Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Broadcast licenses can’t be taken away because of protected political speech.But their license isn't protected if they are bought by a political party. We will all watch if it happens huh?
It never fails. "But, but, but something about a blob that only I can see!!!"She’s right. Your blob has pre-onset senility. Five minutes of listening to him confirms it.
Link us up to a medical diagnosis of that, Simp.She’s right. Your blob has pre-onset senility. Five minutes of listening to him confirms it.
Irony.I do.
Because he’s an authoritarian thug who doesn’t understand the first amendment.
The entire MSM should lose their broadcast licenses.You do know that Trump wanted ABC to lose their broadcast license because they fact checked him at the debate, right?
Are you sure?Broadcast licenses can’t be taken away because of protected political speech.
The first amendment prevents the government from discriminating based on content of speech.
So yes, the license is protected.
Fairness doctrine wouldn’t help you.Are you sure?
Fact check: Fairness Doctrine only applied to broadcast licenses, not cable TV like Fox News
Posts on Facebook claim that the end of the Fairness Doctrine under Ronald Reagan spawned Fox News. But the doctrine only applied to broadcast TV.www.usatoday.com
Recently, a post on Facebook described former President Ronald Reagan as the "The Father of Fake News" and argued to "Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine."
"Ronald Reagan's FCC abolished the Fairness Doctrine which, since 1949, required media to present both sides' opinions in the rare event they weren't just reporting straight news," the post explained.
"A Democrat-controlled Congress passed a bill to re-instate the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. Reagan vetoed the bill," it continued. "Fox News followed in the 1990s. America is now more polarized and misinformed than ever."
The only party wanting to use government authority to suppress protected speech no Americans is the Republican Party.Irony.
That's why your party threw him under the bus?He still is.
Kind of like how your party threw the fat orange insurrectionist under the bus.That's why your party threw him under the bus?
Once Trump got the nomination I've supported Trump. So I don't know what you're referring to.Kind of like how your party threw the fat orange insurrectionist under the bus.
until they kissed the ring again.
Debunked lieSo it’s cool for Melania to run Trump’s cabinet meetings if he wins?
Once Trump got the nomination I've supported Trump. So I don't know what you're referring to.
no need to argue this with me, he's the one fighting it. I know why. It's your inability to see that hampers your eyes.Fairness doctrine wouldn’t help you.
Trump was actually given ample time to respond. In fact, he spoke significantly more than Harris.
Both of you are wrong and demonstrate your disrespect for the first amendment.no need to argue this with me, he's the one fighting it. I know why. It's your inability to see that hampers your eyes.
sure lawyer superman, you know!!!!Both of you are wrong and demonstrate your disrespect for the first amendment.
Your inability to understand what protected speech is hampers your eyes.
