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.

 

Time for a press boycott of White House press conferences

page: 9
60
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TruMcCarthy

Sure, which ones do you like?




posted on Nov, 14 2018 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: TruMcCarthy

Sure, which ones do you like?


It doesn't matter which ones I personally like, all that matters is there are thousands of journalists and reporters who don't work for Corporate Media who aren't activists and propagandists. News and reporting wouldn't disappear if CNN boycotted the White House, or vanished from the Earth tomorrow.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: scrounger

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

Correct. Kelly will decline to issue a restraining order, so why would I?

TheRedneck


Kelly is member of the Federalist Society, was on the far rights special list of judges they wanted Trump to appoint, and was appointed by Trump himself just over a year ago.

You would think this would be a slam dunk for Trump.

But here is the thing, no judge wants to be over-ruled by the SCOTUS or higher courts in general.
Kelly is appointed for life. He is more concerned with his legacy now. He will do what the law and constitution demands.

Immediate temporary injunction because the WH has not demonstrated either legally justifiable cause or due process.


no judge wants to be over ruled by the scotus or higher courts in general

wow even rod sterling could not make that ridiculous idea work as an episode for the twilight zone.

if that were the case no judge on the 9th circuit court of appeals would make the rulings the do and have the record of the most overturned rulings .



Just a quick statistical factoid.
CA is the largest population in the USA, 10 Million more than #2 Texas.
The 9th Circuit covers CA, Alaska, Arizona and Hawaii
So "the most overturned rulings" means little without considering they handle more cases than any other court in the nation.

What you should be thinking about is RATE of reversal.

The number of rulings overturned divided by the number of rulings issued.

The most over-turned court in the land is the 6th Circuit, which serves Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Tennessee, with an 87 percent average between 2010-15.

Second place is the 11th Circuit, covering Alabama, Florida and Georgia.

The 9th circuit comes in third.

www.politifact.com...



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ahabstar
At his first press conference he should politely reminded them that their jobs were antiquated relic legacies of the past because he was able to announce important information directly to interested people directly and without editorial bias filters. That technology has replaced their function in society and that they were for all intents and purposes just below tack and harness makers in the heyday of the Model T.

Any questions?


Yes, why are you pro-government propaganda/anti democracy? The press are there to fact check verify and investigate the pr announements to hold the government to account so the public have an informed vote as opposed to the public only being told what the government wants tem to hear.

The average citizen doesn't have several hundred million and a few billion in PR portfolios, background in critical discourse analysis or any of the relevant skills to interpret or analyse the data themselves.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: Ahabstar
At his first press conference he should politely reminded them that their jobs were antiquated relic legacies of the past because he was able to announce important information directly to interested people directly and without editorial bias filters. That technology has replaced their function in society and that they were for all intents and purposes just below tack and harness makers in the heyday of the Model T.

Any questions?


Yes, why are you pro-government propaganda/anti democracy? The press are there to fact check verify and investigate the pr announements to hold the government to account so the public have an informed vote as opposed to the public only being told what the government wants tem to hear.

The average citizen doesn't have several hundred million and a few billion in PR portfolios, background in critical discourse analysis or any of the relevant skills to interpret or analyse the data themselves.


They’d love to see themselves as such. Unfortunately many flout the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: Ahabstar
At his first press conference he should politely reminded them that their jobs were antiquated relic legacies of the past because he was able to announce important information directly to interested people directly and without editorial bias filters. That technology has replaced their function in society and that they were for all intents and purposes just below tack and harness makers in the heyday of the Model T.

Any questions?


Yes, why are you pro-government propaganda/anti democracy? The press are there to fact check verify and investigate the pr announements to hold the government to account so the public have an informed vote as opposed to the public only being told what the government wants tem to hear.

The average citizen doesn't have several hundred million and a few billion in PR portfolios, background in critical discourse analysis or any of the relevant skills to interpret or analyse the data themselves.


They’d love to see themselves as such. Unfortunately many flout the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage.


Not an unfounded opinion, but an opinion all the same.

If we were to allow the oppression or silencing of journalists that we thought flouted "the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage" then all journalists would be silenced or oppressed by the government except the ones the government felt appropriate.

We don't need to like, agree with or respect a journalist in order to understand that journalists we might like, agree with or respect might be silenced by a government that feels differently than ourselves once we begin permitting the same.

Opinions different than our own are critical to democracy. Democracy lives in the public discourse and debate.


edit on 15-11-2018 by soberbacchus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Jim Accosta hasn't been silenced. This is such hyperbole.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: Ahabstar
At his first press conference he should politely reminded them that their jobs were antiquated relic legacies of the past because he was able to announce important information directly to interested people directly and without editorial bias filters. That technology has replaced their function in society and that they were for all intents and purposes just below tack and harness makers in the heyday of the Model T.

Any questions?


Yes, why are you pro-government propaganda/anti democracy? The press are there to fact check verify and investigate the pr announements to hold the government to account so the public have an informed vote as opposed to the public only being told what the government wants tem to hear.

The average citizen doesn't have several hundred million and a few billion in PR portfolios, background in critical discourse analysis or any of the relevant skills to interpret or analyse the data themselves.


They’d love to see themselves as such. Unfortunately many flout the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage.


Not an unfounded opinion, but an opinion all the same.

If we were to allow the oppression or silencing of journalists that we thought flouted "the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage" then all journalists would be silenced or oppressed by the government except the ones the government felt appropriate.

We don't need to like, agree with or respect a journalist in order to understand that journalists we might like, agree with or respect might be silenced by a government that feels differently than ourselves once we begin permitting the same.

Opinions different than our own are critical to democracy. Democracy lives in the public discourse and debate.



I absolutely agree, except that no one accused of "oppression or silencing of journalists" in this case is guilty of the charge.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: Ahabstar
At his first press conference he should politely reminded them that their jobs were antiquated relic legacies of the past because he was able to announce important information directly to interested people directly and without editorial bias filters. That technology has replaced their function in society and that they were for all intents and purposes just below tack and harness makers in the heyday of the Model T.

Any questions?


Yes, why are you pro-government propaganda/anti democracy? The press are there to fact check verify and investigate the pr announements to hold the government to account so the public have an informed vote as opposed to the public only being told what the government wants tem to hear.

The average citizen doesn't have several hundred million and a few billion in PR portfolios, background in critical discourse analysis or any of the relevant skills to interpret or analyse the data themselves.


They’d love to see themselves as such. Unfortunately many flout the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage.


Not an unfounded opinion, but an opinion all the same.

If we were to allow the oppression or silencing of journalists that we thought flouted "the ethics of their own craft for fame and advantage" then all journalists would be silenced or oppressed by the government except the ones the government felt appropriate.

We don't need to like, agree with or respect a journalist in order to understand that journalists we might like, agree with or respect might be silenced by a government that feels differently than ourselves once we begin permitting the same.

Opinions different than our own are critical to democracy. Democracy lives in the public discourse and debate.



I absolutely agree, except that no one accused of "oppression or silencing of journalists" in this case is guilty of the charge.


Alas, that itself is up for debate and not just amongst the public, but now the courts.



posted on Nov, 15 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus




Alas, that itself is up for debate and not just amongst the public, but now the courts.


We could say it is up for debate, but really, it isn't. Oppression is defined as "prolonged cruel or unjust treatment or exercise of authority". There is no oppression going on here.



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

Correct. Kelly will decline to issue a restraining order, so why would I?

TheRedneck


Wondering how this worked out? Care to catch me up?



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

*sigh*

Hide and watch. Tomorrow at this time you'll be claiming Judge Kelly is biased because Trump appointed him.

TheRedneck


I am not hiding?
Where you at Red?



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Right here. I'm not hiding.

I just saw the ruling. I suppose Jim Acosta now runs the White House. If I were Trump, I would stop all future press conferences to protect White House staff from abuse.

Congratulations. I hope you're happy with what you've "won."

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
Jim Accosta hasn't been silenced. This is such hyperbole.



Technically he was silenced the day he started working for CNN, then further when he demonstrated he doesn’t understand basic protocol. The final nail was demonstrating further that he doesn’t realize repeatedly that the question he just asked was already asked and answered...for almost every question he ever asks. Amazing one can get paid for producing nothing, not even information as a “journalist*”.



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: soberbacchus

Right here. I'm not hiding.

I just saw the ruling. I suppose Jim Acosta now runs the White House. If I were Trump, I would stop all future press conferences to protect White House staff from abuse.

Congratulations. I hope you're happy with what you've "won."

TheRedneck


I won nothing.

You however, as a member of the public, won the right not to have journalists silenced cuz the President didn't like them.

Congratulations.



posted on Nov, 16 2018 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Too expensive to be called a win. It cost me the ability to get questions answered in a calm objective manner.

Not a win for me.

TheRedneck




top topics



 
60
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join