[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.

Tenn. AG reveals ICE released thousands of ‘murderers and rapists’ from detention centers into US streets

Kamala Harris Touts Mass Amnesty Offering Fast-Tracked Citizenship to Nearly Every Illegal Alien in U.S.

Migration Crisis Fueled Rise in Tuberculosis Cases Study Finds

"They’re Going to Try to Kill Trump Again"

"Dems' Attempts at Power Grab Losing Their Grip"

"Restoring a ‘Great Moderation’ in Fiscal Policy"

"As attacks intensify, Trump becomes more popular"

Posting Articles Now Working Here

Another Test

Testing

Kamala Harris, reparations, and guaranteed income

Did Mudboy Slim finally kill this place?

"Why Young Americans Are Not Taught about Evil"

"New Rules For Radicals — How To Reinvent Kamala Harris"

"Harris’ problem: She’s a complete phony"

Hurricane Beryl strikes Bay City (TX)

Who Is ‘Destroying Democracy In Darkness?’

‘Kamalanomics’ is just ‘Bidenomics’ but dumber

Even The Washington Post Says Kamala's 'Price Control' Plan is 'Communist'

Arthur Ray Hines, "Sneakypete", has passed away.

No righT ... for me To hear --- whaT you say !

"Walz’s Fellow Guardsmen Set the Record Straight on Veep Candidate’s Military Career: ‘He Bailed Out’ "

"Kamala Harris Selects Progressive Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as Running Mate"

"The Teleprompter Campaign"

Good Riddance to Ismail Haniyeh

"Pagans in Paris"

"Liberal groupthink makes American life creepy and could cost Democrats the election".


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles

Title: Trump Promises Harsh Media Criticism of Him Will Be ILLEGAL If He’s President (TITLE IS FALSE HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY THAT)
Source: Counter Current News
URL Source: http://countercurrentnews.com/2016/ ... legal-if-he-becomes-president/
Published: Feb 27, 2016
Author: M. David
Post Date: 2016-02-27 11:46:16 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 14346
Comments: 68

Have you ever made fun of Donald Trump? Have you ever read an editorial that really lays into him with criticisms of his proposed policies, or even his hair?

Well if Trump becomes president, he promises that things will change, and these sorts of critiques will no longer be legal.

It almost sounds like satire, but during a speech in Texas on Friday morning, the Republican candidate and frontrunner, Donald Trump said he wants to sue news outlets if they negative stories about him.

He acknowledged that currently the First Amendment of the Constitution protects a free press, and thus shields journalists from suits like this.

But Trump said on Friday that he would limit the press using litigation that would be permitted due to “opening up” libel laws and allowing them to include things like criticism and critiques that he doesn’t like.

“I think the media is among the most dishonest groups of people I’ve ever met,” Trump stated. “They’re terrible.”

So Trump promised to change things through legislating what he considers “honest reporting.”

“One of the things I’m gonna do, and this is only gonna make it tougher for me, and I’ve never said this before, but one of the things I’m gonna do if I win… is I’m gonna 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 gonna open up those libel laws.”

He went even further and made it clear what he meant, saying, “We’re gonna open up those libel laws, folks, and we’re gonna have people sue you like you never get sued before.”

See if for yourself in the video clip below…

(Article by M. David;

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 51.

#16. To: Deckard (#0) (Edited)

of course ,suing people is what Trump does best .Trump isn't talking about facts .He's talking about his bruised ego . Who defines what is 'horrible and purposely negative ' ? I just have to wonder how many times he would've been sued had his proposals been the law of the land ?

Gutting the 1st amendment so public leaders can silence critics is totalitarianism in my book. I've got news for Trump . The 1st campaigns in this country were far more vicious when it came to the lies and slanders . The nation survived . Take his proposal now and put the power in the hands of Evita or Bolshevik Bernie. Not so attractive is it ? I'm probably on my way to the frog march ,and if not me ,any conservative outlet that opposes them .Evita thinks they are all in a conspiracy against her. But I have to give him credit . He has most of the US media wrapped around his fingers . He claims his campaign is self financed ;but he should be giving a big hat tip to the press in this country who cower at the idea that he would cut off their access. The free promotion has been worth $$$$$$$ millions .

tomder55  posted on  2016-02-27   13:36:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: tomder55 (#16)

Gutting the 1st amendment so public leaders can silence critics is totalitarianism in my book.

Seems that there are some here who disagree.

The cult of Trump is scary. His followers would give up their liberty for him.

Deckard  posted on  2016-02-27   13:44:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Deckard (#18)

Gutting the 1st amendment so public leaders can silence critics is totalitarianism in my book.

Seems that there are some here who disagree.

The cult of Trump is scary. His followers would give up their liberty for him

The good news is POTUS doesn't write laws . If Trump ever read a copy of the Constitution he would know that .

tomder55  posted on  2016-02-27   14:26:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: tomder55 (#49)

The good news is POTUS doesn't write laws .

Federal judges do that.

Roscoe  posted on  2016-02-27   14:33:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Roscoe (#50) (Edited)

The good news is POTUS doesn't write laws .

Federal judges do that.

The court decided that public figures needed to prove that there was a falsehood ,and that the press knew it was false.

In this case there is no Federal libel laws. There are state laws. So when Her Donald proposes "opening up " libel laws what he means is that he wants to amend the 1st amendment .

tomder55  posted on  2016-02-27   14:42:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 51.

#52. To: tomder55 (#51)

The court decided that public figures needed to prove that there was a falsehood

Quote, please. It's not like I don't trust your interpretations, but I don't trust your interpretations.

There are state laws.
Which the federal judges wrongly subjected to the 1st Amendment's restrictions on Congress, right?

Roscoe  posted on  2016-02-27 14:52:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: tomder55, Roscoe, misterwhite (#51)

It has already been established that the media is under no obligation to tell the truth.

Fox News Wins Lawsuit To Misinform Public – Seriously

Here’s the rundown: On August 18, 2000, journalist Jane Akre won $425,000 in a court ruling where she charged she was pressured by Fox News management and lawyers to air what she knew and documented to be false information.

The real information: she found out cows in Florida were being injected with RBGH, a drug designed to make cows produce milk – and, according to FDA-redacted studies, unintentionally designed to make human beings produce cancer.

Fox lawyers, under pressure by the Monsanto Corporation (who produced RBGH), rewrote her report over 80 times to make it compatible with the company’s requests. She and her husband, journalist Steve Wilson, refused to air the edited segment.

In February 2003, Fox appealed the decision and an appellate court and had it overturned. Fox lawyers argued it was their first amendment right to report false information. In a six-page written decision, the Court of Appeals decided the FCC’s position against news distortion is only a “policy,” not a “law, rule, or regulation.”

So, Fox and the other gladiatorical cable news channels were given the okay to legally lie right around the time of the Iraq War’s birth – when media lies coincidentally hit a peak in both frequency and severity.

Deckard  posted on  2016-02-27 15:09:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: tomder55 (#51)

"The court decided that public figures needed to prove that there was a falsehood ,and that the press knew it was false."

Why the higher standard? Prior to 1967 the same standard applied to public or private figures.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-02-27 18:35:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 51.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com