It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So what is CNN’s biggest objective lie??
originally posted by: CriticalStinker
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: toms54
For one diffence Jones has gone full blown pro-Government political hack. Where Clyde Lewis , Norris and bell always played the bi-partisan anti-government conspiracy game.
Good point. Alex jones has obviously become entrenched into the Trump campaign and therefor mainstream politics.
At least Jones comes off as a looney, many "news" outlets have been pushing false or twisted stories for ratings and or agendas lately (all political spectrums).
I would guess you like CNN now that it has turned into an anti-government conspiracy channel.
Actually, CNN is not that different from Alex Jones now. They both talk about outrageous conspiracies continuously.
originally posted by: Lysergic
Okay, maybe y2k was the start
Vladimir Putin known as Vladimir THE RUTHLESS! He resembles a demon.
Thankfully you brought this to everyone's attention.
originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Why do you care?
You cared enough to reply to this thread.
The guy is a full on nutjob, he makes money by engaging uninformed people
Many of which come onto this forum and spread his nonsense. He still has a large following.
Broadly there are four elements that the plaintiff is required to prove in a defamation lawsuit, whether for libel (a defamatory written statement, for example in a newspaper or other publication) or slander (a defamatory spoken statement.) These are as follows:
1] The statement, which must be about another person, must be false.
2] The statement must be ‘published’ to a third party, who cannot also be the person who is being defamed. Publishing in this context does not mean that it must be printed, but purely that the statement has to be ‘made available’ to someone other than the person about whom the statement was made.
3] If the nature of the statement is ‘of public concern’ the person who has published it must be at least liable in negligence. Public figures who seek to prove that they have been defamed must prove an additional element under the First Amendment of the US Constitution, that in publishing the statement the defendant was acting with ‘actual malice’ (by publishing something they know to be a lie) or at least to have a total disregard for whether the statement is true or not.
4] The person about whom the defamatory statement is made must be ‘damaged’ by the statement. In some states, it is sufficient to establish that the plaintiff suffered ‘mental anguish’ as opposed to ‘damage.’