Again, you’re assuming that trump will always love you and give you everything you want and he’ll be there forever. He won’t. And what happens when a Democrat gets elected someday and decides that something he read on Free Republic was libel? Well, he may lose in court if it’s proven to be true but it’ll cost just the same
George Will is to journalism what the GOP elite establishment types are to the Republican Party....out of touch with the electorate.
You said..
“The Fairness Doctrine is slime proposed under a fair name to steal our freedoms. There is no resemblance to an acknowledgement that the Freedom of the Press retains the responsibility to fact check and that if the “facts” they tell are false and damage is done there need to be consequences.”
You’re not aware of the history of the Fairness Doctrine, are you?
I sure batted an eye when GWB got the TSA and Dept. of Homeland security and Medicare drugs and no child left behind, etc....
The media lied through omission in keeping The Won hid.
Our country may not survive that.
They are criminal.
Here’s the link
2/27/2016, 5:22:53 PM · 49 of 74
Darksheare to All
For all who think it is a great idea:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3116989/posts
“Conservative website shuttered after libel ruling [Free Dominion]”
http://freerepublic.com/tag/freedominion/index?tab=articles
Free Dominion was our sister site in Canada.
“Opened” libel laws were used to silence them.
Pro 21:23 Whoever keeps his mouth and his tongue keeps himself out of trouble.
James 3:5 So too the tongue is a little member, yet boasts greatly. See how a little fire kindles a great forest! 6 And the tongue is a fire, the world of unrighteousness. Among our members the tongue is set, the one defiling the entire body, and setting on fire the wheel of life, and it is set on fire by Gehenna.
Maybe conservatives should spend more time at home actually reading the Word of God, for in it are the principles & limits of the 1st Amendment set forth by our founding fathers.
Read the link I posted.
Again, last time, who do you want regulating what’s responsible reporting and what isn’t? One already said the courts. What’s your position? Don’t use the Good Book to protect Trump. I want to know who you feel is qualified to decide what’s responsible reporting
And, if the NYT’s libels Trump and he can prove it harmed him, he already has recourse
The movement going on now is the real original Tea Party springing back to life. It is yuge. Just like it was when it began.
It was co-opted and fizzled. It was never supposed to be just a conservative thing. Ask yourself how many “Tea Party” candidates ended up being RINOs. The Tea Party was for all Americans who desired to hold all politicians feet to the fire.
“The press has no right to libel.”
Not true, the SCOTUS has determined that they can libel away as long as there’s no malicious intent behind it, and of course we know that liberals always have good intentions.
They do have talk and pomposity going for them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.