Sexual Predator is Working to Amend or Abolish the First Amendment..

I'll just wait here for the patriotic, freedom-lovin', Constitution-cherishing Republicans to be outraged..

KARL: I want to ask you about two things the President has said on related issues. First of all, there was what he said about opening up the libel laws. Tweeting “the failing New York Times has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change the libel laws?” That would require, as I understand it, a constitutional amendment. Is he really going to pursue that? Is that something he wants to pursue?

PRIEBUS: I think it’s something that we’ve looked at. How that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story.

Caution: Mainstream Media Article Below

Priebus: : "Something We've Looked Into"

I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

LooseGoose wrote:I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

Okay let's start here then we'll go from there on consequences

https://mobile.twitter.com/donaldtrump?lang=en

LooseGoose wrote:I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

Are you in favor of amending or abolishing the first amendment?

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

Are you in favor of amending or abolishing the first amendment?

I'm all in favor of a stronger 1st amendment. Everyone should be able to say what they want whenever they want.



Razor‏ @hale_razor 19h19 hours ago
Conservative at Berkeley: SHUT HER DOWN!
Conservative writes in the NYTimes: SHUT HIM DOWN!
Trump's mean to press: DEFEND THE 1ST AMENDMENT!

LooseGoose wrote:I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

the sexual predator is very much opposed to the truth.

so it's nice to see you side with America.

LooseGoose wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Are you in favor of amending or abolishing the first amendment?

I'm all in favor of a stronger 1st amendment.  Everyone should be able to say what they want whenever they want.



Razor‏ @hale_razor  19h19 hours ago
Conservative at Berkeley: SHUT HER DOWN!
Conservative writes in the NYTimes: SHUT HIM DOWN!
Trump's mean to press: DEFEND THE 1ST AMENDMENT!

so you support the sexual predator and his efforts to censor the press?

(it's a "yes" or "no" answer - somehow I don't think it'll be that simple for you).

LooseGoose wrote:I'm in favor of people telling the truth or facing the consequences.

Think how it would be in America if we couldn't believe our leaders.

You mean like it is right now?

Goosechev will tell us there is nothing to worry about until the lapdog GOP Legislature passes the bill and our President/oligarch signs it.

We know Trump admires Putin, Erdogan, Duterte and Kim Jong un as strong leaders. They are also leaders whose country's most recently Eddogan's Turkey who have libel laws that muzzle free press.

Goosechev is always looking out for the oligarchs.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

I'm all in favor of a stronger 1st amendment.  Everyone should be able to say what they want whenever they want.



Razor‏ @hale_razor  19h19 hours ago
Conservative at Berkeley: SHUT HER DOWN!
Conservative writes in the NYTimes: SHUT HIM DOWN!
Trump's mean to press: DEFEND THE 1ST AMENDMENT!

so you support the sexual predator and his efforts to censor the press?

(it's a "yes" or "no" answer - somehow I don't think it'll be that simple for you).

Please provide an example of what you consider "censoring the press".

Robert J Sakimano wrote:so you support the sexual predator and his efforts to censor the press?

(it's a "yes" or "no" answer - somehow I don't think it'll be that simple for you).

LooseGoose wrote:
Please provide an example of what you consider "censoring the press".

Let's see the hypocrites here on this:

Alexandra DeSanctis‏ @xan_desanctis
Breaking: Undercover Planned Parenthood footage removed from YouTube at Calif. judge's order. More info @NRO

Dan McLaughlin‏Verified account @baseballcrank
Let's see how many of the folks up in arms the past two days about freedom of the press are outraged at this. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448030/center-medical-progress-undercover-video-planned-parenthood-removed-youtube-judge …

LooseGoose wrote:Let's see the hypocrites here on this:

Alexandra DeSanctis‏ @xan_desanctis
Breaking: Undercover Planned Parenthood footage removed from YouTube at Calif. judge's order. More info @NRO

Dan McLaughlin‏Verified account @baseballcrank
Let's see how many of the folks up in arms the past two days about freedom of the press are outraged at this. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448030/center-medical-progress-undercover-video-planned-parenthood-removed-youtube-judge …

It wouldn't be the press. It would be speech. It's part of an ongoing prosecution of a crime and was ordered by the judge not to be released during the trial. The judge also ordered that the names of the members of the group that released the video not be release to protect them. Should that order also be ignored? Do we no longer have the rule of law in this country? Finally, how is this anything like a politician slamming a guy to the ground by his neck and punching him while he's down? What the fuck is really wrong with you dude?

LooseGoose wrote:Let's see the hypocrites here on this:

Alexandra DeSanctis‏ @xan_desanctis
Breaking: Undercover Planned Parenthood footage removed from YouTube at Calif. judge's order. More info @NRO

Dan McLaughlin‏Verified account @baseballcrank
Let's see how many of the folks up in arms the past two days about freedom of the press are outraged at this. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448030/center-medical-progress-undercover-video-planned-parenthood-removed-youtube-judge …

I'm not sure you understand the assignment.

Trump wants the same reforms Erdogan has signed n Turkey. Tweak the libel laws so the offended person or corporation can sue you into silence.

Something Gianforte would have done with the offending media. Every multi millionaire, billionaire and corporation will go after investigative journalists.

A perfect world in some posters idea of America

GRR Spartan wrote:Trump wants the same reforms Erdogan has signed n Turkey. Tweak the libel laws so the offended person or corporation can sue you into silence.

Something Gianforte would have done with the offending media. Every multi millionaire, billionaire and corporation will go after investigative journalists.

A perfect world in some posters idea of America

So you think the judge is wrong to suppress the video showing the ghouls laughing over dismembering babies?

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote:Trump wants the same reforms Erdogan has signed n Turkey. Tweak the libel laws so the offended person or corporation can sue you into silence.

Something Gianforte would have done with the offending media. Every multi millionaire, billionaire and corporation will go after investigative journalists.

A perfect world in some posters idea of America

So you think the judge is wrong to suppress the video showing the ghouls laughing over dismembering babies?

did they get sucked into a sink with a vacuum?

LooseGoose wrote:Let's see the hypocrites here on this:

Alexandra DeSanctis‏ @xan_desanctis
Breaking: Undercover Planned Parenthood footage removed from YouTube at Calif. judge's order. More info @NRO

Dan McLaughlin‏Verified account @baseballcrank
Let's see how many of the folks up in arms the past two days about freedom of the press are outraged at this. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/448030/center-medical-progress-undercover-video-planned-parenthood-removed-youtube-judge …

I don't care enough to really research this, but if it is part of an ongoing court case and the video was posted by one of the parties to the case, it is certainly within the judge's discretion to order the removal of the video under penalty of contempt. I would hope that after the trial, the video would be free to be reposted, as I'm generally in favor of transparency in regards to these sorts of undercover videos (particularly in the context of slaughterhouses and the ag-gag type stuff, but the principals would be the same in regards to Planned Parenthood).