Discussion:
Should Trump deny WH press passes to media who collaborated with Clinton?
(too old to reply)
Joe Cooper
2016-11-25 15:24:06 UTC
Permalink
Every media outlet is going to have a point of view. That's pretty
unavoidable. But when a media organization directly collaborates with a
political campaign, that crosses the line.

We learned from WikiLeaks that several media outlets were in direct
collaboration with the DNC and/or the Clinton campaign. That's why talk
show host Sean Hannity is suggesting that Donald Trump deny White House
press passes to these organizations.

On his radio show on Tuesday, Hannity bashed several major media outlets.

"Maybe Donald Trump should rethink how he deals with media," he said.
"Why should CNN have a seat in the White House press room? Why should NBC
have a seat there? Why should The New York Times have a seat there, or
Politico?

"Until members of the media come clean about colluding with the Clinton
campaign and admit that they knowingly broke every ethical standard they
are supposed to uphold, they should not have the privilege, they should
not have the responsibility of covering the president on behalf of you,
the American people," he said.

[/Hannity]

This is not a First Amendment issue. Media outlets can say what they
like. But there is no constitutional right to have a press pass to the
White House. The White House press corps helps set the agenda, either
with questions to reinforce talking points (for a Democratic president)
or accusatory questions meant to put a (Republican) president on the
defensive.

We learned from WikiLeaks that Politico reporter Glenn Thrush sent
articles to the Hillary Clinton campaign for her approval before they
were published. CNN asked the DNC for (presumably hostile) questions to
ask Donald Trump during an interview. WikiLeaks also showed that the New
York Times sent an interview transcript to the Clinton campaign for their
approval and worked collaboratively with them on article topics.

These media outlets will never be fair to Donald Trump. Why should they
get a press pass? I think that until they fire the people involved, they
should be denied. Right now the liberal media think there are no
consequences for their rampant bias. This would show them that there are
consequences. Once dropped from the White House pool, they would feel
the sting of irrelevance. It would also be a good lesson for other media
outlets who get talking points from the Democrats.

Alternatively, Trump could give them press passes but only on the same
terms as they gave the Democrats. That means these outlets would have to
agree to let him vet their articles about him before publication, just as
they did with the Democrats. They would have to consult with the Trump
White house for aggressive questions to ask their Democratic
interviewees, and so on.

Can you imagine the reaction of Politico, CNN, and the New York Times
when they are told they are kicked out of the press pool and cannot
return until they give Trump the same benefits they have been giving
Democrats?

Source: http://bit.ly/2gtZyYK
--
“Don't let Democrats get away with pretending to care about blacks while
they fight tooth and nail against any policy that would give blacks a
chance to earn their share of the American Dream." (Tom Trinko)
Siri Cruise
2016-11-25 15:53:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Cooper
Every media outlet is going to have a point of view. That's pretty
unavoidable. But when a media organization directly collaborates with a
political campaign, that crosses the line.
No, it's not. It's the First Amendment. That's why Obama never had the federal
government act against Fox New, Breitbart, and the rest.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
Beam Me Up Scotty
2016-11-25 17:14:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Joe Cooper
Every media outlet is going to have a point of view. That's pretty
unavoidable. But when a media organization directly collaborates with a
political campaign, that crosses the line.
No, it's not. It's the First Amendment. That's why Obama never had the federal
government act against Fox New, Breitbart, and the rest.
If it was, then it was the first time Obama let the constitution stop him...

Obama did listen into and/or track phone called from the reporters and
family of reporters at FOX and Obama did some other things that could be
construed as constitutional violations to silence the press and other
critics of Obama's agenda.

[""""""Newly uncovered court documents reveal the Justice Department
seized records of several Fox News phone lines as part of a leak
investigation -- even listing a number that, according to one source,
matches the home phone number of a reporter's parents.

The seizure was ordered in addition to a court-approved search warrant
for Fox News correspondent James Rosen's personal emails. In the
affidavit seeking that warrant, an FBI agent called Rosen a likely
criminal "co-conspirator," citing a wartime law called the Espionage
Act."""""""""]

Did the ObamaRegime's DOJ ever subpoena Hillary's e-mails and did the
FBI call Hillary a "co-conspirator" under the *ESPIONAGE ACT* /OR/ do
they only violate the rights of free speech and News papers on the
RIGHT/Conservative side of the political spectrum?
--
That's Karma
Siri Cruise
2016-11-25 17:45:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Beam Me Up Scotty
[""""""Newly uncovered court documents reveal the Justice Department
seized records of several Fox News phone lines as part of a leak
investigation -- even listing a number that, according to one source,
matches the home phone number of a reporter's parents.
Federal law unlike some states's laws does not have a press immunity. The
federal government has regarded reporters as witnesses to federal crimes and has
tried to get them to testify for a long time. Congress can change the law and
has refused to do so on numerous occasions.

Other than Assange the federal government does not treat reporters as espionage
suspects and takes no legal action against hostile press activity which is
unrelated to espionage.

None of this is specific to Obama.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
Elizabeth Boudreaux
2016-11-25 19:50:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Beam Me Up Scotty
[""""""Newly uncovered court documents reveal the Justice Department
seized records of several Fox News phone lines as part of a leak
investigation -- even listing a number that, according to one source,
matches the home phone number of a reporter's parents.
Federal law unlike some states's laws
Ha ha ha ha ha! "States's laws" - jumpingfuckingjesus! So now:


"murderred", "murderrer"
"abandonned"
"prisonner"
"bigotted"
"wonderred"
"happenned"
"wonderring"
"mentionned"
"threatenning"
"biasses"
"edittor", "edittorial"
"marketting"
"civillian"
"Neighbourring"
"conquerred"
"deliverred"
"cowerring"
"sufferring"
"limitted"
"registerring"
"pardonned"
"developping"
"modelled"
"anchorred"
"uppitty"
"coverred"
"deliverred"
"considerred"
"riotting"

and "states's"

Holy mother of fuck!
Ted
2016-11-25 21:05:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Elizabeth Boudreaux
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Beam Me Up Scotty
[""""""Newly uncovered court documents reveal the Justice Department
seized records of several Fox News phone lines as part of a leak
investigation -- even listing a number that, according to one source,
matches the home phone number of a reporter's parents.
Federal law unlike some states's laws
"murderred", "murderrer"
"abandonned"
"prisonner"
"bigotted"
"wonderred"
"happenned"
"wonderring"
"mentionned"
"threatenning"
"biasses"
"edittor", "edittorial"
"marketting"
"civillian"
"Neighbourring"
"conquerred"
"deliverred"
"cowerring"
"sufferring"
"limitted"
"registerring"
"pardonned"
"developping"
"modelled"
"anchorred"
"uppitty"
"coverred"
"deliverred"
"considerred"
"riotting"
and "states's"
Holy mother of fuck!
"States's" is even worse than the doubled consonants. Does she never read?
Well, we already knew Siri was stupid.
--
http://kingofwallpapers.com/ted/ted-005.jpg "This troll is one of the
dumbest, most opinionated, most blinkered and also the most arrogant septic
idiots one can come across."
PaxPerPoten
2016-11-26 02:43:02 UTC
Permalink
Elizabeth, Catherine, Ted and Rudy are all Suck Puppets from the very
sick perverted mind of Johnathon Ball of Sacramento. The scrawny runt
pervert thinks they are real.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
PaxPerPoten
2016-11-26 02:41:44 UTC
Permalink
On 11/25/2016 1:50 PM, Elizabeth Boudreaux wrote:

Elizabeth, Catherine, Ted and Rudy are all Suck Puppets from the very
sick perverted mind of Johnathon Ball of Sacramento. The scrawny runt
pervert thinks they are real.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
First-Post
2016-11-25 17:50:49 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 12:14:36 -0500, Beam Me Up Scotty
Post by Beam Me Up Scotty
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Joe Cooper
Every media outlet is going to have a point of view. That's pretty
unavoidable. But when a media organization directly collaborates with a
political campaign, that crosses the line.
No, it's not. It's the First Amendment. That's why Obama never had the federal
government act against Fox New, Breitbart, and the rest.
There is nothing in the Constitution stating that anyone has to allow
the press in anywhere they want. Freedom of the press doesn't give
the press the right to, for example, trespass on your private property
without your consent just because they want an interview.
The press is not some holy untouchable entity that the 1st allows to
act with impunity.

And the democrats aren't so lily white as Cruise would have you
believe.
In this clip:

Hillary flat out tells a couple of reporters that she isn't going to
take any questions from them in particular. Of course if Trump does
anything even remotely similar the left will be howling about some
imaginary violation of the 1st Amendment.
Not to mention that during a poverty summit Obama stated that "we're
going to have to change the way that the media reports the news.
Really? How'd he think he would be able to do that without just
instituting some kind of censorship policy? And of course the left
was completely silent on that one because he was directing the comment
at Fox in particular and they new that their beloved liberal news
agencies would be safe from any such action.
Post by Beam Me Up Scotty
If it was, then it was the first time Obama let the constitution stop him...
Obama did listen into and/or track phone called from the reporters and
family of reporters at FOX and Obama did some other things that could be
construed as constitutional violations to silence the press and other
critics of Obama's agenda.
[""""""Newly uncovered court documents reveal the Justice Department
seized records of several Fox News phone lines as part of a leak
investigation -- even listing a number that, according to one source,
matches the home phone number of a reporter's parents.
The seizure was ordered in addition to a court-approved search warrant
for Fox News correspondent James Rosen's personal emails. In the
affidavit seeking that warrant, an FBI agent called Rosen a likely
criminal "co-conspirator," citing a wartime law called the Espionage
Act."""""""""]
Did the ObamaRegime's DOJ ever subpoena Hillary's e-mails and did the
FBI call Hillary a "co-conspirator" under the *ESPIONAGE ACT* /OR/ do
they only violate the rights of free speech and News papers on the
RIGHT/Conservative side of the political spectrum?
Siri Cruise
2016-11-25 18:21:47 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>,
First-Post <***@invalid.org> wrote:

It's fun watching you pretend you don't see me.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
Xavier
2016-11-25 18:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
It's fun watching you pretend you don't see me.
It's greater fun to observe you act like a cunt when unable to respond.
Siri Cruise
2016-11-25 19:04:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xavier
Post by Siri Cruise
It's fun watching you pretend you don't see me.
It's greater fun to observe you act like a cunt when unable to respond.
Bleeah!
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted.
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
Free the Amos Yee one.
Yeah, too bad about your so-called life. Ha-ha.
First-Post
2016-11-25 19:17:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Xavier
Post by Siri Cruise
It's fun watching you pretend you don't see me.
It's greater fun to observe you act like a cunt when unable to respond.
I don't "pretend" to do anything.
Cruise is in my kill file but that doesn't filter out her insane posts
in the replies of others.
Only reason I kill file most idiots is just to save space in the
database and minimize the compacting time when closing Agent.

I do indeed simply ignore some such as the nutcase Canuck "King
Johnny".
Someone should really have that incestuous lunatic committed.
Ted
2016-11-25 21:05:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by First-Post
Post by Xavier
Post by Siri Cruise
It's fun watching you pretend you don't see me.
It's greater fun to observe you act like a cunt when unable to respond.
I don't "pretend" to do anything.
Cruise is in my kill file but that doesn't filter out her insane posts
in the replies of others.
LOL. Only a dope like Siri wouldn't realize that.
Post by First-Post
Only reason I kill file most idiots is just to save space in the
database and minimize the compacting time when closing Agent.
I do indeed simply ignore some such as the nutcase Canuck "King
Johnny".
Someone should really have that incestuous lunatic committed.
Yeah, he needs help.
--
Loading Image... "This troll is one of the
dumbest, most opinionated, most blinkered and also the most arrogant septic
idiots one can come across."
PaxPerPoten
2016-11-26 02:45:11 UTC
Permalink
On 11/25/2016 3:05 PM, Ted wrote:

Elizabeth, Catherine, Ted and Rudy are all Suck Puppets from the very
sick perverted mind of Johnathon Ball of Sacramento. The scrawny runt
pervert thinks they are real.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
PaxPerPoten
2016-11-26 02:45:48 UTC
Permalink
On 11/25/2016 3:05 PM, Ted wrote:

Elizabeth, Catherine, Ted and Rudy are all Suck Puppets from the very
sick perverted mind of Johnathon Ball of Sacramento. The scrawny runt
pervert thinks they are real.
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Loading...