First Amendment about to be violated by con artist

[someoneyouknow]

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said the Trump administration has "looked at" changes to libel laws that would curtail press freedoms, but said "whether that goes anywhere is a different story.

In other words, any time anything is printed about the con artist which ruffles his fragile ego would be considered libel. Even if it's not.

This is the same contempt for freedom of the press shown by dictator Putin, which is why there is almost no independent news organizations in Russia. Any time cold hard facts about the corruption endemic in Russia is published, the news organizations are shut down or, in the case of Boris Nemtsov, the reporter is murdered on Putin's orders.

Now the con artist appears to be headed in the same direction. Unlike those who lied about Obama going to take away their guns, the con artist is seriously considering taking away something even more powerful and more explicitly enumerated in the Constitution: the right to a free and independent press.

Has anyone checked to see if Jefferson has drilled a hole to China yet?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-official-weve-looked-libel-laws-restrict/story?id=47114566

 

[Tnt69]

.....

 

[Boxlicker101]

I hope you know, Freedom of the Press is not Absolute, nor is Freedom of Speech. Libel and slander are still illegal, as are other things such as inciting to riot.

 

[Hard_Rom]

"Insulting the office of the president' will be a crime by the time the orange one is done. He is one thin skinned git that's for sure.

 

[LadyVer]

Gun sales are down at my company. Wonder why?

 

[someoneyouknow]

I hope you know, Freedom of the Press is not Absolute, nor is Freedom of Speech. Libel and slander are still illegal, as are other things such as inciting to riot.

The problem is the con artist is of the opinion anything bad said or written about him is libelous or slanderous, even when it's true. Write how he used illegal workers for a project in Chicago? Libel. Write about the con artist siphoned millions from his casinos as they were plunging into bankruptcy? Libel.

The con artist thrives on attention and anything which is negative or takes away from his delusions of grandeur are immediately suspect in his eyes. He can't stand anyone talking or writing bad things about him which is why, when articles come out about him using climate change as a reason to build a sea wall for his Irish golf course, he claims they don't know what they're talking about. Even when the very document showing the statement is produced.

As to inciting a riot, um, yeah. He might be on the hook for that as well:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/02/politics/donald-trump-lawsuit-incite-violence-kentucky-rally/index.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/matthew-heimbach-countersues-trump-saying-he-urged-protesters-removal-from-rally/

 

[Boxlicker101]

The problem is the con artist is of the opinion anything bad said or written about him is libelous or slanderous, even when it's true. Write how he used illegal workers for a project in Chicago? Libel. Write about the con artist siphoned millions from his casinos as they were plunging into bankruptcy? Libel.

The con artist thrives on attention and anything which is negative or takes away from his delusions of grandeur are immediately suspect in his eyes. He can't stand anyone talking or writing bad things about him which is why, when articles come out about him using climate change as a reason to build a sea wall for his Irish golf course, he claims they don't know what they're talking about. Even when the very document showing the statement is produced.

As to inciting a riot, um, yeah. He might be on the hook for that as well:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/02/politics/donald-trump-lawsuit-incite-violence-kentucky-rally/index.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/matthew-heimbach-countersues-trump-saying-he-urged-protesters-removal-from-rally/

Riot is much too strong a word for that incident. As for incitement, I'm not sure about that either. I don't know what the plaintiffs were doing just before being ejected, and neither do you. They may have been attacking Trump supporters at the rally, and doing just what they are accusing others of doing to them. Given their youth and the propensity to violence of such groups, I would not be at all sure that did not happen. Eye witnesses may well be located testifying to that.

 

[AnAmericanDarling]

Trump is just beyond lunacy. These things that bother him are beyond his control. Not EVERYTHING is libel or slander just because it hurts his feelings or is negative. He is such a wimp. What gets me is he's perfectly willing to be a misogynistic ass towards women and that's okay, and yet he can't take a little heat in his direction.