Posted on 09/29/2016 6:31:10 AM PDT by Red Badger
In their biggest threat yet to conservative media, Democrats on the Federal Election Commission are laying the groundwork to bar companies with even the tiniest foreign ownership from American politics, a move that could ban Fox, the Wall Street Journal and even the New York Times from covering political races or giving endorsements.
In a last-minute submission Wednesday, a top Democrat on the evenly split FEC proposed that the Thursday meeting of the commission begin the process to prohibit companies with foreign ownership as small as 5 percent "from funding expenditures, independent expenditures, or electioneering communications."
Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said in her submission, "Given everything we have learned this year, it blinks reality to suggest that that there is no risk of foreign nationals taking advantage of current loopholes to intercede invisibly in American elections. This is a risk no member of the Federal Election Commission should be willing to tolerate."
Under Weintraub's proposal, entities that reach her foreign ownership target would conceivably be banned from advocating for a candidate's election or defeat.
Several media giants have at least 5 percent foreign ownership, some with as much as 25 percent. Included is News Corp, which owns Fox, the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. The New York Times also has foreign ownership, as do many politically active firms like Ben & Jerry's.
That prohibition could include Fox commentator Sean Hannity or Wall Street Journal editorial. And, according to one analysis, because foreign nationals also are prohibited from making electioneering communications, those media would not even be able to mention Donald Trump or Hillary Rodham Clinton, even if just covering them.
Democrats on the commission have been on a three-year campaign to limit the voice of conservative media, stopped by Republican commissioners who have warned that the First Amendment is under attack in the FEC.
The latest move was hinted at last month when Weintraub proposed another political ban on foreign-owned companies. Republicans countered with their proposal, but both were voted down. It was suggested that Weintraub tighten her proposal and her Wednesday submission calls for commission lawyers to design a foreign ownership rule.
"I am prepared to move that we address through rulemaking five discrete topics relating to foreign-national political spending and corporations: 1. Percentage of foreign ownership: 2. Board membership of corporation: 3. Foreign government ownership: 4. Type of corporation: and 5. Implementation measures," she wrote.
For many clean election advocates, the broad foreign money ban makes sense, but it has stalled over the impact on media.
She cited legal decisions and rules by other federal agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission, in calling for changes and said that U.S. companies that go overseas to avoid American taxes should also be included. Ironically, the FCC recently watered down foreign ownership rules, a move that is expected to spark greater foreign ownership of media.
At last month's meeting, Weintraub bluntly said she'd consider regulating the media including the Times, in a discussion with Republican Commissioner Lee Goodman.
GOODMAN: So, you would consider, your proposal would contemplate taking up then foreign ownership of the New York Times as potentially tainting the New York Times?
WEINTRAUB: If you want to consider media entities and the foreign national, I am willing to consider that.
She added, "In a rulemaking, we could set new rules. That's the whole point of a rulemaking, and if you want to raise the issue in that rulemaking, I think it's actually a very interesting issue that we have not taken a position on yet, what happens, how do the rules on media ownership, on the media exemption and the, um, foreign national ban, what's the interplay between those? I don't think that's a topic that the Commission has addressed yet, but we could consider it in this rulemaking."
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com Top Story
I guess the 1st Amendment is dead.
Is there any doubt that if H! is elected they will not follow through with their scheme?..............................
Marxists on the March!!!
Isn’t the NYT owner a Mexican?
Yes, it is and this would apply also to them as well.
That is unless the traitors at the FEC can figure out a way to exempt them and others just like them.................
Ouch.
Sharia Prince Owns Stake In FOX News Parent
http://bigthink.com/Resurgence/sharia-prince-owns-stake-in-fox-news-parent
How ironic is it that the FOX News where Sean Hannity has been howling about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf wanting “Sharia law” to replace our existing laws is the very same FOX News whose parent company, the Rupert Murdoch controlled News Corporation, has as its second largest shareholder Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal?
Al-Waleed bin Talal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Waleed_bin_Talal
Waleed is also Citigroup’s largest individual shareholder, the second-largest voting shareholder in 21st Century Fox, and owns Paris’ Four Seasons Hotel George V and part of the Plaza Hotel.
Every liberal is a totalitarian thug.
I have no problem with foreign-owned media entities being required to be clearly labeled below the newspaper’s name/ or ID’d regularly during Station Identification with the owner’s name and nationality.
You don’t need to ban anyone, just put the hands on the table so we know whose playing.
Oh there is an Way to Fix that; abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
That was Easy.
If only there was a Second Amendment to back the first up...
This crazy but would anyone really miss these three piles of Shite??
That is okay and doesn’t interfere with the 1st amendment.
We might be surprised at who actually owns our media.
WTF?
If only there was a Government to back the Second Amendment up...
When protestors get nasty they always quote the 1st. Amend. completely eliminating the word “peaceful”
They’ll be ‘exempted’ thru a loophole, bet on it.................A government of ‘pull’.................
-
Hannity is the lone conservative on FOX and they banished him as late as they can per his contract.
Every other face on that network are Hillary hacks that go back into their acting roles right after Hillary is safely elected.
Shep Smith and MEgyn Kelly run things, that much is clear.
Hannity is preempted once a week.
People must learn, it’s all about $$$. They market to a segment that is not served at all, but they believe in everything the DEMS espouse.
They’d love nothing more than to sell you stories of President Hillary being charged by the noble Loretta Lynch, and other stupid crap.
-
Maybe the IRS can ride in to the rescue......they seems to be just another arm of the DNC now anyways.
The goal of the “Democratic” Party is to destroy the U.S.Constitution (and re-instate slavery if possible).
(but they will rename slavery by calling it something else....i.e. “responsible citizenship”, etc
Add FEC to the lists of agencies that need to be eliminated or greatly reduced.
“working off their Fair Share”...................
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.