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.

 

Why does the Right support Trump attacking the 1st amendment and the Free Press???

page: 5
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
The Right has been busy defending White Nationalists "Free Speech Rights"...but they don't seem to have the problem with the current sitting President of the United States attacking the Free Press every chance he gets..


There is no "free press," that's why. 80%+ of the nation's media is owned by 6 multinational megacorporations. That's not a "free press," it's propaganda for profit. Trump's two biggest media detractors are WaPo and CNN... WaPo is owned by Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon, which is a major target of Trump's intent to break up their illegal monopoly. Conflict of interest much, WaPo? CNN's chief is Jeff Zucker, who carries heat against Trump because, in some ways Zucker is the man responsible for this POTUS. Zucker was the mastermind behind the Apprentice. Without the Apprentice, Trump likely remains a ridiculously wealthy man who only provides his opinion when directly asked.

The free press in the United States is an illusion, a joke without a punchline. What you're accusing Trump of attacking doesn't exist anymore and won't ever exist again so long as shortsighted people continue to turn a blind eye to the falsification of media for profit in America.
edit on 23-8-2017 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Gandalf77




Don't get me wrong, I know all too well that the media is neither left nor right: it's corporate.

However, to my original point: Trump says things that are routinely proven false by the media.

-- The photos of his inauguration completely contradicted his assertions. Did I take that out of context?
-- All of the reasearch to date, including testimony from Republican officials, suggests there were NOT 3 to 5 million fraudulent votes. Did I take that out of context?
-- Trump Jr. did attend a meeting where he thought he'd be obtaining dirt on big daddy's opponent. Did I take that out of context?

Those are facts that the media did bring to light, and just because those facts contradict Trump's lies, doesn't necessarily make the media hostile.


They are hostile by their own admission. Many journalists admitted to eschewing ethics in favour of opposing Trump. That what makes them hostile.

Take this analysis for example:

The Lies of Donald Trump's Critics

Have you fallen for any of this?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
The Right has been busy defending White Nationalists "Free Speech Rights"...but they don't seem to have the problem with the current sitting President of the United States attacking the Free Press every chance he gets.

Well, using logic, since free speech is a thing, the president can say whatever he wants about the press.


In one situation, we have US citizens (counter-protesters) protesting against other US citizens (White Nationalists), and for some reason people on the Right are outraged that US citizens (counter-protesters) are exercising their Free Speech to voice their opinions against another group of hateful US citizens (White Nationalists).

From what I've seen, the outrage has been against the violence that ensues, or the interruption of free speech. I don't really see anyone specifically arguing that protesting is okay, but counter-protesting is not.


In another situation, we have the President of the United States openly attacking the Press and insinuating they are traitors to our nation. He has called them "sick", "crooked", "liars", and to top it off...last night he claimed that the press "doesn't like our country".


'Not liking our country' is not synonymous with being a traitor, but the fact that there is a LOT of misleading and incomplete reporting that happens via the nation's media outlets lends some credence to his claims that he makes about the mainstream media. But like I noted, it is his right to make these claims, and if certain networks, like CNN, really wanted to, they could sue him for slander if they can prove that his claims are incorrect. I notice that they have not taken that route, yet...



I don't get the Right Wing. One situation you have two groups of US citizens exercising their Free Speech...and they choose to defend the one side that is racists, and claim that they are "defending their 1st amendment rights".

The other situation, you have the sitting President attacking the Free Press...and they applaud him.

It is true--you really don't seem to get it. I know Libertarians, Independents, Right Wing, AND Left Wing people that hold these same views as I have noted. But the reality of the situation that you are attempting to say that these two situations are under different umbrellas, but they're not: The umbrella is that of the 1st Amendment, and everything that you have noted has a right to happen UNTIL said speech becomes illegal.

The protests and counter protests in Charlottesville were legal UNTIL they became violent--they were then declared illegal assemblies, as should have happened at that point. Trump's verbal assault against the MSM is legal and his right to do--it's no different than those protesting.



If anyone is attacking the 1st amendment and trying to take away rights, it is our current President by attacking the Free Press. Government influence into the Press SHOULD be a huge issue...but it seems like the Right is perfectly fine with the President attempting to discredit our Free Press.

The Government (Trump) is not trying to influence the press, he is calling them out for their piss-poor performance of their duty to provide factual reporting to the general public. If you see that as "attacking the 1st amendment and trying to take away rights," that's on you, not Trump...or the Right Wing.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 01:58 PM
link   
for all the problems bush, clinton, w. and obama had they didn't label sections of the media fake for reporting actual news nor did they advertise networks as purveyors of alternate facts they want you to use.
remember, trump on tape bragging of rape was the first time he labeled the news media as fake and it snowballed since.
when a large chunk of the electorate is prepared to accept that, and bemoan anyone reporting that the general public is on a downward slope, look at the trump planted seth rich lies, not much to keep even the most paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist type going yet fox, one of trump's trewth networks, ran it for months.

authoritarian type governments like a dumbed down electorate, i give you the american public.
this place used to use the tagline deny ignorance, countless threads about government mind control yet, in under a year many posters here defending have sleepwalked into a trance where only the government is correct, defending every broken promise ad nausea and rather than question the need for armed conflict rather relish it.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: Gandalf77




Don't get me wrong, I know all too well that the media is neither left nor right: it's corporate.

However, to my original point: Trump says things that are routinely proven false by the media.

-- The photos of his inauguration completely contradicted his assertions. Did I take that out of context?
-- All of the reasearch to date, including testimony from Republican officials, suggests there were NOT 3 to 5 million fraudulent votes. Did I take that out of context?
-- Trump Jr. did attend a meeting where he thought he'd be obtaining dirt on big daddy's opponent. Did I take that out of context?

Those are facts that the media did bring to light, and just because those facts contradict Trump's lies, doesn't necessarily make the media hostile.


They are hostile by their own admission. Many journalists admitted to eschewing ethics in favour of opposing Trump. That what makes them hostile.

Take this analysis for example:

The Lies of Donald Trump's Critics

Have you fallen for any of this?


That is a good article. Thanks for the link. It's a fair critique because people do tend to attack him along those lines, and much of it is overblown.

However, the article's conclusion does point out that Trump's critics have attacked his behavior and policies based on accurate facts. The incidents I listed earlier are examples of the media reporting accurate facts that directly contradict Trump's lies. That's what I'm getting at.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: growler
for all the problems bush, clinton, w. and obama had they didn't label sections of the media fake for reporting actual news nor did they advertise networks as purveyors of alternate facts they want you to use.
remember, trump on tape bragging of rape was the first time he labeled the news media as fake and it snowballed since.
when a large chunk of the electorate is prepared to accept that, and bemoan anyone reporting that the general public is on a downward slope, look at the trump planted seth rich lies, not much to keep even the most paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist type going yet fox, one of trump's trewth networks, ran it for months.

authoritarian type governments like a dumbed down electorate, i give you the american public.
this place used to use the tagline deny ignorance, countless threads about government mind control yet, in under a year many posters here defending have sleepwalked into a trance where only the government is correct, defending every broken promise ad nausea and rather than question the need for armed conflict rather relish it.



remember, trump on tape bragging of rape


NO! I don't remember that Comrade!
Larp on my friend, Larp on.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheTory
a reply to: jimmyx




jesus...go read about propaganda in Germany, and see how that worked so well, read about Goebbels turning an entire nation into self-destructive cultists. your brain is still in diapers


Trump isn't the media. He doesn't control the media. He doesn't tell them what to say. Those who fill your head with what fills diapers is the propaganda. That is the media.


when a sitting president calls the media "the enemy of the people".....he is controlling the media....why?.....who listens to what their "enemies" have to say?....do you?...and if you do...why would you BELIEVE what your "enemies" say?.....it's all in chapter 6 of MEIN KAMPF........if you mean does he have ownership of media outlets, no, not yet.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx

Trump critics are currently running around calling other citizens as enemies,.

Guess which one is more dangerous.

And justifying the use of violence against them.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Huge difference between a free press and a dishonest, propaganda machine press...



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
Right Wingers...simple question, why do you hate "A" but love "B"???

A) US Citizens using their freedom of speech to protest against hate groups.

B) US President trying to discredit the Free Press


It's a very simple question...and not one logical answer yet.


you really don't understand the difference between one person criticizing the media and a mob of people aggressively disrupting another group of protesters with the intention of drowning out their voices, intimidation then shaming them to ruin their social lives?

you have the right to peaceable assembly as in free of conflict or argument, by definition counter-protest is being in conflict thus it violates the first amendment.

if they wanted to protest they should have waited for another day when it was free.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

Why does the left support attacking freedom of religion and the 1st Amendment?

Then I recall lots of time the left attacks free press when it suits them. Both Clinton and Obama went after conservative media sources.
edit on 23-8-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: kruphix

So you're saying that no one should ever be critical of the press.

Got it.




posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: kruphix

what has Trump done to silence anyone?


Did I say Trump is silencing anyone? Try reading the OP first before responding.


Your headline suggests an attack on the 1st amendment - which is false.
There is no attack on the free press - that would require silencing the free press by force.

So the question remains as to whether Trump has the right to criticise the free press - the answer is an unequivocal yes.

Hope that clears things up for you.



edit on 23/8/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: kruphix

So you're saying that no one should ever be critical of the press.

Got it.





Every free thinker should be critical.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
The Right has been busy defending White Nationalists "Free Speech Rights"...but they don't seem to have the problem with the current sitting President of the United States attacking the Free Press every chance he gets.

In one situation, we have US citizens (counter-protesters) protesting against other US citizens (White Nationalists), and for some reason people on the Right are outraged that US citizens (counter-protesters) are exercising their Free Speech to voice their opinions against another group of hateful US citizens (White Nationalists).

In another situation, we have the President of the United States openly attacking the Press and insinuating they are traitors to our nation. He has called them "sick", "crooked", "liars", and to top it off...last night he claimed that the press "doesn't like our country".


I don't get the Right Wing. One situation you have two groups of US citizens exercising their Free Speech...and they choose to defend the one side that is racists, and claim that they are "defending their 1st amendment rights".

The other situation, you have the sitting President attacking the Free Press...and they applaud him.


If anyone is attacking the 1st amendment and trying to take away rights, it is our current President by attacking the Free Press. Government influence into the Press SHOULD be a huge issue...but it seems like the Right is perfectly fine with the President attempting to discredit our Free Press.


What are you, 12? He's not arresting them. They're still free. Geesh. Everyone hide your straws!



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: kruphix

what has Trump done to silence anyone?


Maybe he'll get the IRS on them!



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: jimmyx




when a sitting president calls the media "the enemy of the people".....he is controlling the media....why?.....who listens to what their "enemies" have to say?....do you?...and if you do...why would you BELIEVE what your "enemies" say?.....it's all in chapter 6 of MEIN KAMPF........if you mean does he have ownership of media outlets, no, not yet.


That is false. If he was controlling them, everything would be positive. The exact opposite is closer to the truth.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: kruphix

Why does the left support attacking freedom of religion and the 1st Amendment?

Then I recall lots of time the left attacks free press when it suits them. Both Clinton and Obama went after conservative media sources.


I'm a staunch supporter of the Bill of Rights, but I do see the left's point in some cases where freedom of religion is concerned. That is, when people deny other citizens their civil rights based on religious beliefs, it's actually discrimination.
It's a fine line because that same amendment also protects us from the establishment of a religion, which is something a lot of evangelical revisionists conveniently forget when they talk about history.

On the other hand, Democracy Now did a pretty good job of reporting how the Obama admin went after journalists to an unprecedented level.



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: kruphix

originally posted by: xuenchen
Obama had reporters arrested.

Then the crickets came.



He did???

Who was arrested???

Here is one that was arrested for asking someone from the Trump administration a question.
www.cnbc.com...




I thought you are suppose to be a smart guy? There were at least 8 people, Google is your friend.


I didn't make the claim, the other guy did...and now you are.

But I tried google anyway...don't see any reporters arrested by Obama.

So...would you like to back up your claim with facts?



posted on Aug, 23 2017 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963




My mind is like the ocean tides. It can change by the hour because I think with logic versus emotional BS. I guess that's something you just can't grasp is it?


Ummmmm....that's not how logic works.

Logic will lead you to the truth...the truth doesn't change by the hour.

I think you use emotion more than you think, and are lying to yourself about logic.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join