Posted on 06/14/2016 10:42:09 AM PDT by Cyberman
There was a fair bit of coverage on Monday of the news that the Donald Trump campaign had removed the press credentials from the Washington Post because the campaign was upset with the Washington Post's coverage of the campaign. While it got a lot of attention, it was quickly pointed out that Trump has revoked or barred at least six other news outlets from receiving press passes, including Politico, the Huffington Post, the National Review, Buzzfeed and the Daily Beast. This issue is being discussed in lots of media circles. But what interested me much more was buried deeper in the full two paragraph statement that the Trump campaign later released. It included a weird and basically confused attack on Jeff Bezos, that again raises some serious questions about how Trump may use the Presidency to "settle scores.".
The Washington Post unfortunately covers Mr. Trump very inaccurately. Today's headline, "Donald Trump Suggests President Obama Was Involved With Orlando Shooting" is a perfect example. We no longer feel compelled to work with a publication which has put its need for "clicks" above journalistic integrity.There are all sorts of issues with that statement, beyond the simple fact that there appears to be basically zero evidence to support it. Yes, Jeff Bezos runs Amazon and also owns the Washington Post. But I've seen basically no evidence that the Washington Post has done any stories that are somehow lobbying for Amazon's interests (for what it's worth, Amazon tends to stay far, far away from all sorts of policy fights). Perhaps I've missed it, but I don't recall any WaPo editorials advocating for letting Amazon avoid taxes.
They have no journalistic integrity and write falsely about Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump does not mind a bad story, but it has to be honest. The fact is, The Washington Post is being used by the owners of Amazon as their political lobbyist so that they don't have to pay taxes and don't get sued for monopolistic tendencies that have led to the destruction of department stores and the retail industry.
But it's really the end of that last paragraph that's the most concerning. Claiming that Amazon has "monopolistic tendencies" and the ridiculous claim that it's "led to the destruction of department stores and the retail industry," is somewhat concerning. This is not the first time Trump has attacked Bezos. In fact, his original infamous statements about how he was going to "open up libel laws" were actually directed at Bezos. He first went on a tirade about Bezos owning the Washington Post, followed by:
If I become President, oh, are they going to have problems. They're going to have such problems.Lots of people pointed out that Trump perhaps couldn't do too much to libel laws (the Supreme Court and the First Amendment has that covered), but he absolutely could have the DOJ or even the FTC go after Amazon for claimed anti-trust or anti-consumer behavior. And it seems pretty clear that he would gleefully do so. And not because of any actual evidence of problems, but because he doesn't like the coverage in the Washington Post which just happens to be owned by Bezos. Settling personal scores with the press by attacking a service that many in the public find extremely useful and convenient doesn't seem particularly presidential, does it?
Why don’t you drop dead?
Clinton did this crap to Microsoft.
Settling personal scores with the press by attacking a service that many in the public find extremely useful and convenient doesn’t seem particularly presidential, does it?
I wonder if he means Hillary, Obama and GUNS???
It’s how Democrats roll ever since they embraced Saul Alinsky. Trump is just returning the favor.
Reap the whirlwind!!
Amazon and Google needs to be paying more taxes than they do now. I never understood why we constantly leave corporate enemies alone, while the Left constantly sabotage ours
Count me in as supporting free enterprise, capitalism, and small government.
“Clinton did this crap to Microsoft.”
One of the few good things Slick did. To bad he wasn’t able to take it down completely. Hope Trump has a better plan to get Amazon (Facebook and Google too).
Why would you vote for someone who has “a plan” to attack capitalism?
If you wish to propagandize against Trump you can just get the Zot. Getting tired of the nonsense attacks by you leftwingers.
I love Amazon.
-PJ
What are you babbling about?
As far as Amazon is concerned, do they have too much control over retail? I'd like to hear the arguments, both ways.
It was not comfortable when Amazon would no longer sell Confederate gear. Seems that was way too much control over retail choices.
Google is a more reasonable target - dominating search AND content AND online advertising, plus documented bias against conservatives.
Amazon does not have any "control" over retail. They have a 21st century business model and some bricks & mortar places cannot or have refused to evolve to keep pace.
It was not comfortable when Amazon would no longer sell Confederate gear. Seems that was way too much control over retail choices.
I don't agree with their decision but Amazon is a private company and can sell or not sell what they wish. As consumers, we can choose to keep shopping with Amazon, or not. Freedom for all.
Zero government intervention or involvement needed.
Like I stated, I’m listening to any discussion about the issue. After the baning of Confederate gear, I personally use Amazon a lot less, and only for items I can’t get elsewhere.
Main street should be taken down for antitrust. Local regulations and fees are worse.
Obamas entire tenure has been based on bribery, and revenge...still is.
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.