Larry Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Case in point. Imagine if Bernie was getting a third of the press Trump gets . . . Perhaps if he'd won the primaries Trump has? (Although granted, that probably wouldn't get him the attention, either. PART of the reason Trump is getting so much coverage is because he's so spectacularly bad). Again I didn't hear what he said, but if all he said is he wants to open up libel laws, then I think it's a stretch to interpret that as an attack on the 1st amendment. Freedom of the press doesn't protect you from being sued for libel. Um, granted, I got my knowledge of constitutional law on this topic from one line of dialog in the movie "Absence of Malice ". But yeah, I'm pretty sure Freedom of the Press DOES grant them protection from libel laws. Specifically, to successfully sue them, the plaintif not only has to prove that they said something untrue, but that they did so out of intentional malice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 The press does get away with too much when it comes to public figures in the US. I'm not opposed to the idea of changing the rules to make them more accountable. The question is do I trust Trump to favor changes that don't also prevent the press from its main function, which is informing the public even if the government would prefer they kept quiet? No. Trump seems heavy handed in all things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I'm not opposed to re-examination of the current libel and slander laws at all. But I'd rather a bill be put forth and Congress debate about it, etc...of course the President would have his input as well. But that doesn't seem to be what Trump is suggesting. He's making it sound like he will personally get the laws changed, which is scary that he even thinks he would have the authority and power to do that. He is either incredibly naive about the power a President has, he is just lying and trying to rile people up, or he wants to expand the powers of the President. Giving how fragile his ego is, I don't think he is lying just to try and rile people up, but who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Interesting. Did Christie go after Rubio and lay off Trump to help Trump rather than to help himself? (knowing that he had no chance at that point) http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/02/union-leader-joe-mcquaid-christie-trump-endorsement-219874 Christi went after Rubio because Rubio was emerging as the GOP insiders last candidate and that's a spot Christi was in competition with him for. Think Christi endorsed Trump because he probable has known the Donald for his entire political career and has a good working relationship with him and many common interests. Likewise (1) Trumps winning and endorsing a winner is better than endorsing a looser. (2) He probable genuinely believes either freshman senator is not up to the job of President as he said continuously in his campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Socrates, I get your frustration with media and the balance of coverage. For all it's warts though, I think the media serves as an important check against corruption (even Fox) I would be loathe to weaken the press especially in a way that discourages negative reporting. At the same time, I wish that modern journalism took a step away from analysis in lieu of reporting and sensationalizing. Mind you, Trump should be the last to criticize sensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Um, granted, I got my knowledge of constitutional law on this topic from one line of dialog in the movie "Absence of Malice ". But yeah, I'm pretty sure Freedom of the Press DOES grant them protection from libel laws. Specifically, to successfully sue them, the plaintif not only has to prove that they said something untrue, but that they did so out of intentional malice. Um. You've given a definition of what counts as libel, not a demonstration that you cannot be sued for libel. To be clear, let me put my point this way: The first amendment does not protect you from being sued if you publish lies with intentional malice. More generally: There is no question that freedom of speech and the press have limits. The only question is what the limits are. For example, we'll all agree the 1st amendment doesn't give you the right to publish child pornography, or to incite a riot, or to put pornographic images on billboards. Some cases are trickier: Does the first amendment give Illinois Nazis the right to march through a Jewish neighborhood, for example? The question of what counts as libel is one of the tricky cases, but most agree that something counts as libel, which is not protected by the 1st amendment. Anyway, if you want to attack Trump on this point, I would recommend arguing this is a question for the judiciary to answer, not the executive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Perhaps if he'd won the primaries Trump has? (Although granted, that probably wouldn't get him the attention, either. PART of the reason Trump is getting so much coverage is because he's so spectacularly bad). Trump is getting the free coverage because (1) He works at it. (2) He's unscripted and interesting even sometimes outrageous. (3) That draws ratings. (4) Which drives more opportunity and Trump never turns down opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Socrates, I get your frustration with media and the balance of coverage. For all it's warts though, I think the media serves as an important check against corruption (even Fox) I would be loathe to weaken the press especially in a way that discourages negative reporting. At the same time, I wish that modern journalism took a step away from analysis in lieu of reporting and sensationalizing. Mind you, Trump should be the last to criticize sensation. Thanks for this post, it sets me up to get back on track. Honestly I don't really want to defend Trump here. I don't think the libel laws are that bad. The press must be free to criticize public figures. If anything, I wish they were more critical. I do have a problem with the press though, but my complaint is of a different sort, I'm bothered by media monopolies and corporate propaganda. If the truth is against the interest of owners and advertisers, then we don't hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Socrates, I get your frustration with media and the balance of coverage. For all it's warts though, I think the media serves as an important check against corruption (even Fox) I would be loathe to weaken the press especially in a way that discourages negative reporting. At the same time, I wish that modern journalism took a step away from analysis in lieu of reporting and sensationalizing. Mind you, Trump should be the last to criticize sensation. There is no modern TV journalism. The profession is dead. What we have now is guys who sit in a room and discuss things. They don't know anything, they don't investigate anything and on any given topic the audience can tell you what each of the "journalists" is going to favor and dispute. That's not journalism that entertainment, and true enough modern TV news shows no longer have a News Division, they are under the entertainment division. Used to be you had to be smart to be a journalist. Used to be you investigated stories, and researched them, Nobody does that anymore. Not the Network News Programs, Not the Cable News programs.. They get the AP feed and they just read, sensationalize and then go to the talking heads. The only prerequisite to being a modern TV journalist is looking good, looking like you know what you are talking about when you clearly don't. That's why I watch the BBC... who announced they are closing down their TV news branch.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Oh my. "Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face." - Rubio https://twitter.com/hunterschwarz/status/703657447706251266 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Oh my. "Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face." - Rubio https://twitter.com/hunterschwarz/status/703657447706251266 Rubio has officially given up his chance to ever be President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Rubio has officially given up his chance to ever be President. He's trying to beat Trump at his own game; in a way it's similar to Hillary reading from Bernie's notes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Rubio has officially given up his chance to ever be President. Rubio should not try to compete with Trump in the art of the insult. It's like a preschooler going against Picasso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Oh my. "Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face." - Rubio https://twitter.com/hunterschwarz/status/703657447706251266 Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. He's broken Rubio's polished shell and out has tumbled an angry man that's not going to suffer insults quietly. Especially not from an orange man sporting a truffula tree hair piece. Trump wants jokes? Marco Antonio Rubio got jokes to spare. Not good ones, mind you, so far they sound like grade school cut downs with a dad joke delivery, but you go to war with the jokes you've got not the ones you might want or wish to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Rubio has officially given up his chance to ever be President. By that logic, I assume Trump did that months ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Poll: 38% of Florida voters believe Ted Cruz could be the Zodiac Killer WASHINGTON, Feb. 26 (UPI) -- A poll by Public Policy Polling found that a surprising number of Florida voters believe Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz could be the Zodiac Killer. While a 62 percent majority of voters answered "No" when asked if they believed Cruz was responsible for the string of murders in the early 70s, 10 percent answered "Yes" and an additional 28 percent said they were unsure. Click on the link for the full article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. He's broken Rubio's polished shell and out has tumbled an angry man that's not going to suffer insults quietly. Trump said yesterday... Drawing his arm across his upper chest... I've had it up to here with Maro Rubio.. It was hilarious. Trump is pretty funny.. Marco Antonio Rubio got jokes to spare. Not good ones, mind you, so far they sound like grade school cut downs with a dad joke delivery, but you go to war with the jokes you've got not the ones you might want or wish to have. It's an act of desperation to take on Trump in his own home court. Rubio's not going to be able to pull it off but he knows what happens if he doesn't try. Trump will just destroy him like he did Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 This is why the GOP will win the next Presidential Election.REINCE PRIEBUS, RNC CHAIRMANhttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/24/preibus_unlike_the_democrats_were_going_to_let_the_voters_decide_our_nominee.html Priebus: Unlike the Democrats, We're Going to Let The Voters Decide Our Nominee CNN: Let me read a portion of it ( Critical Editorial on Priebus) , Mr. Priebus. -- [/size]"Mr. Priebus has shown that he knows that Mr. Trump is a problem. He condemned Mr. Trump’s plan to ban Muslims from entering the United States. But, also like many top Republicans, the party chairman has nevertheless given Mr. Trump a wide berth to run a flamboyant insult of a campaign... Mr. Priebus and everyone else 'leading' the GOP are Americans before they are Republicans. They should act like it." Has Donald Trump run too toxic of a campaign?[/size]PRIEBUS: That is the stupidest editorial that I've ever seen. that -- that I'm called out for beating up the front runner of the GOP. This is -- it is ridiculous. [/size]CNN: Not condemning some of his more vitriolic statements. [/size]PRIEBUS: Come on. That's not my job. My job is to put forward the fairest process that we can put forward, to not put my hand on the scale, to allow our delegates to make the choices that they want to make and then accept the decision that the delgates make, unlike on the Democratic side where they have superdelegates and could give a darn about what the grassroots are telling the party. That's not how we operate our party on our side.[/size] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 This is why the GOP will win the next Presidential Election. REINCE PRIEBUS, RNC CHAIRMAN http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/02/24/preibus_unlike_the_democrats_were_going_to_let_the_voters_decide_our_nominee.html The man has a point. The DNC has definitely put "a hand on the scale" for Hillary, "ignoring the grassroots," and it may very well cost them the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Poll: 38% of Florida voters believe Ted Cruz could be the Zodiac Killer Sounds like a unbiased poll to have such a question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Sounds like a unbiased poll to have such a question I think it was an informal poll Donald Trump took after the last debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hey who was the one (on here) who was a really big fan of Gingrich last time around? I was wondering that earlier when trying to think back to the last Republican primary. Supposedly Rubio released his tax returns. Not sure if Cruz had yet. Been away from the news much of the afternoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 30 minutes until SC Dem polls close. Last chance to get in on the betting: Over-under 20% win for Hillary today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Hey who was the one (on here) who was a really big fan of Gingrich last time around? I was wondering that earlier when trying to think back to the last Republican primary. Supposedly Rubio released his tax returns. Not sure if Cruz had yet. Been away from the news much of the afternoon. Saw a blurb that Cruz had missed his self-imposed deadline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 Saw a blurb that Cruz had missed his self-imposed deadline C'mon is it really a surprise if Rubio isn't present? He never shows up for votes or committees. Why should deadlines be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.