ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

[Penelope]

Earlier this year Trump called libel laws “a sham and a disgrace,” shortly after his lawyers had threatened a possible libel suit in an unsuccessful attempt to block publication of another book — Michael Wolff’s “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House.” He then renewed his campaign promise to “open up” America’s libel laws, pledging “to take a strong look” at them.
Trump wants to toughen the nation's libel laws. Here's why he isn't likely to succeed
--------------------------------------------------

He would probably shut down SNL, Kimmel, and all the others. He would probably put such a high price on the internet only the rich could use it. Oh wait, only the neg sites about him. The propaganda about him is OK.

 

[Marion Morrison]

ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

Sulzberger compared Trump’s statements to those of autocrats around the world who had limited the press.

“The phrase ‘enemy of the people’ is not just false, it’s dangerous,” Sulzberger wrote. “It has an ugly history of being wielded by dictators and tyrants who sought to control public information. And it is particularly reckless coming from someone whose office gives him broad powers to fight or imprison the nation’s enemies.”

Sulzberger wrote that he had previously spoken with Trump in an attempt to get the president to soften his rhetoric.

'It's dangerous': New York Times publisher responds to Trump's media rhetoric
-----------------------------------------------
Pecker's paper National Enquirer is real the enemy of the people. Since Trump wants to "change libel" law, I'm sure Hillary Clinton can own AMI in line after Bezos, maybe they can run AMI together.

That was in yesterday's talking points memo.

To Rehash: Hitler never said the media was an enemy of the people, in fact, they weren't allowed to listen to anything outside the main loop upon penalty of death.

I never talked about Hitler in this thread.

Of course not, because doing so destroys that narrative.

If Trump wants to make the libel laws stricter , do you not think Hillary should be able to sue the heck out of Pecker and his NE?

No, because ex post facto.

 

[Tehon]

So you think its ok to give classified secrets to let out:

I believe that the idea behind having a free press is that it keeps government power in check. A coordinated effort by the state to silence those who would provide that check is an impediment to our freedom.

If you can't see that then you are part of the problem.

Trump isn't the problem, you are.

 

[Correll]

ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

Sulzberger compared Trump’s statements to those of autocrats around the world who had limited the press.

“The phrase ‘enemy of the people’ is not just false, it’s dangerous,” Sulzberger wrote. “It has an ugly history of being wielded by dictators and tyrants who sought to control public information. And it is particularly reckless coming from someone whose office gives him broad powers to fight or imprison the nation’s enemies.”

Sulzberger wrote that he had previously spoken with Trump in an attempt to get the president to soften his rhetoric.

'It's dangerous': New York Times publisher responds to Trump's media rhetoric
-----------------------------------------------
Pecker's paper National Enquirer is real the enemy of the people. Since Trump wants to "change libel" law, I'm sure Hillary Clinton can own AMI in line after Bezos, maybe they can run AMI together.

So, what is the point being claimed?


It seems that your position is that since some bad people in the past, said that the press of their nations, was the enemy of the people at that point in time,



that the media can never be the enemy of the people?



That does not follow. Did I misunderstand your point?

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to stiffen libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Nope. If that was your point, what you would have done was point out the specific complaints that Trump has made, and argue why you think they are wrong.


Something I haven't seen any of you libs actually try.


Because deep down, you know that Trump is completely right and that the media is the enemy of the People.

 

[Correll]

ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

Sulzberger compared Trump’s statements to those of autocrats around the world who had limited the press.

“The phrase ‘enemy of the people’ is not just false, it’s dangerous,” Sulzberger wrote. “It has an ugly history of being wielded by dictators and tyrants who sought to control public information. And it is particularly reckless coming from someone whose office gives him broad powers to fight or imprison the nation’s enemies.”

Sulzberger wrote that he had previously spoken with Trump in an attempt to get the president to soften his rhetoric.

'It's dangerous': New York Times publisher responds to Trump's media rhetoric
-----------------------------------------------
Pecker's paper National Enquirer is real the enemy of the people. Since Trump wants to "change libel" law, I'm sure Hillary Clinton can own AMI in line after Bezos, maybe they can run AMI together.

So, what is the point being claimed?


It seems that your position is that since some bad people in the past, said that the press of their nations, was the enemy of the people at that point in time,



that the media can never be the enemy of the people?



That does not follow. Did I misunderstand your point?

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to relax libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

 

[Wry Catcher]

ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

Sulzberger compared Trump’s statements to those of autocrats around the world who had limited the press.

“The phrase ‘enemy of the people’ is not just false, it’s dangerous,” Sulzberger wrote. “It has an ugly history of being wielded by dictators and tyrants who sought to control public information. And it is particularly reckless coming from someone whose office gives him broad powers to fight or imprison the nation’s enemies.”

Sulzberger wrote that he had previously spoken with Trump in an attempt to get the president to soften his rhetoric.

'It's dangerous': New York Times publisher responds to Trump's media rhetoric
-----------------------------------------------
Pecker's paper National Enquirer is real the enemy of the people. Since Trump wants to "change libel" law, I'm sure Hillary Clinton can own AMI in line after Bezos, maybe they can run AMI together.

So, what is the point being claimed?


It seems that your position is that since some bad people in the past, said that the press of their nations, was the enemy of the people at that point in time,



that the media can never be the enemy of the people?



That does not follow. Did I misunderstand your point?

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to relax libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

 

[Correll]

So, what is the point being claimed?


It seems that your position is that since some bad people in the past, said that the press of their nations, was the enemy of the people at that point in time,



that the media can never be the enemy of the people?



That does not follow. Did I misunderstand your point?

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to relax libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",


and implied, not stated, that since at least some of those people were bad,


that that means that the media can never be the "enemy of the people".



I pointed out, correctly that that does not logically follow.



I also asserted the central argument of Trump's position, as I understand it.



YOu addressed none of that, and instead used the Logical Fallacy of Argument by Ridicule.



You did that because you know that you cannot win this argument because you know very well that Trump and I are correct.



Yet you choose to side with a group you know are the enemy of the people.



AND, you do so in a manner of an ass, because you are a liberal.

 

[Penelope]

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to relax libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",


and implied, not stated, that since at least some of those people were bad,


that that means that the media can never be the "enemy of the people".



I pointed out, correctly that that does not logically follow.



I also asserted the central argument of Trump's position, as I understand it.



YOu addressed none of that, and instead used the Logical Fallacy of Argument by Ridicule.



You did that because you know that you cannot win this argument because you know very well that Trump and I are correct.



Yet you choose to side with a group you know are the enemy of the people.



AND, you do so in a manner of an ass, because you are a liberal.

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",

I did not.

 

[Correll]

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",


and implied, not stated, that since at least some of those people were bad,


that that means that the media can never be the "enemy of the people".



I pointed out, correctly that that does not logically follow.



I also asserted the central argument of Trump's position, as I understand it.



YOu addressed none of that, and instead used the Logical Fallacy of Argument by Ridicule.



You did that because you know that you cannot win this argument because you know very well that Trump and I are correct.



Yet you choose to side with a group you know are the enemy of the people.



AND, you do so in a manner of an ass, because you are a liberal.

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",

I did not.

It is the only point in your op.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That the press is not the enemy of the people. If Trump wants to relax libel laws then Hillary should own the NE and Pecker (Trumps buddy) and Trump is the real enemy of the people.

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",


and implied, not stated, that since at least some of those people were bad,


that that means that the media can never be the "enemy of the people".



I pointed out, correctly that that does not logically follow.



I also asserted the central argument of Trump's position, as I understand it.



YOu addressed none of that, and instead used the Logical Fallacy of Argument by Ridicule.



You did that because you know that you cannot win this argument because you know very well that Trump and I are correct.



Yet you choose to side with a group you know are the enemy of the people.



AND, you do so in a manner of an ass, because you are a liberal.

Without a doubt you've been brainwashed. Sometimes ridicule gets people to think. To bad you won't look beyond the confines of the Trump box.

 

[Correll]

Do you believe that since in the past, bad people said the media was the enemy of the people,


that the media can never be the Enemy of the People?

I'm sorry Trump wants to stiffen libel laws. I corrected it. He wants to be able to sue all the publishes who wrote the truth about him and the NYT's and Wa Post.

Funny the way you can't answer a simple question, one completely, seriously and honestly addressing the point you were just trying to make.



Almost as though, on some level, you know that the point you tried to make was total bullshit and would fall apart the moment it was seriously looked at.


The Media is purposefully trying to divide this nation by telling lies about Trump and Trump supporters.



They are the Enemy of the People.

Where did you get your brainwash? Watching Faux News, listening to Limbaugh & Hannity, or reading posts by PoliticalChic and other members of the Right Wing Echo Chamber?

Penelope made the point that some other people in the past said that the "media was the enemy of the people",


and implied, not stated, that since at least some of those people were bad,


that that means that the media can never be the "enemy of the people".



I pointed out, correctly that that does not logically follow.



I also asserted the central argument of Trump's position, as I understand it.



YOu addressed none of that, and instead used the Logical Fallacy of Argument by Ridicule.



You did that because you know that you cannot win this argument because you know very well that Trump and I are correct.



Yet you choose to side with a group you know are the enemy of the people.



AND, you do so in a manner of an ass, because you are a liberal.

Without a doubt you've been brainwashed. Sometimes ridicule gets people to think. To bad you won't look beyond the confines of the Trump box.

I point out, among many other points I made, that you were down to substituting Argument by Ridicule for any actual substantive debate,


and what do you do?


You ridicule me.


Dude. You are the one stuck in a box, and you are the one that can't look beyond it.