It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Trump collusion is proven, should "conservative" media be prosecuted?

page: 5
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 21 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
How many unproven stories have come out about Trump since he was the nominee? More than you can count. Who's going to be punished for all of those?




posted on May, 21 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr


I agree but it's up to the people to hold them responsible.


How, exactly?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: jjkenobi
How many unproven stories have come out about Trump since he was the nominee? More than you can count. Who's going to be punished for all of those?


Why and how should anyone be punished? What if the court cases prove that the stories are all true. (They are, you know.)



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

The media is being polite? No, the media does not have evidence and are following orders. The media is a scam. The fact that the media is so into this tells me that it isn't true.

In effect, if ABCNBCCBSCNNMSPCP make any claims about practically anything - I do not believe it.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: DJW001

LOL

You let your bitterness get to you.

You didn't list any real sources !!!



Are you saying you made those stories up yourself?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Fools


In effect, if ABCNBCCBSCNNMSPCP make any claims about practically anything - I do not believe it.


Congratulations! The Kremlin's programming has taken control of your mind. "We cannot even know what the truth is."



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
No more than the liberal media, neither is a beacon of truth. Just opinion pieces from both sides.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: GraffikPleasure


" For the record, I believe strongly in the First Amendment. As a "liberal," I believe that the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even America's enemies. "

This is hard for me to get past and contradicts itself. If you believe strongly in the 1st amendment, then you sound like you believe all of it, especially that it pertains to CITIZENS. then is when you mention that all of the bill of rights should be for all. Sorry I just really have a tough time with this.


Please re-read what I wrote. I said that some people think the Bill of Rights applies only to citizens, and I disagree. That is not a contradiction.


Being a citizen is not something to take for granted, otherwise we don't have people becoming as such and joining our great nation.


Exactly! What distinguishes a United States citizen from a non-citizen is not that we have the right to due process or freedom of expression and they do not. As citizens, we determine who will serve us in government, and non-citizens do not.
That is the very issue at hand. Was the 2016 election determined by non-citizens? Trump believes that non-citizens were voting for his rival. The evidence is beginning to suggest that the electorate was manipulated by non-citizens to give Trump the victory. He did warn us it was rigged, remember?


But to answer your question... If anyone breaks the law, laws that are not draconian and need to be abolished, then yes, they should be charged. Honestly it is a stupid question, posed in the OP. That is what court is for.


That was not the question. Are there laws that can punish media for backing the wrong horse politically?


Don't you think it's a shame you have to ask this question today just because it is targeted towards another political party now?


"What" is "being targeted" now?


This entire thread is partisan. Yuck!


In what way?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: vonclod
No more than the liberal media, neither is a beacon of truth. Just opinion pieces from both sides.


Ah! But that is what makes legitimate media legitimate. Editors publish opinion pieces so that readers can understand their potential biases. Propagandists claim to be telling the unvarnished, unbiased truth.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: jjkenobi
How many unproven stories have come out about Trump since he was the nominee? More than you can count. Who's going to be punished for all of those?


Why and how should anyone be punished? What if the court cases prove that the stories are all true. (They are, you know.)


They're true?

Why then, you have the transcript of the original Michael Flynn phone call *and* the Comey memos *and* the full transcript of Trump's meeting with the Russians?

Are you going to link those to the ATS website so we can all see them for ourselves and make our own judgments?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


They're true?


I was referring to the "countless" unproven stories about Candidate Trump. He was allegedly caught on tape boasting about groping women. He allegedly claimed that Obama was not an American citizen. He allegedly claimed that Obama and Clinton founded ISIS. He allegedly tweeted... you get the idea. All true.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Call me cynical but I have a hard time believing any of them at this point..and I lean more left than right to be clear.
I don't believe there is any sort of truly free press anymore..all get some sort of direction or marching orders..if you will.
As far as both Trump and Clinton go..both are scumbags..imo, the l/r paradigm is a distraction.
edit on 21-5-2017 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

But at the same time, those women who claimed he assaulted him? If they had real claims, where did they go?

You'll note that Clinton's coterie follows him everywhere, all the time, up or down. They don't give up.

So why did Trump's women just suddenly all come climbing out of the woodwork when he ran for office and then disappear after Hillary lost. You'd think they'd still be there today more than ever.

So how much of that scandal was true beyond Trump's big mouth writing checks his actions never cashed?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

I stand by my statements. Of someone broke the law,and of that includes non citizens then they should be charged.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko


But at the same time, those women who claimed he assaulted him? If they had real claims, where did they go?


Trump has deep pockets. He can drag a court case out for years until his opponents give up.


You'll note that Clinton's coterie follows him everywhere, all the time, up or down. They don't give up.


Not exactly. Trump paid them to be at the debate as a cheap trick.


So why did Trump's women just suddenly all come climbing out of the woodwork when he ran for office and then disappear after Hillary lost. You'd think they'd still be there today more than ever.


Perhaps in the hopes that Trump would pay them off to silence them. Why aren't they around any more? Perhaps he paid them off to silence them. Trump has done that before.


So how much of that scandal was true beyond Trump's big mouth writing checks his actions never cashed?


As they say in Russia, "we may never know the truth."



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
a reply to: DJW001

I stand by my statements. Of someone broke the law,and of that includes non citizens then they should be charged.


So you agree Julian Assange should be extradited and tried for espionage?



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra


Conspiracy of what?


Conspiracy to aid a foreign power in undermining the United States government. (Incidentally, I notice your tag links to a claim that someone on the investigating committee "hinted" that Comey said that Trump was not under investigation. This conclusion is an interpretation, not a "fact," and is an excellent example of a "conservative" news site doing exactly what the "liberal" ones are accused of doing!)


Except in the case of the link on my signature line its from Grassley and Feinstein... Something liberal media never reported on. I took what they said as fact.. Unless your suggesting that Grassley, a Republican, is lying while you ignore what Feinstein, a Democrat, said.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra


The 1st amendment guarantees a free media and with that comes the requirement of responsibility and common sense.


Agreed; but as Voltaire supposedly observed: common sense is not so common. This is where laws come in. My overarching question in the OP is: should media be treated differently under the law based on their politics? All too many members here implicitly believe they should-- and not just by those identifying with the right, but those identifying with the left as well.


Media's responsibility is to report the news and not to involve themselves in it as a part of what they are reporting. If the media cant do that and intentionally report rumors, gossip and falsehoods then they should be punished for it. Especially so when dealing with elections or major pieces of legislation.

When media shapes the news they are no longer journalists but opinion programs. Opinion programming in the US comes on at 3 am and is usually preceded by a warning that the following program is opinion.

That same standard should apply to media.



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: GraffikPleasure
a reply to: DJW001

I stand by my statements. Of someone broke the law,and of that includes non citizens then they should be charged.


So you agree Julian Assange should be extradited and tried for espionage?


Yes.

Had he reported only the stuff showing law violations I would most likely agree with him. When he released classified info that showed no illegal acts for the sole purpose of damaging the US he crossed a line.
edit on 21-5-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

No, we should not go after the media, no matter the outcome of this debacle.

The media should be respected for what they do, despite the cries of those that think there is a media bias, and we should respect their 1st amendment right.




top topics



 
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join