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.

 

President’s abuse of the press is violative of his oath of office and is grounds for impeachment

page: 2
43
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:
+15 more 
posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   
Oh, please. The press is not immune from criticism, including by the President You must be living in a dreamworld if you believe this is an "impeachable offense." The President also has free speech rights.
edit on 6/30/2017 by schuyler because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

So, too, is the President. That doesn't prevent people from abusing him...does it?

The press needs holding accountable just as anyone else they talk about, they being the press. Yes, no?

Impeachable? No, laughable.


+1 more 
posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:20 PM
link   
As an amateur historian, I can say with all confidence that there has never been a time where any president ever said anything bad against a member of the media.

There is a clause in the US Constitution that actually says that people can insult the president and he can't do sh!t about it.

Thomas Jefferson wanted to have it say "Crap", but Larry Finklestein, a proofreader back in 1776, actually put "sh!t" in instead because he had a bad date the night before and was angry that she didn't put out.

"Putting out", in 1776 meant holding hands after the 10th date and she thought that might be moving too fast.

Getting a look at "side boob" didn't happen until the 4th year of marriage.





posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
When the full RICO case goes public

CNN might not be able to respond live on air

From a lil birdie



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Is the press allowed to print lies and make stuff up ? Is lieing covered under the freedom of the press?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JHumm

RICO

This time the gloves all FIT!

DOJ
DNI
CIA
NSA
FBI
CGI
CF
CrowdStrike
Orbis
DNC
ABC
CBS
CNN
NYT
WaPo

And all actors associated in the top levels
edit on 30-6-2017 by iWontGiveUP because: Edit



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I signed up specifically to say this is the single most stupid thread I have ever seen on ATS.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: JHumm
Is the press allowed to print lies and make stuff up ? Is lieing covered under the freedom of the press?


How can they be lying when they are telling us what we want to hear?



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
As an amateur historian, I can say with all confidence that there has never been a time where any president ever said anything bad against a member of the media.

There is a clause in the US Constitution that actually says that people can insult the president and he can't do sh!t about it.

Thomas Jefferson wanted to have it say "Crap", but Larry Finklestein, a proofreader back in 1776, actually put "sh!t" in instead because he had a bad date the night before and was angry that she didn't put out.

"Putting out", in 1776 meant holding hands after the 10th date and she thought that might be moving too fast.

Getting a look at "side boob" didn't happen until the 4th year of marriage.




No less than sixteen hundred and thirty-eight official unnamed sources have confirmed that every historian whom has ever lived, completely agrees with your findings.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: JHumm
Is the press allowed to print lies and make stuff up ? Is lieing covered under the freedom of the press?


Obama the turd made sure it was legal to use taxpayer funded propaganda against citizens through the news.

This of course was the second mistake allowed after Billy boy ended antitrust laws allowing consolidation of news.

Politicians can do what they want when they write the narrative.

It is a pretty scary situation we have been lawyer-ed into.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: JHumm

The media has been lying or otherwise intentionally distorting the truth in this country for the last 241 years. The 1st Amendment probably does afford them some limited protection in that regard. Honestly, that's probably a good thing, too, because the last thing we need is some type of government body determining what is 'real news' and 'fake news.'



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Unless Trump has passed a law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances," I'm not sure which bit of the Constitution he is meant to be violating.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: audubon
Unless Trump has passed a law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances," I'm not sure which bit of the Constitution he is meant to be violating.



Actually, you have to look to past Supreme Court rulings and opinions as to what constitutes (or is the equivalent to) Congress's passing a "law."

Don't ask me. Ask a Constitutional lawyer. Barack Obama is a Constitutional lawyer. Ask him.
edit on 30-6-2017 by theworldisnotenough because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-6-2017 by theworldisnotenough because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

You act like Trump is the first president to have a bad relationship with the press, let me know if he pulls a John Adams.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: refugeeee

Welcome to the madhouse.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

Nope, sorry. The kind of reporting being done against Trump is falsehoods and outright lies. It isn't "hard hitting" reporting, it's pure libel/slander. Libel is grounds for retaliation by Trump. OF course the left will defend their libel, slander under the umbrella of the first amendment, but America is getting quite sick of this ploy. I would like to see Trump drop a 20,000 bomb on CNN headquarters as enemies of the state. Just like Hillary wanted to do to Russian HQ for the hacking they never did do.

Who deserves it more? Russia for doing nothing? Or CNN for continually damaging America with faked and manufactured propaganda? I don't really want to see anyone bombed, just making a point, like Hillary made, except it is fitting the actual criminals here, not the false target she insinuated..

edit on 30-6-2017 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: theworldisnotenough
If the President engages in this type of behavior, striking back 10 times as hard, then he violates his Oath of Office to defend and protect the Constitution which includes the right of the press to criticize and call the President every name in the book and to even call his sanity into question .

The President, once more, has provided his to opponents one more point, just more grounds to be included in a draft of Articles of Impeachment.


Nah! I think that's Blarney, What is real is his downright ignorance....in manners that is, and is an embarrassment to the office of President. The World is laughing at the downright childishness, and no one in the White seems able to turn the tap off...that's not good. Let's not forget this child is playing with real guns, and sooner or later the people will realise this isn't really funny at all, and at the end of the is only showing himself up.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

I'm not entirely sure about that. I believe what Trump has said and done in regards to the media may be false and/or wrong, but I don't think I've seen him go to the point in which I would say he violated their right to free speech and the press.

He would have to go to an extreme, such as has been suggested by many on this site, by targeting them in a way that revokes or suppresses the media's rights.
edit on 30-6-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: theworldisnotenough

No.

Just no.

Also, stop.



posted on Jun, 30 2017 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed



It isn't "hard hitting" reporting, it's pure libel/slander. Libel is grounds for retaliation by Trump.


If that was the case and it was so obvious, the press could easily be taken to court. That does not appear to be happening.



OF course the left will defend their libel, slander under the umbrella of the first amendment, but America is getting quite sick of this ploy.


That "umbrella" is there for a reason. I would hope Americans are not sick of their own liberties.



I would like to see Trump drop a 20,000 bomb on CNN headquarters as enemies of the state. Just like Hillary wanted to do to Russian HQ for the hacking they never did do.


The hacking did occur and dropping a bomb on CNN HQ would result in a lot more consequences than impeachment.



Who deserves it more? Russia for doing nothing? Or CNN for continually damaging America with faked and manufactured propaganda? I don't really want to see anyone bombed, just making a point, like Hillary made, except it is fitting the actual criminals here, not the false target she insinuated..


Your point is not very reasonable or logical.




top topics



 
43
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join