Posted on 02/27/2016 1:57:52 PM PST by dschapin
In his remarks today at a rally in Fort Worth, Tex., Donald Trump knew he’d make news. “I’ve never said this before,” he declared.
We’ll await the word of the Washington Post Fact Checker on the integrity of the statement, but Trump did appear to be veering into a new talking point. A media-law talking point, that is:
One of the things I’m going to do, and this is going to make it tougher for me…but one of the things I’m going to do if I win…is I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re going to open up those libel laws. So that when the New York Times writes a hit piece, which is a total disgrace, or when the Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they’re totally protected.
An attack on media law is a logical extension of Trump’s rhetoric, not to mention a threat to American democracy. After all, he has displayed a highly undemocratic annoyance with the idea that the media is independent. For months he has been attempting to get the cameras at his rallies to properly pan around the thronged arenas, the better to capture his out-of-control popularity, even when the camera operators’ job is to stay on him. He has ridiculed reporter after reporter for reporting the facts of Trump’s march through the GOP primaries. Whenever he has been busted out by investigative journalism, he has attacked the institutions that have compiled it.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well said. Reasonable, explainable, and cogent. Thank you.
The only way to stop the lies is to at long last just STOP. When the Clintons had their first brush with their indecencies and had trash flowing from the mouths of the two, not to mention the talking heads employed by them - I totally STOPPED buying anything which might have given them cover by lying to the public. The press was so far into the tank for the couple, they were completely drowning in the sludge of the pool. Magazines -STOPPED and to this day they are never purchased. Newspapers - STOPPED again, they are not purchased, not missed. If there is news to be found it is found with more reputable persons. What do I care about what the NYT has to say about anything? I live in Texas and NY is a lifetime away (and it is hoped it will continue to stay there). MFM is nothing but a pack of lying liars who attempt to swindle the public. AND NOW -the public is, hopefully, opening their minds to the truth. When G-d created attorneys, He must have used the devil as a mold.
In the UK you can already sue a newspaper if you think they have libeled you. It does happen from time to time but is not all that common it is usually only available to the very rich the poor can’t afford to sue a newspaper.
The headline looks like something from a fund raiser Email.
"Elect me and we will repeal Obamacare. Elect me and I will seal the Border..." Etc. The founders did not intend for free speech to provide cover for defrauding voters.
You should be getting paid for metaphors like that.
Change 2 to: That they should have known it was false...done minimal due diligence.
Trumpster always fling insults when they've got nothing. You're in fine company.
Does it have something to do with Julius Streicher therapy?
I could already go after them under current libel law as could Trump. He wants to change the libel law to make it easier for him to shut down negative attacks that he thinks are untrue or unfair.
C’mon. You know as well as I do they’ll create bias out of thin air if they want to. The only way without obstructing the first amendment is to dilute their ability to propagandize. A breakup of their holdings has precedent, their own precedent by the way. Many of the Left’s news companies are beholden to common ownership, thus can be brought up for break up.
FWIW I agree with your diversion on education.
Enforcing sensible libel laws does not equate to destroying democracy.
I see the issue with letting the courts and government have any more power over the press. Not hard to see that power be used against us by twisted lefty courts.
The problem is that the ‘mainstream’ press is already pretty much 100% owned by the government as-is and can (almost literally) get away with murder.
So what on earth can we do about that?
This isn't an anti-Trump article. It is an account of what Donald Trump actually said. Apparently, Trump has a problem with Amendment I.
“I can say it. Disappear them like Pinoche did. Not assassinate, but put them on a boat to N. Korea or some other worker’s paradise.”
Why not take those who disagree with “The Donald” and put them in camps with gas chambers and crematoriums. The Bill Ayers wing of Trumps democrat party has proposed something similar and I’m sure they would help out a fellow democrat who wanted to reign in free speech.
The defamation laws in UK are much stricter than they are here. Some countries make defamation a criminal act.
Blah, Blah, Blah.....you are blinkered and suffering from terminal TDS.
Public figures have been ruled all but fair game for any level of falsehoods. This is what he’s talking about.
For example, the lie that good Tyler fired, is protected journalism. No journalists got fired for rrepeating were not liable under libel and defamation statutes.
He said stories that are FALSE you lying poodle molestor.
Dan Rather fan, are you?
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.