Any concerns?
- Thread starter davidallen
- Start date
Nope. Comey was either too stupid to understand the gravity of Clinton's email practices, too partisan to care, or was obstructed by Lynch and the White House. Either way, he's got the credibility of CNN now. After Jan 20th, Trump gets the bullet proof vest. Too bad, so sad little Dems.
I don't have any clue whether they are true or false but I don't trust the sources being anonymous and being hand delivered by McCain.
Yes. The actions of the media are extremely concerning. They are so desperate that they are willing to run with any and every story about Trump without any standards or corroboration.
It's stuff like this which Trump was speaking about when he suggested a review of liable/slander laws and protections. It's also the reason I've stated in the past that the media should lose some of their 1st amendment shield when they deliberately report fakenews knowing it's bogus. I am aware that my belief doesn't sit well with many on this board.
List of who John McCain represents, and their donations:
https://www.opensecrets.org/politic...=Career&type=I&cid=N00006424&newMem=N&recs=20
Pretty similar list to Hillary:
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019&type=I
https://www.opensecrets.org/politic...=Career&type=I&cid=N00006424&newMem=N&recs=20
Pretty similar list to Hillary:
https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000019&type=I
What you want is already the state of the law.
"The court's decision. ... In sum the court ruled that "the First Amendment protects the publication of all statements, even false ones, about the conduct of public officials except when statements are made with actual malice (with knowledge that they are false or in reckless disregard of their truth or falsity)."
New York Times v Sullivan (United States Supreme Court)
Emphasis added by me.
I don't believe he was speaking about going to a Sullivan standard when he suggested a review of liable/slander laws and protections. If he was, it shows that he doesn't know anything about the First Amendment and liable/slander.
I believe he was advocating a movement towards British style liable/slander law where the publisher/press have the burden to prove the truth of the allegations in a court of law rather than the plaintiff having to establish actual malice.
At times he kinda sounded to me like he was wanting to go back to early sedition laws where even a truthful criticism or a critical opinion was actionable by public officials.
I didn't read but I'll tell you what. I'll start to care as soon as I begin to see a little bit non-biased coverage. That'll happen about as soon as the MSM starts to actually show one iota of concern instead of passing over liberal Soros and Saudi connections. Funny how the Saudi connections have been of no concern since GWB left office.
I never saw the MSM incessantly railing on Hillary and The Clinton Slush Fund over the Uranium One deal that gave Putin control over a lot of the global uranium supply chain.
McCain is in all out CYA mode.
Crusty ol neocon bastard needs to be put to pasture. Graham too.
Glen Greeneald seems pretty unpersuaded: https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11...-elect-using-unverified-claims-as-dems-cheer/
And he's correct about the deep state. They are using and will continue to use the same tactics they've deployed against Scott Walker for the same reason.
And he's correct about the deep state. They are using and will continue to use the same tactics they've deployed against Scott Walker for the same reason.
What? Deep state went after Scott Walker because he doesn't hate Russia?
Exactly. Why can't they just call out corruption regardless of party? Why do much bias and paintingbof false narratives based on political affiliation?
At this point I'm not sure I can trust anyone
No because they are incredibly sore losers and will grasp at anything, including made up charges, to keep hold of their power.
At this point, nothing will surprise me. Just as what Obama does in his last 9 days in his scorched Earth agenda won't.
I have a prediction. I'm not sure what the scandal will be but David Allen and syskatine will get their marching orders to spread it and will increase their carbon footprint by putting out a lot of hot air.
If only syskatine had any more credibility to lose but he is bankrupt. A silly little loser who has hitched his wagon to the left and does their bidding completely void of shame, morals or conscience. David Allen don't be like syskatine.
If Bergdahl and Snowden just state they either identify as a woman or initiate a sex change they'll get consideration.
Manning submitted an application.
Rumor is she's on a short list of possible commutations/pardons being considered.
Rumor is she's on a short list of possible commutations/pardons being considered.
Similar threads
