Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Freedom of the press is generally the first to go in fascist regimes

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Freedom of the press is generally the first to go in fascist regimes

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

It's about time somebody stood up for reasonable people, the honest electorate. The Fake News outlets didn't make the cut this time - so what?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

It's about time somebody stood up for reasonable people, the honest electorate. The Fake News outlets didn't make the cut this time - so what?

---

I'll give you what:

No modern president would even think of taking revenge on a state that voted against him by refusing disaster aid. No modern president would dream of evicting news outlets from a press briefing because they had criticized him. No modern president would lie about easily checkable facts on a routine basis.

---

Quote:

---

It's not that modern presidents couldn't do these things. They just didn't. And we all came to assume that none of them would. The technical machinery of government—collecting data, hiring staffers, working by the rules—would be left alone to operate in a professional and impartial way. But that's no longer something we can assume.

Trump is going to find lots of things like this. Things that nobody ever thought of before, but aren't illegal. Or maybe just slightly illegal. And he's going to use them to demagogue his enemies and take revenge on people who badmouth him.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Like Obama, Slick?

like Obama, Slick Willy?

Like Obama/Hilliary? Like Slick Willie?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Like Obama, Slick?

like Obama, Slick Willy?

Like Obama/Hilliary? Like Slick Willie?

---

You've got really thin skin, don't you? Trump can't tolerate criticism and has to hit back every time because he has little self-control of his anger. He needs a thicker hide or else step down and let someone not so mentally fragile take the job. I suggest Mike Pence.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

I. F. Stone (Isidor Feinstein Stone, 24 December 1907 – 18 June 1989) was an American investigative journalist and writer known as a man of great integrity (personal and political) who was an inspiration to other writers, and an intellectual annoyance to the American right wing.[1][2]

He is best remembered for the newsletter, I. F. Stone's Weekly (1953–71), which was ranked in 16th place among “The Top 100 Works of Journalism in the United States in the 20th Century”, and was ranked in second place among print-journalism publications.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Like Obama, Slick?

like Obama, Slick Willy?

Like Obama/Hilliary? Like Slick Willie?

---

You've got really thin skin, don't you? Trump can't tolerate criticism and has to hit back every time because he has little self-control of his anger. He needs a thicker hide or else step down and let someone not so mentally fragile take the job. I suggest Mike Pence.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Trump haters don't despair. Who knows, another protest march wearing your best Sunday pussy hats, or another violent riot with burning cars and smashing windows may just do the trick for ya. Never give up! Never surrender!

C'mon, that's the spirit!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The best reporting that was every done was done by a guy who never talked to confidential sources or attended press briefings.

Why?

Because he didn't want to be beholden to those confidential sources, or to have his thoughts messed with by WH pronouncements.

That was I.F "Izzy" Stone:

Quote:

---

I. F. Stone (Isidor Feinstein Stone, 24 December 1907 – 18 June 1989) was an American investigative journalist and writer known as a man of great integrity (personal and political) who was an inspiration to other writers, and an intellectual annoyance to the American right wing.[1][2]

He is best remembered for the newsletter, I. F. Stone's Weekly (1953–71), which was ranked in 16th place among “The Top 100 Works of Journalism in the United States in the 20th Century”, and was ranked in second place among print-journalism publications.

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._F._Stone

You don't need to attend "press briefings" to know what's going on ... those are just dog-and-pony shows anyway, kind of like being embedded in the military. You'll only get to see what "they" want you to see.

To be a good investigative reporter you need sharp analysis and willingness to dig into actual records ... both public and private ... and not just listen to the "pronouncements" of the day (which are usually propaganda anyway). Reporters who are rejected by the Trump admin are being done a favor. Maybe that will boot them off their asses and get them to so some real investigation, instead of just schmoozing with TPTB.



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Trump haters don't despair. Who knows, another protest march wearing your best Sunday pussy hats, or another violent riot with burning cars and smashing windows may just do the trick for ya. Never give up! Never surrender!

C'mon, that's the spirit!

---

LOL... What the hell was I just watching where they were talking about a big payoff they got in the late 90's and said "and that was like Chumbawumba money".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Riverlove:
That's funny, because I haven't thought about that song in like forever, but for some reason it was in my head today.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/white-house-bars-news-organization
s_us_58b08a76e4b0a8a9b78213ae

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:

I think Mainstream media news is done

---

Quote:

---

Seriously?? You *really* think they don't know all of that already? Do you think they just do that and go home??

---

Quote:

---

"You'll only get to see what "they" want you to see.- SIGNY"
No sh*t - that's the point. If you understood what being a "reporter" means - G

---

Quote:

---

you'd know from what the WH says you know where else to look, you can get a sense of what they're trying to hide. By their phrasing you can see what they're trying to hide.-G

---

Quote:

---

It also happens to be one of the
1) most prominent public facing interactions
2) of what the White House believes.
3) It has to be put into the public record and
4) chopped up and dissected by the press.
5) It has to be, or the White House - already a source of frequent lies - will feel unchecked.
6) Just like in Russia. Ding!

---

Quote:

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.- CONSTITUTION

---

Quote:

---

Rulings on free speech and the press
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
A U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that prior restraint on publications is a violation of free speech and free press. In so doing, the Court struck down a state law that allowed the police to confiscate publications that were malicious, scandalous, or obscene. The case involved a virulently anti-Semitic pamphlet.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
The U.S. Supreme Court decision that prohibited public officials from suing news organizations for inaccuracies made by mistake. This ruling, based on the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press, made it more difficult for public officials to sue the press for libel, because they had to prove not only that the information was wrong, but that the news organization published it with malicious intent or reckless disregard for the truth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.- CONSTITUTION

---

But even "free speech" has its limits, the most famous example: You can't yell FIRE!! in a crowded theater.

Quote:

---

Rulings on free speech and the press
Near v. Minnesota (1931)
A U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that prior restraint on publications is a violation of free speech and free press. In so doing, the Court struck down a state law that allowed the police to confiscate publications that were malicious, scandalous, or obscene. The case involved a virulently anti-Semitic pamphlet.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
The U.S. Supreme Court decision that prohibited public officials from suing news organizations for inaccuracies made by mistake. This ruling, based on the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of the press, made it more difficult for public officials to sue the press for libel, because they had to prove not only that the information was wrong, but that the news organization published it with malicious intent or reckless disregard for the truth.

---

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

THUGR ... is there anywhere in the Constitution that the WH has to invite every single representative of every media outlet to press briefings? That the WH has to roll out the red carpet and make itself accessible to any media representative any time, anywhere?

No?

Do you see the WH restricting what media outlets can publish? Do you see Congress drafting laws to curtail content?

No?



-----------

Now, my humble opinion on what constitutes "free speech" is different than current court opinion, but I believe it would curtail the overweening power of the major media (and entities like FB and Google) to shape public perception, and that is this:

Free speech (to me) is speech which nobody has to PAY FOR. But once someone has to start shelling out dollars to get their opinion broadcast, IMHO it should be counted as "advertisements" and the "truth in advertising" laws should apply.

But that's just me, and why I'm on the libertarian side of the chart and not the authoritarian one.



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Quote:

---

SIG, 99% of the Republican Party distances themselves from Trump on this. George Bush

---

Quote:

---

came out of retirement just one month after Trump took office to answer questions, knowing he would be asked about this and other things Trump is doing. And SIG, while he is very polite and classy, he disagrees with this and much more. -THUGR

---

Quote:

---

Yes, absolutely. How can they write about what the White House believes if they can't ask them?

---

Quote:

---

Actually, now that I think of it... there are so many people at the WH who keep leaking information maybe they don't need these briefings.

---

Quote:

---

BTW - you hear about the 10% increase in defense spending proposed? I guess that means less war, right?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Trump's reaction may be stupid but it's not illegal. It's not even unethical: the WH has NO obligation to do this dance with "the press". It was kind of sickening to watch, anyway. You can tell me all day long that it was a PR mistake on Trump's part, but find another issue to get all huffy about.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Yes, absolutely. How can they write about what the White House believes if they can't ask them?

---

I'm sure transcripts are provided.

Quote:

---

Actually, now that I think of it... there are so many people at the WH who keep leaking information maybe they don't need these briefings.

---

You're probably right. And then, there are those tweets, which seem remarkably uncensored and unprepared. In fact, cringe-worthy. TMI, if you ask me!

Quote:

---

BTW - you hear about the 10% increase in defense spending proposed? I guess that means less war, right?

---

Finally, an ACTUAL criticism of what Trump is doing! Good for you!



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Quote:

---

Again SIG, the first amendment. He does have to dance with the press.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Again SIG, the first amendment. He does have to dance with the press.

---

No he doesn't. You clearly don't know the Constitution.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

It's about time somebody stood up for reasonable people, the honest electorate. The Fake News outlets didn't make the cut this time - so what?

---

I'll give you what:

No modern president would even think of taking revenge on a state that voted against him by refusing disaster aid. No modern president would dream of evicting news outlets from a press briefing because they had criticized him. No modern president would lie about easily checkable facts on a routine basis.

---

Like Obama, Slick?

Quote:

---

No modern president would loudly cite every positive bit of economic news as a personal triumph.

---

like Obama, Slick Willy?

Quote:

---

No modern president since Nixon would casually ask the FBI to take his side in an ongoing investigation.

---

Like Obama/Hilliary? Like Slick Willie?

Quote:

---

It's not that modern presidents couldn't do these things. They just didn't. And we all came to assume that none of them would. The technical machinery of government—collecting data, hiring staffers, working by the rules—would be left alone to operate in a professional and impartial way. But that's no longer something we can assume.

Trump is going to find lots of things like this. Things that nobody ever thought of before, but aren't illegal. Or maybe just slightly illegal. And he's going to use them to demagogue his enemies and take revenge on people who badmouth him.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:
Yes, absolutely. How can they write about what the White House believes if they can't ask them?

---

I'm sure transcripts are provided.

Quote:

---

Actually, now that I think of it... there are so many people at the WH who keep leaking information maybe they don't need these briefings.

---

You're probably right. And then, there are those tweets, which seem remarkably uncensored and unprepared. In fact, cringe-worthy. TMI, if you ask me!

Quote:

---

BTW - you hear about the 10% increase in defense spending proposed? I guess that means less war, right?

---

---

Quote:

---

Finally, an ACTUAL criticism of what Trump is doing! Good for you!

THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally ;osted by THRGGI:
Again SIG, the first amendment. He does have to dance with the press.

---

No he doesn't. You clearly don't know the Constitution.

THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The main stream press has been doing a fine job destroying themselves. And that includes giving all those free minutes of air time to Trump. Whoops.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally ;osted by THRGGI:
Again SIG, the first amendment. He does have to dance with the press.

---

No he doesn't. You clearly don't know the Constitution.

THUGR IS A DEEP-STATE TROLL

---

Perhaps you and I are wrong, Sig. He claims he is educamated, making him better than any of us. He has proclaimed that he will help us out by explaining all to us. If we ignore the close-mindedness that he was indoctrinated to and which strangles his attempts at logical critical reason, maybe we might glean some insights from his ramblings.

---

Quote:

---

He can ignore what they write, but he has to mostly answer their questions.-THUGR

---

Quote:

---

He has, let me say that again, he has to give them access.-THUGR

---

Quote:

---

If he choses to keep out the times and instead invite Breitbart News, then he will have to explain that and deal with the consequences. The American people and the rest of our elected officials, will have to deal with the consequences that poses with our allies.

---

Quote:

---

He also cannot use the power of the presidency to try and destroy what is considered the main stream press.

---

Quote:

---

Well, he can't get away with it.

---

Quote:

---

It should also be noted that you would have him do exactly that.-THUGR

---

Quote:

---

Just as you try to do that here.- THUGR

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

BTW - you hear about the 10% increase in defense spending proposed? I guess that means less war, right?

---

Finally, an ACTUAL criticism of what Trump is doing! Good for you!

---

And yet no comment on that.

In fact, a week ago when I asked you about these other things (below) you also had no comment. Hrmmm, what could be stopping you?

"I would rate his (a president's) honesty with US pretty high up there, but for the sake of conversation, what else is more important? And don't say 'deep state' - that's too predictable and lazy.

Infrastructure? Banks? Health Care? Tax relief? Small business relief? Security? Immigration? Wall Building? Military? Education? Gun Control? International Relations? I know it's early but he's running a deficit on almost all of those so far. I'd say the only one he's done well in in Military, one of your favorites, right?"

SIGNYM crickets ....

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by DREAMTROVE:
Yeah, that increase in military spending means less war. That was the point. You have to make the monster happy one way or the other.

---

Eh?? o_0 Not according to Trump:

"Trump says he wants America “to start winning wars again”. His first budget will certainly make it more likely that America will start fighting wars again – but that is hardly the same thing."

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/28/donald-trump-mil
itary-spending-war

"The core proposal is for a massive increase in defence spending, with Trump seeking an extra $54bn for tanks, ships and weapons systems. The money will come from cutting – “dollar for dollar” – spending on foreign aid, diplomacy and environmental protection.

The myopia of that decision is astonishing. The US already spends more on defence than the next eight biggest defence-spending nations put together. The US enjoys “full-spectrum dominance”. It has a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying all human life on the planet many times over.

Yet apparently that’s not enough. Last week Trump told Reuters he believed the US had fallen behind in its nuclear capacity and he wanted to make it “top of the pack” – as if the US is not already at the nuclear summit and out of sight.

What makes this shift so misguided is not just the piling of excess upon excess, but the opportunity cost – paying for all this hardware by depleting the arsenal of US soft power. Trump’s plans call for a 30% cut in the state department’s budget, with reports of a 40% cut in US contributions to international agencies, such as the United Nations, and a 25% cut in funds for the the Environmental Protection Agency (which is already saddled with a boss who doesn’t believe human-made climate change is real). It’s as if Trump decided that the best way to protect his buildings and hotels would be to spend millions on shiny new fire engines – and rip out all the smoke detectors.

Now it will fall to Mattis and the other generals in key positions in the Trump administration to fight this deeply dangerous policy shift. Like most who’ve worn their nation’s uniform, they see war as a last resort, to be approached with no relish. But they work for a chicken hawk president, who avoided military service by claiming “bone spurs” in a foot – though he later couldn’t remember which one – and who called his subsequent efforts to sleep around without picking up a sexually transmitted disease his “personal Vietnam”."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The bestest way to win a war is to prevent it from happening. Talk softly and carry a big stick.

---

We've had the biggest stick since WWII - how many wars has that kept us out of? We don't need another big stick.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The bestest way to win a war is to prevent it from happening. Talk softly and carry a big stick.

---

We've had the biggest stick since WWII - how many wars has that kept us out of? We don't need another big stick.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by G:

Trump

---