CNN Sues.....

[PoliticalChic]

"The media jumped to Acosta's defense, claiming the video posted by Sarah Sanders showing Acosta getting physical with the intern was doctored. It was not. The video shows Acosta using his hand and arm to prevent the intern from getting the microphone, and the versions circulated showing the incident in slow motion, close up, and in portions speeded up, were the type of formatting commonly done and obvious to anyone watching."
CNN sues Trump over suspension of Jim Acosta's press pass after he got physical with White House intern (Update: Hearing 11/14/18 3:30 p.m.)

Who’s that other guy standing looking at Acosta like he’s the embarrassment he is?

Must be Peter Zenger.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Trump is not a king. He is supposed to be president. If only he behaved as one.

Can you name another President who has done more to bring prosperity to the American people?

LBJ. FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama.

"....Barack Obama...."


If this were a mental test you'd be in restraints right now....



Obama, leaving this record behind....

1.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay

The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI



2. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


3. . Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'

Would you regard it as a good and nob Le thing to sell out constitutional rights for tax cuts for the wealthy? If your justification for Trump's autocratic moves is the rich got tax cuts, what form of Americaan political ideology do you subscribe to?

Stop lying.....there are no 'tax cuts for the wealthy,' nor is there any such perennial group in America known as 'the wealthy.'

Soooo...you're a government school grad, huh?




Let's check, dunce:


1.”Small business optimism surges to highest level ever, topping previous record under Reagan”

Small business optimism surges to highest level ever, topping previous record under Reagan


2. “U.S. job openings climb to record 6.9 million” U.S. job openings climb to record 6.9 million

3. “House Republicans Unveil Plan to Make Individuals’ Tax Cuts Permanent”
House Republicans Unveil Plan to Make Individuals’ Tax Cuts Permanent

4. “Airlines say booming US economy led to record summer travel”
Airlines say booming US economy led to record summer travel

5. Las Vegas is booming again
Few cities were hit as hard as Las Vegas by the 2008 financial crisis and recession, which eroded consumer spending on the sort of fast thrills the city had to offer and left it with the highest foreclosure rate in the nation. Home prices plummeted 62 percent from their peak in 2006 to their bottom in 2012, according to data from ATTOM Data Solutions, a real estate tracking firm.” Las Vegas is booming again, and bracing itself for next slump | Reuters

 

[PoliticalChic]

Trump is not a king. He is supposed to be president. If only he behaved as one.

Can you name another President who has done more to bring prosperity to the American people?

LBJ. FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama.

"....Barack Obama...."


If this were a mental test you'd be in restraints right now....



Obama, leaving this record behind....

1.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay

The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI



2. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


3. . Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'

Would you regard it as a good and nob Le thing to sell out constitutional rights for tax cuts for the wealthy? If your justification for Trump's autocratic moves is the rich got tax cuts, what form of Americaan political ideology do you subscribe to?

"....what form of Americaan (sic)political ideology do you subscribe to?"

1. Never end a sentence with a preposition.


2. My political view is the same as that of the Founders, classical liberals, and other conservatives:
Individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


3. As I have no doubt you couldn't succinctly state yours, let me provide it:

The collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.

 

[BookShaka]

Funny what you snowflakes call assault.

Acosta jumped the line of reporters.
Then Acosta pushed her.
He should have been a real man and just handed her the mic.

View attachment 228532

I wouldn’t call it assault but I would call it dumbass behavior. Acosta is not more important than any other reporter in that room and IMO is disrespecting everyone there by not playing nice. He’s not acting like a journalist. He’s acting like a civilian there to protest.

 

[Nosmo King]

Trump is not a king. He is supposed to be president. If only he behaved as one.

Can you name another President who has done more to bring prosperity to the American people?

LBJ. FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama.

"....Barack Obama...."


If this were a mental test you'd be in restraints right now....



Obama, leaving this record behind....

1.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay

The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI



2. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


3. . Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'

Would you regard it as a good and nob Le thing to sell out constitutional rights for tax cuts for the wealthy? If your justification for Trump's autocratic moves is the rich got tax cuts, what form of Americaan political ideology do you subscribe to?

"....what form of Americaan (sic)political ideology do you subscribe to?"

1. Never end a sentence with a preposition.


2. My political view is the same as that of the Founders, classical liberals, and other conservatives:
Individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


3. As I have no doubt you couldn't succinctly state yours, let me provide it:

The collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.

You're not too much to debate with. Yeah, I ended that sentence with a preposition.

You would sell out our constitutional rights for a big bottom line. I have no interest in arguing with the shallow and treasonous.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Can you name another President who has done more to bring prosperity to the American people?

LBJ. FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama.

"....Barack Obama...."


If this were a mental test you'd be in restraints right now....



Obama, leaving this record behind....

1.“Team Obama: Sorry, America, the ‘new normal’ may be here to stay

The good times may be over for good. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York yesterday, US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said the US GDP growth rate, adjusted for inflation, is now projected to run a little above 2% a year.”
Team Obama: Sorry, America, the 'new normal' may be here to stay - AEI



2. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


3. . Obama is the first President never to have had a year of 3% or better economic growth: "... annual growth during Obama’s “recovery” has never topped 3%. By comparison, it never fell below 3% during the Reagan recovery. And in the nine years following the 1990-91 recession, GDP grew faster than 3% in all but two. Heck, even Jimmy Carter had some strong growth years." President Obama's Growth Gap Hits $1.31 Trillion | Investor's Business Daily

a. "The years since 2007 have been a macroeconomic disaster for the United States of a magnitude unprecedented since the Great Depression." Obama: Always Wrong, Never In Doubt

b. ".... first president since Hoover to never have a single year above 3% GDP growth."Hedge fund billionaire calls Obama economy 'amazing'

Would you regard it as a good and nob Le thing to sell out constitutional rights for tax cuts for the wealthy? If your justification for Trump's autocratic moves is the rich got tax cuts, what form of Americaan political ideology do you subscribe to?

"....what form of Americaan (sic)political ideology do you subscribe to?"

1. Never end a sentence with a preposition.


2. My political view is the same as that of the Founders, classical liberals, and other conservatives:
Individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


3. As I have no doubt you couldn't succinctly state yours, let me provide it:

The collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.

You're not too much to debate with. Yeah, I ended that sentence with a preposition.

You would sell out our constitutional rights for a big bottom line. I have no interest in arguing with the shallow and treasonous.

Everyone knows what you really mean: you've been whipped like the recalcitrant donkey that you are.

 

[BookShaka]

Acosta should be charged with a misdemeanor Battery.

I'm sure the Authorities will appreciate the doctored video presented by the WH as "evidence".

Doctored my ass. I saw it live. The second someone puts hands on someone against their will, that's a misdemeanor Battery. Includes spitting on someone too.

So the Intern should be be arrested for assault... She is the aggressor...

Simple, if I have something in my hand and someone comes to grab it (ownership aside), they are the aggressor.

She reached in and tried to pull the mic out of Jim's hand. Actually she was so forceful it slightly imbalanced Jim, he quickly corrected himself and said 'Pardon me mam...'. she knew she went too far and sat down...

tiny trump the bully sent a female intern to do his "dirty work" in trying to shut down a reporter.

And if Trump had tried to take the mic away himself I’m sure you and your ilk would have nothing to say about it... LMFAO!!!!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"Why do you hate Obama?"

I feel that way about all anti-Americans.


Didn't you know that, silly?????

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


It is only the Left/Democrats/Liberals who demand restrictions on free speech.


Here's a real Liberal documenting same:

If you ever get around to reading a book.....

....silly me.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"Why do you hate Obama?"

I feel that way about all anti-Americans.


Didn't you know that, silly?????

You must hate yourself. That's sad, find a good therapist.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Democrats/Liberals/Left are such blatant liars, that even when the evidence is right before everyone's eyes.....they'll deny it:



"CNN's Acosta denies 'placing his hands on' White House intern
by Naomi Lim
| November 07, 2018 10:01 PM

CNN's chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta denied Wednesday putting his hands on a White House intern as she tried to take a microphone away from him at a press conference during a heated exchange with President Trump.

"Obviously I didn't put my hands on her or touch her as they're alleging, and it's just unfortunate the White House is saying this," Acosta said during an interview with CNN colleague Anderson Cooper."
CNN's Acosta denies 'placing his hands on' White House intern

 

[BookShaka]

Oh sure it is an assault.
Just imagine Acosta as a Republican and it all becomes clear.

just because a busload of ass-tarts will call something this stupid an assault because it suits their needs doesn't mean i'm going to redefine the term to go along with them.

i simply fail to see how one side can bitch at the other for watering down words to fit their extreme views then using their doing as a justification to do it back to them and think it's ok.

An assault is the act of inflicting physical harm or unwanted physical contact upon a person or, in some specific legal definitions, a threat or attempt to commit such an action.[1] It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law. Assault - Wikipedia

she did not look "harmed", in need of a band aid, counseling, or antiseptic spray.

acosta was/is an ass to be sure. but pushing someone away used to be pushing them away.

now it's "assault" and if you ask some, it's "assault" cause the other side would call it that if they could. well the "other side" is full of asswhiped out crybabies mad there's not enough participation trophies in the world so forgive me if i don't get mad at what they get mad at.

There is no need for injury, dunce.

Assault

Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonableapprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required.
Assault



That's the law..

She reached in!!!! What do you not understand about that!!! My god, its like common sense flys out the door when you go into Trump defense mode. Wake up!

It’s best to just let it go before she hits you with definitions of every single word you’ve typed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"Why do you hate Obama?"

I feel that way about all anti-Americans.


Didn't you know that, silly?????

You must hate yourself. That's sad, find a good therapist.

What a stupid post.

But, then, you're a stupid poster.



Conservatives vs Liberals in debate? Kinda like Notre Dame vs the Tumble Tots.

 

[PoliticalChic]

just because a busload of ass-tarts will call something this stupid an assault because it suits their needs doesn't mean i'm going to redefine the term to go along with them.

i simply fail to see how one side can bitch at the other for watering down words to fit their extreme views then using their doing as a justification to do it back to them and think it's ok.

An assault is the act of inflicting physical harm or unwanted physical contact upon a person or, in some specific legal definitions, a threat or attempt to commit such an action.[1] It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law. Assault - Wikipedia

she did not look "harmed", in need of a band aid, counseling, or antiseptic spray.

acosta was/is an ass to be sure. but pushing someone away used to be pushing them away.

now it's "assault" and if you ask some, it's "assault" cause the other side would call it that if they could. well the "other side" is full of asswhiped out crybabies mad there's not enough participation trophies in the world so forgive me if i don't get mad at what they get mad at.

There is no need for injury, dunce.

Assault

Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonableapprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required.
Assault



That's the law..

She reached in!!!! What do you not understand about that!!! My god, its like common sense flys out the door when you go into Trump defense mode. Wake up!

It’s best to just let it go before she hits you with definitions of every single word you’ve typed.

OK....you asked for it:

Assault

Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonableapprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required.
Assault




Now, mind your manners.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


It is only the Left/Democrats/Liberals who demand restrictions on free speech.


Here's a real Liberal documenting same:

If you ever get around to reading a book.....

....silly me.

Send me an executive summary and I'll read it. Notwithstanding your silly ad hominem I read a very interesting op-ed by Ms. Powers.

You and other readers might enjoy this piece written for the USA Today:

CNN's Kirsten Powers' Op-Ed: I Thought My Sexual Assault Was My Fault | HuffPost

 

[BookShaka]

Here's the premise for the suit:


CNN sues President Trump and top White House aides for barring Jim Acosta - CNN
"""........
The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."

There are other guidelines as well. Abrams said the case law specifies that before a press pass is denied, "you have to have notice, you have to have a chance to respond, and you have to have a written opinion by the White House as to what it's doing and why, so the courts can examine it."



Verbally sparring with the POTUS doesn't exactly fall into these guidelines.

Trump is going to lose this.
.
.
.

This is just fucking pathetic. Trump has every right to chose who to give press passes to.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Yes he can, when he's a private person. When he's the president giving a press conference yes he can but to a point.

He has to show that person is a threat to the president or his cabinet and people in the room. It has to be officially done in writing too. The person or news outlet has the right to appeal.

The first Amendment is very clear.

Congress shall make no 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.[1]


I've been a member of that press that trump hates so much for a very long time.

Jim Acosta’s name isn’t in the First Amendment. They didn’t revoke CNN’s press pass and someone will replace him therefore they have NO case.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Under the rubric of 'knowing on which side your bread is buttered.....'

1. "CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta"
CNN sues President Trump and White House for banning reporter Jim Acosta



And....in related stories, sans lawsuits....



2. “But Trump's anti-press bluster aside, there's a clear blueprint to follow — courtesy of Barack Obama, who once claimed that he would be the most transparent president ever but proved to be no friend to press rights.

Under Obama, the Justice Department subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists as investigators pursued a leak.

…what happened under Obama set an ominous tone for reporters who were trying to do their jobs of informing the public.

So did the Obama administration's record-breaking use of an arcane century-old law — the Espionage Act — which it used nine times to pursue leakers.” Shocked by Trump aggression against reporters and sources? The blueprint was made by Obama





3. “Weeks before President Barack Obama was to leave office, [James] Risen wrote in the Times, “If Donald J. Trump decides as president to throw a whistle-blower in jail for trying to talk to a reporter, or gets the F.B.I. to spy on a journalist, he will have one man to thank for bequeathing him such expansive power: Barack Obama.”

The Obama administration's aggressiveness on this front mushroomed into a scandal in spring 2013, as revelations surfaced that the Justice Department had subpoenaed two months’ worth of phone records of Associated Press journalists, and that it had named James Rosen, then of Fox News, as a potential co-conspirator in a criminal leak as it pursued his reportorial records.

Which is to say that entangling the media in leak investigations isn’t a Trump-era outrage; there’s nothing here for Trump to “normalize.”
Opinion | Seizing journalists’ records: An outrage that Obama ‘normalized’ for Trump



4. “…many journalism groups say the record is clear. Over the past eight years, the administration has prosecuted nine cases involving whistle-blowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined. It has repeatedly used the Espionage Act, a relic of World War I-era red-baiting, not to prosecute spies but to go after government officials who talked to journalists.

Under Mr. Obama, the Justice Department and the F.B.I. have spied on reporters by monitoring their phone records, labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.”
Opinion | If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama




5. “…about the media that undercut Obama’s credibility with the absurd claim that he — unlike Trump — didn’t “threaten the freedom of the press.” Baloney.” Before Trump, Obama was an 'enemy of press freedom'



Which reminds us that the only place on finds justice is the dictionary and the cemetery.

Why do you hate Obama?

BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Of course you and he have no code of ethics, or any ethics for that matter, and will continue to sully everyone who holds no loyalty to him and you, or to any part of the Constitution which conflicts with your wants.

"BTW, there's somethings Donald Trump and you need to read:

“Congress shall make no 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.”

and,

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


It is only the Left/Democrats/Liberals who demand restrictions on free speech.


Here's a real Liberal documenting same:

If you ever get around to reading a book.....

....silly me.

Send me an executive summary and I'll read it. Notwithstanding your silly ad hominem I read a very interesting op-ed by Ms. Powers.

You and other readers might enjoy this piece written for the USA Today:

CNN's Kirsten Powers' Op-Ed: I Thought My Sexual Assault Was My Fault | HuffPost

Gads, you Liberals are dumb.....and lazy.


Here's part of my notes....


Silencing The Right

1. As true sons and daughters of the German totalitarian inclination, contemporary Liberals, Progressives, Democrats try their utmost to silence any voices that they determine to be iterations of their own views.


And by 'their views,' I refer to the supremacy of the state, the collective, over the individual.


a. The Germans have a history of embracing authoritarian rule. As the German philosopher Hegel said, “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest” (Ralf Dahrendorf, Society and Democracy in Germany).




2. The staging area for incipient totalitarians is, of course, the university system, where huge dollops of indoctrination are doled out, and no adverse information is tolerated.



Dennis Prager gives this overview:


Leftism is so pervasive, that if applied to any other way of looking at life, it would be widely recognized as a form of brainwashing! Image a person who attended only fundamental Christian schools from preschool through graduate school, who never saw a secular, let alone anti-Christian, film, and who only read religious books. Most would say that they had been ‘brainwashed.” Yet, we regularly find individuals who only attended secular liberal schools from preschool through college, watched or listened to only Left-of-center television, movies, music, and had essentially no exposure to religious or conservative ideas. Brainwashed?

Of course not! Liberals are open-minded!!! The irony here is that the denial itself shows how very effective the brainwashing has been.

Now, Christians or Jews who have rarely been exposed to secular ideas and values would readily acknowledge same. It is only those on the Left who fool themselves into believing that they have been exposed to all points of view.

a. Universities have become to Liberalism what a Christian seminary is to Christianity. The difference is that Christian seminaries acknowledge their purpose, to produce committed Christians.

b. “The purpose of a university should be to make a son as unlike his father as possible.”
" The University's Part in Political Life” (13 March 1909) in PWW (The Papers of Woodrow Wilson) 19:99.
As Lord Acton stated, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely?"
Such is clearly seen in academia, where diversity of opinion is forbidden.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As Lord Acton stated, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely?"
Such is clearly seen in academia, where diversity of opinion is forbidden.

And that corruption appears in the very area in which America was once the ideal of the world: free speech.

3. Exactly so...as can be seen in the university system, "with a spate of high-profile2014 commencement speech cancelations and forced withdrawls. These were spurred by the protesets of lefty students and professors outraged that someone who held views with which they disagreed, such as support fo rthe Iraq War or capitalism, would be allowed to deliver a commencement address.


According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE),....during the twenty-two years between 1987 and 2008,138 protests of planned campus speech led to 62 incidents of an invited guest not speaking.


....in the six years- 2009 through 2014- 151 protests have caused cancellation of 62 speeches."

Kirsten Powers, "The Silencing: How The Left Is Killing Free Speech,"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. " CAMBRIDGE — Michael R. Bloomberg implored Harvard University graduates Thursday to ardently defend the rights of others, citing what he described as growing intolerance for different religions, political ideas, and even college commencement speakers.

“Tolerance for other people’s ideas and the freedom to express your own are . . . perpetually vulnerable to the tyrannical tendencies of monarchs, mobs, and majorities, and lately we’ve seen those tendencies manifest themselves too often, both on college campuses and in our society,”....

Bloomberg also condemned how, he said, college campuses seem to increasingly profess only liberal viewpoints and refuse to listen to conservative ideas. “

"A liberal arts education must not be the art of liberalism,” he said.

....he was disturbed by how numerous commencement speakers either had invitations rescinded or decided themselves to cancel appearances amid protests over their views or actions."
In Harvard commencement speech, Michael Bloomberg assails lack of political diversity at college campuses - The Boston Globe



5. ... it’s a school’s obligation to teach them not what to think, but how to think critically, including listening to the other side and considering other people’s points of view. “The more we accept political diversity, the healthier we are, and the stronger our society will be,” ...."
Michael Bloomberg Delivers Harvard Commencement Speech



Seems that Major Bloomberg is the right kind of Liberal: he's calling the other kind exactly what they are: fascists.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. How do universities decide which speakers are "acceptable"?
Here.....take a peek into the sort of decision making that goes on:

“…the Jesuit college Fordham University welcomed infanticide and bestiality advocate Peter Singer for a panel discussion on Friday.

Singer has long lamented the societal stigma against having sex with animals. “Not so long ago,” Singer wrote in one essay, “any form of sexuality not leading to the conception of children was seen as, at best, wanton lust, or worse, a perversion. One by one, the taboos have fallen. But … not every taboo has crumbled.”


In the essay, titled “Heavy Petting,” Singer concluded that “sex across the species barrier,” while not normal, “ceases to be an offence [sic] to our status and dignity as human beings.” “Occasionally mutually satisfying activities may develop” when humans have sex with their pets, he claimed.


In addition to supporting bestiality and immediately granting equal legal rights to animals, Singer has also advocated euthanizing the mentally ill and aborting disabled infants on utilitarian grounds.

In his 1993 essay “Taking Life,” Singer, in a section called “Justifying Infanticide and Non-Voluntary Euthanasia,” wrote that “killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person.”
Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks




The very same Fordham effectively barred conservative columnist Ann Coulter from speaking on campus last week,
The Jesuit university’s president, Joseph M.McShane wrote in a statement the day before the Coulter speaking engagement was canceled. “There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative — more heat than light — and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.” Op.Cit.
Campus president condemns Coulter event, silent as professor who calls sex with animals potentially ‘satisfying’ speaks



Have a better example of "Silencing The Right"?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Earlier I pointed out the relationship of Liberal/fascist thinking in demands for bowing the head and bending of the knee in respect for big government and the collective.

It's a good time to point out that the view was propounded by the neoMarxist 'Frankfurt School' brought here during WWII.


"Herbert Marcuse (German: [maʀˈkuːzə]; July 19, 1898 – July 29, 1979) was a German-Americanphilosopher, sociologist, and political theorist, associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory."

Herbert Marcuse - Wikipedia


Proving that there is nary a difference between communists, fascists,....and Liberals, Marcuse wrote strongly in favor of shutting off opposing voices, and that curbing freedom of expression in favor of leftist ideological aims is absolutely necessary.



From Marxist tactician Marcuse:

"...define the direction in which prevailing institutions, policies, opinions would have to be changed in order to improve the chance of a peace which is not identical with cold war and a little hot war, and a satisfaction of needs which does not feed on poverty, oppression, and exploitation. Consequently, it is also possible to identify policies, opinions, movements which would promote this chance, and those which would do the opposite. Suppression of the regressive ones is a prerequisite for the strengthening of the progressive ones."

Repressive Tolerance, by Herbert Marcuse (1965)


How many good little Liberals, or Progressives, have mindlessly marched down this totalitarian path....

...yet still imagine that they support liberty, free speech, and the unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence ?







It is no wonder they are identified as 'useful idiots'.... propagandists for a cause whose goals they are not fully aware of, and who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Be prepared for a quiz.....

 

[easyt65]

Basically CNN is suing for the right for reporters to be rude d!cks, for the right to hijack Presidential news conferences, for the right to spread fake news, for the right to throw childish tantrums, and to openly insult the President inside the WH.

Bwuhahahaha.......

 

[Slade3200]

just because a busload of ass-tarts will call something this stupid an assault because it suits their needs doesn't mean i'm going to redefine the term to go along with them.

i simply fail to see how one side can bitch at the other for watering down words to fit their extreme views then using their doing as a justification to do it back to them and think it's ok.

An assault is the act of inflicting physical harm or unwanted physical contact upon a person or, in some specific legal definitions, a threat or attempt to commit such an action.[1] It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in either criminal and/or civil liability. Generally, the common law definition is the same in criminal and tort law. Assault - Wikipedia

she did not look "harmed", in need of a band aid, counseling, or antiseptic spray.

acosta was/is an ass to be sure. but pushing someone away used to be pushing them away.

now it's "assault" and if you ask some, it's "assault" cause the other side would call it that if they could. well the "other side" is full of asswhiped out crybabies mad there's not enough participation trophies in the world so forgive me if i don't get mad at what they get mad at.

There is no need for injury, dunce.

Assault

Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonableapprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required.
Assault



That's the law..

She reached in!!!! What do you not understand about that!!! My god, its like common sense flys out the door when you go into Trump defense mode. Wake up!

It’s best to just let it go before she hits you with definitions of every single word you’ve typed.

I know... the mods should really do better limiting her repetitive and long winded copy and paste bullshit. I guess she isn’t equipped to have a straight forward conversation so she needs to flood the zone with her useless blubber