43% of Republicans say Trump should be allowed to shut down media

These Republicans are the very definition of fascism.

 

https://nypost.com/2018/08/07/43-of-republicans-say-trump-should-be-allowed-to-shut-down-media/

43% of Republicans say Trump should be allowed to shut down media

August 7, 2018

President Trump’s repeated cries of “fake news” and attacks on journalists as “enemies of the American people” have resonated with his base, with 43 percent of Republicans saying he “should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior.”

The results — suggesting that a plurality of Republicans would have no problem trashing the First Amendment — came from a stunning new poll conducted by Ipsos and reported Tuesday by the Daily Beast.

The survey also showed that just 36 percent of GOP voters disagreed with that statement.

When asked if Trump should close down specific news organizations, such as CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times — all frequent Trump targets — 23 percent of GOP voters agreed while 49 percent did not.

Overall, Republicans were more likely to take a dim view of the media, the website reported.

Forty-eight percent said they believed “the news media is the enemy of the American people,” with only 28 percent disagreeing.

Nearly four out of five — 79 percent — said that they believed “the mainstream media treats President Trump unfairly.”

The commander-in-chief — who as recently as January called existing US libel laws “a sham and a disgrace” — has routinely accused journalists of lying, making up sources and knowingly reporting false information to make him look bad.

“The Fake News hates me saying that they are the Enemy of the People only because they know it’s TRUE. I am providing a great service by explaining this to the American People. They purposely cause great division & distrust. They can also cause War! They are very dangerous & sick!” he ranted Sunday in a typical media-bashing tweet.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders recently refused to respond when she was asked if she thought journalists were the enemies of the people — though first daughter Ivanka Trump said she disagreed with the characterization.

But it’s not only Republicans who think the president should have the power to muzzle the media, a common practice in dictatorships and authoritarian states like Russia, North Korea and China.

According to the survey, 12 percent of Democrats and 21 percent of independents agreed that “the president should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior.”

Conversely, 74 percent of Dems and 55 percent of independents disagreed with the statement.

But 12 percent of Democrats and 26 percent of independents agreed that “the news media is the enemy of the American people,” while 74 percent of Democrats and 50 percent of independents disagreed.

But there were kernels of positive news for the press in the survey as well.

Overall, 57 percent of those surveyed said they believed the news media and reporters were “necessary to keep the Trump administration honest” — including a 39 percent plurality of Republicans.

And a large majority — 85 percent — believed that “freedom of the press is essential for American democracy,” compared to 4 percent who opposed that statement.

The 43 percent figure roughly corresponds to the president’s loyal base.

Gallup’s most recent weekly tracking poll showed that 41 percent of voters approved of the job Trump is doing while 54 percent disapproved.

 

August 10, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , . Donald Trump, Police state. Leave a comment.

In my opinion, the fact that Maxine Waters supporters stole an American flag is far more significant than the fact that they burned it

This article from the Washington Times includes the following photograph of Maxine Waters supporters burning an American flag:




As a libertarian who believes in free speech and property rights, I think it should be legal to burn the American flag as long as both of the following conditions are met:

1) The flag being burned is the property of the person (or people) who is (or are) burning it, i.e., the flag is not stolen.

and

2) The flag is burned in a manner that is in accordance with all of the fire and safety laws, i.e., the flag burning doesn’t pose a physical threat or fire hazard to the lives or property of other people.

Well, the particular incident in the above photograph fails this test, because, according to the same article from the Washington Times:

A small crowd that gathered Thursday outside the Los Angeles office of U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters to counter an expected protest by a self-styled militia group burned an American flag taken from the back of a pickup truck.

The vehicle, occupied by two men who appeared to be white, was stopped by the crowd. Some marchers opened the doors and one grabbed the flag flying on a pole in the bed of the truck, which sped off.

In other words, they stole the flag.

In my opinion, the fact that these Maxine Waters supporters stole an American flag is far more significant than the fact that they burned it.

I hope the person who stole the flag is prosecuted for robbery.

And I hope the people who blocked the vehicle and opened its doors are charged as accessories to robbery.

There is no excuse for committing robbery. Shame on them.

July 20, 2018. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , . Flag burning, Social justice warriors. Leave a comment.

Hillary Clinton allegedly threatened to shut down a comedy club for showing this three minute video

Here’s the video, which contains profanity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n083eytJe5g

National Review reports:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427354/hillary-clinton-laugh-factory-comedians-threats

Hillary’s Campaign Ordered a Comedy Club Not to Make Fun of Her — Someone Should Tell Her This Isn’t China

The campaign actually threatened to shut the club down.

November 19, 2015

Hollywood’s Laugh Factory posted a three-minute video of comedians telling jokes about Hillary Clinton on its website…

… her campaign called the club demanding that it take the video down and give them the personal contact information of every single comic who appeared in it…

Club owner Jamie Masada reports that the campaign actually threatened to put the club out of business if he did not heed their demands…

The same information has also been reported by the Blaze and Judicial Watch.

However, I haven’t been able to find any mainstream media sources that have reported this information.

So, one of the two following things must be true: either the information is false, or, the mainstream media has failed to do its job.

If it is true, then this, by itself, is enough to convince me that Clinton does not support the Bill of Rights, and, therefore, should not be President. It also makes me wonder why the mainstream media has chosen to avoid reporting it.

If it’s not true, then the Laugh Factory owes Clinton a big apology.

 

November 19, 2015. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . Politics. 2 comments.

Colorado judge rules that a Facebook post is an illegal campaign contribution

I agree with the law professor who said this could be troubling for free speech. I worry about the precedent that it creates, and about the possibility of it eventually being expanded to any kind of political speech that anyone makes on the internet.

USA Today reports:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/23/facebook-post-campaign-contribution/74486688/

Judge: School’s Facebook post a campaign contribution

DENVER — A Colorado judge has ruled that a charter school’s Facebook post amounts to an illegal campaign contribution to a school board candidate.

In August, Liberty Common School in Fort Collins, Colo., shared a newspaper article about a student’s parent running for a board seat in a neighboring school district. Liberty Common’s principal, former Colorado GOP Rep. Bob Schaffer, then shared the post and called candidate Tomi Grundvig an “excellent education leader” who would provide “sensible stewardship” of Thompson School District.

An administrative law judge, Matthew E. Norwood, called the violation “minor,” and ruled that “no government money of any significant amount was spent to make the contribution.” He also focused on the post to the school’s specific page, not Schaffer’s personal page.

“The school’s action was the giving of a thing of value to the candidate, namely favorable publicity,” Norwood wrote in his Oct. 14 ruling, which became public Wednesday. “It was given indirectly to her for the purpose of promoting her election.”

Law professor Scott Moss of the University of Colorado called that point troubling for its implications on political speech.

“I don’t buy that under the First Amendment speech about a candidate can be deemed a contribution,” Moss said after reading the ruling. “Is speech valuable? Yes. But that’s not a basis for restricting core political speech.”

 

November 5, 2015. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Police state, Politics. 2 comments.

Obama plans to illegally put government bureaucrats inside TV stations and newspaper offices to monitor their activities

Ajit Pai, a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, recently wrote the following in the Wall St. Journal:

Last May the FCC proposed an initiative to thrust the federal government into newsrooms across the country. With its “Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs,” or CIN, the agency plans to send researchers to grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.

… the FCC’s queries may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore. They would be out of business without an FCC license…

… why does the CIN study include newspapers when the FCC has no authority to regulate print media?

The Washington Examiner recently wrote:

The First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…” But under the Obama administration, the Federal Communications Commission is planning to send government contractors into the nation’s newsrooms to determine whether journalists are producing articles, television reports, Internet content, and commentary that meets the public’s “critical information needs.” Those “needs” will be defined by the administration, and news outlets that do not comply with the government’s standards could face an uncertain future. It’s hard to imagine a project more at odds with the First Amendment.

If the FCC goes forward, it’s not clear what will happen to news organizations that fall short of the new government standards. Perhaps they will be disciplined. Or perhaps the very threat of investigating their methods will nudge them into compliance with the administration’s journalistic agenda. What is sure is that it will be a gross violation of constitutional rights.

February 24, 2014. Tags: , , , , , , . Barack Obama, Police state, Politics. 2 comments.

Obama threatens to fine nuns over Obamacare’s birth control mandate, all the way to the Supreme Court

This is just sick. Sick, sick, sick.

Obama is a commie-fascist dictator, and I never use that term loosely.

Little Sisters of the Poor – now there’s a sweet name for a sweet group of ladies. Nuns, to be precise. And to be even more precise, nuns who run nursing homes for the old and the sick.

Obama doesn’t like letting these nuns practice their freedom of religion. He is threatening to fine them for violating Obamacare’s birth control mandate, and he’s taking his meddling all the way to the Supreme Court.

I hope the court rules 9-0 in favor of the nuns.

January 4, 2014. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . Health care, Politics, Religion. 3 comments.

President Obama’s actions have had a very dangerous and harmful effect on the media’s ability to report the news

On June 19, while giving a speech at the National Press Club, Gary Pruitt, the president and chief executive of Associated Press said of President Obama’s seizure of AP’s phone records

“Some longtime trusted sources have become nervous and anxious about talking with us… In some cases, government employees we once checked in with regularly will no longer speak to us by phone. Others are reluctant to meet in person … This chilling effect on newsgathering is not just limited to AP… Journalists from other news organizations have personally told me that it has intimidated both official and nonofficial sources from speaking to them as well.”

This terrifies me – but it doesn’t surprise me. This is who Obama is. This is what he does. He’s a control freak who has no interest in or respect for the principles of limited government.

June 20, 2013. Tags: , , , , , , , , . Barack Obama, Police state, Politics. Leave a comment.

Obama’s attack against Fox News reporter James Rosen is a really, really big deal

James Rosen is a law abiding reporter for Fox News. However, the Obama administration falsely labeled him as “an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation when it applied for a warrant to read his emails.

The New York Times wrote of this:

With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible “co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news.

Leak investigations usually focus on the source, not the reporter. But, in this case, federal prosecutors also asked a federal judge for permission to examine Mr. Rosen’s personal e-mails, arguing that “there is probable cause to believe” Mr. Rosen is “an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator” in the leak.

Though Mr. Rosen was not charged, the F.B.I. request for his e-mail account was granted secretly in late May 2010. The government was allowed to rummage through Mr. Rosen’s e-mails for at least 30 days.

Michael Clemente, the executive vice president of Fox News, said on Monday that it was “downright chilling” that Mr. Rosen “was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter.” Bruce Brown, the executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, added on Tuesday that treating “routine news-gathering efforts as evidence of criminality is extremely troubling and corrodes time-honored understandings between the public and the government about the role of the free press.”

Obama administration officials often talk about the balance between protecting secrets and protecting the constitutional rights of a free press. Accusing a reporter of being a “co-conspirator”… shows a heavy tilt toward secrecy and insufficient concern about a free press.

The Washington Post wrote of this:

The Rosen affair is as flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush’s administration, and it uses technology to silence critics in a way Richard Nixon could only have dreamed of.

To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. Guns? Privacy? Due process? Equal protection? If you can’t speak out, you can’t defend those rights, either.

Beyond that, the administration’s actions shatter the president’s credibility and discourage allies who would otherwise defend the administration against bogus accusations such as those involving the Benghazi “talking points.” If the administration is spying on reporters and accusing them of criminality just for asking questions — well, who knows what else this crowd is capable of doing?

My Post colleague Ann E. Marimow, who broke the Rosen story, obtained the affidavit by FBI agent Reginald Reyes seeking access to Rosen’s private e-mails. In the affidavit, Reyes stated that “there is probable cause to believe that the reporter has committed or is committing a violation” of the law against national security leaks. The affidavit detailed how the FBI had monitored Rosen’s comings and goings from the State Department and tracked his various phone calls with the suspected leaker, analyst Stephen Jin-Woo Kim.

Rosen’s supposed crime? Reyes got his evidence from an e-mail from the reporter: “I want to report authoritatively, and ahead of my competitors, on new initiatives or shifts in U.S. policy, events on the ground in [North Korea], what intelligence is picking up, etc. . . . I’d love to see some internal State Department analyses. . . . In short: Let’s break some news, and expose muddle-headed policy when we see it, or force the administration’s hand to go in the right direction, if possible.”

That is indeed compelling evidence — of good journalism.

Obama is establishing an ominous precedent.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath. He said that he had nothing to do with monitoring Rosen’s emails. But it turns out that it was Holder’s own signature on the search warrant.

Even the liberal Huffington Post is saying that Holder should be fired.

Holder could get five years in prison.

Obama did not fire Holder. Instead, Obama asked that Holder be investigated – not by an independent investigating committee – but by Holder himself.

May 29, 2013. Tags: , , , , , , , , . Barack Obama, Police state, Politics. Leave a comment.