Replies

This is why the leftist press is “the enemy of the people”. They are intentionally and maliciously misinforming anyone unfortunate enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.

NYT just admitted it “organized the newsroom” around promoting the Russia-collusion hoax, and that their next move is to reorganize to promote racism hoaxes.

Anyone listening to them is going to be so grossly malinformed that they may as well live in a different universe.

“They were operating under a whole different other set of facts than what I was operating under,” he added.”

Wonder if anyone has ever explained to him that there is only ONE set of “facts”...Anything else is opinion or fallacy…

This is precisely what SCOTUS, IMHO, must teach. The Warren Court, de facto, taught the opposite in its 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan decision. That decision denigrated the right of an office holder - including judges - to sue for libel.
In 1964 the journalism cartel had such a grip on the popular understanding that its “journalists are objective” propaganda was almost entirely unchallenged. The reality, which was entirely different, was that journalism was just as slanted in what it didn’t say then as it is now. Note well, journalism was just as much a cartel then as now. The wire services solidified that fact; the mere name “Associated” Press should tell anyone all they need to know.
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations
. . . and the wire services are continual, unending, virtual meetings of all major journalism outlets.
Not only is journalism a cartel, “liberal” politicians align themselves perfectly with the natural ideology of journalism - which is paternalism towards the public. Society, so the journalists assume, can’t do anything right and the government can and must straighten society out. This is precisely the opposite of the principle of liberty on which the nation was founded. “Liberals” express journalism’s inherent perspective - and consequently “liberals” never need to sue for libel. “Conservatives,” OTOH . . .
The Sullivan decision was nominally not biased towards Democrats; plaintiff Sullivan was, after all, a Democrat. But he was a Southern Democrat.
Republicans must sue for libel in the teeth of Sullivan, and give SCOTUS the chance to rehabilitate libel suits by politicians. That is germane to this discussion because libel suits offer courts the opportunity to determine facts. That is after all their job, in the first instance - and without that discipline “liberals” - people who go along and get along with the journalism cartel - are entitled to their own facts.