Senate passes unanimous resolution avowing a free press

[martybegan]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

 

[dblack]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

That's not "extending" the First Amendment. That's destroying it.

 

[Skylar]

When the President's people are 'signalling' that Truth isn't Truth....such a resolution becomes a might bit more.

The fact that such a resolution of basic constitutional principles is necessary today is yet another in an endless swamp of fetid demonstrations of the depth and severity of the corruption of this president.

How is he violating the constitution by bashing a press that bashes him?

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

The president's lawyers need lawyers. His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

Lay off the Democrat Fake News, kid. Trump has done nothing to 'silence' Democrat Fake News. They've been completely free to rant & rave about him being a 'Racist Nazi.' Stop going all-in on Democrat propaganda. It's rotting your brain.

Laughing...by all means, show me the 'fake news'. Your ilk have been trained to equate anything that criticizes the president as 'fake'. Alas, reality doesn't work that way.

Do you deny that Cohen admitted that Trump was fully aware of the meeting between his people and a Russian operative? That Trump admitted that the purpose of the meeting with the Russian operative was to collect information.

Do you deny that Trump lied about that meeting....insisting it was about adoption, only later to admit it was to collect political information on his opponent. That Trump personally dictated a statement about that meeting filled with the same lies about 'adoption'? That Trump has called for the Attorney General to shut down the ver investigation looking into the meeting?

Do you deny the rampant crimes found among Trump's 'best people'? That Manafort is on trial? That Flynn, Papoldapolous, and Gates all plead to serious crimes? That Cohen, Trump's former personal attorney, is reported to have reached plea deals with the FBI? That Cohen has implicated Trump in the meeting with the Russian Operative, admitting that Trump was well aware of the meeting?

Oh, by all means.....get specific. Tell us, what is 'fake news' of this rampantly corrupt administration.

 

[martybegan]

How is he violating the constitution by bashing a press that bashes him?

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

This administration is so corrupt the president's lawyers need lawyers a this point.\

His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

And the best you got so far is a tax evasion case that looks like it is heading to a hung jury.

There may be a hung jury on 1 of the 18 charges. The rest they've apparently reached a decision.

You start with hating Trump, then fill in as much shit as you can against him to justify your hatred of him. Any accusation is taken as fact, any leaked information treated as truth as long as it supports the narrative inside your head.

Pathetic.

I start with the evidence and move out from there. You start with feeling and emotion and begin your argument.

As demonstrated by our respective posts. I show the evidence of rampant corruption, lies, plea deals, crimes, investigations and russian collusion in the Trump campaign.

And you reply with *feelings* about Trump. While ignoring the evidence entirely. Given the *mountains* of evidence agianst Trump and his people, I can understand why you'd want to double down on emotion rather than face the evidence.

But the unprecedented corruption of this administration, so loathsome that the Senate found it necessary to pass a unanimous resolution reaffirming some of our most basic liberties.....won't change no matter how hard you 'feel' about Trump.

Some reports say otherwise.

Jake Gibson on Twitter

What evidence? People saying things to others behind doors and reporting to people who then say something to someone else who finally gives it to the press?

You are treating accusations as fact, innuendo as evidence, and assumption as proof.

But keep thinking you are not letting your emotion cloud your judgement if it allows you to function.

 

[martybegan]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

That's not "extending" the First Amendment. That's destroying it.

I disagree as long as it is narrowly constructed to certain parameters, i.e. social media sites that claim to be "open forums" and avoid liability for content via saying "it's not ours, it's theirs"

 

[dblack]

I disagree as long as it is narrowly constructed to certain parameters, i.e. social media sites that claim to be "open forums" and avoid liability for content via saying "it's not ours, it's theirs"

Of course..... we are so fucked.

 

[Skylar]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

They were moot to begin with .....as the First Amendment limits government interference in speech. Not that of private companies or individuals.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

It an enormous stretch. As it shifts the 'infringement' argument from the government, to all private citizens. Denying protestors the right to protest on private property would be a 'first amendment violation'.

If protesters wanted to hold a rally in say, your living room....you denying them access would be a violation of their rights.

It takes a right....a freedom from government infringement, and turns it into a power to COMPEL people to host speech that they disagree with or don't want to host.

Its a terrible idea.

 

[dblack]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

They were moot to begin with .....as the First Amendment limits government interference in speech. Not that of private companies or individuals.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

It an enormous stretch. As it shifts the 'infringement' argument from the government, to all private citizens. Denying protestors the right to protest on private property would be a 'first amendment violation'.

If protesters wanted to hold a rally in say, your living room....you denying them access would be a violation of their rights.

It takes a right....a freedom from government infringement, and turns it into a power to COMPEL people to host speech that they disagree with or don't want to host.

Its a terrible idea.

I have to say, it's nice to see you actually standing up for individual freedom. It'll be fun to quote these posts when you switch sides again.

 

[martybegan]

I disagree as long as it is narrowly constructed to certain parameters, i.e. social media sites that claim to be "open forums" and avoid liability for content via saying "it's not ours, it's theirs"

Of course..... we are so fucked.

I understand your position as an absolutist on this, however the problem is platforms like twitter and facebook are so ubiquitous in the digital age that allowing them to pick and choose what positions they will allow on their platform is basically allowing them to shape viewpoints on those positions.

Now if they turn around and claim all the content on the sites as their own, and as their expression of speech, then the government can't touch them. But if they continue to avoid liability for what is said on their sites, and claim to be "open forums" then treating them as a digital commons and making them accept 1st amendment provisions isn't much of a stretch.

 

[martybegan]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

They were moot to begin with .....as the First Amendment limits government interference in speech. Not that of private companies or individuals.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

It an enormous stretch. As it shifts the 'infringement' argument from the government, to all private citizens. Denying protestors the right to protest on private property would be a 'first amendment violation'.

If protesters wanted to hold a rally in say, your living room....you denying them access would be a violation of their rights.

It takes a right....a freedom from government infringement, and turns it into a power to COMPEL people to host speech that they disagree with or don't want to host.

Its a terrible idea.

But the sites don't claim the postings as THEIR SPEECH, they absolve themselves of it to prevent them from being sued, say as an accomplice if someone uses facebook to coordinate a murder.

My living room doesn't shape and mold public opinion, and I don't claim my living room as an open forum. I claim my living room as MY living room, and am responsible and liable for it's contents.

The only reason you are OK with sites like that silencing people is because they mostly silence people YOU DON'T LIKE.

That takes real "courage"

 

[martybegan]

Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

But that's exactly why this issue raises concerns. Previously, Republicans have, however meekly, pushed back against the Democrats' desire to socialize anything and everything. But now they're singing the same tune. Short-sighted political ambitions have Republicans talking about "near monopolies" and claiming that Facebook should be treated as a public utility.

I've always said that I worry the most when Democrats and Republicans agree.

I am actually if not a fan, a interested party in the treatment of things like facebook and twitter as a new form of a digital commons.

Those platforms avoid liability for the posts they show by saying "it's not our content". Well if that's the case 1st amendment protections for them are moot.

They were moot to begin with .....as the First Amendment limits government interference in speech. Not that of private companies or individuals.

And extending the 1st amendment to them via federal communications laws seems like not to big of a stretch to me.

It an enormous stretch. As it shifts the 'infringement' argument from the government, to all private citizens. Denying protestors the right to protest on private property would be a 'first amendment violation'.

If protesters wanted to hold a rally in say, your living room....you denying them access would be a violation of their rights.

It takes a right....a freedom from government infringement, and turns it into a power to COMPEL people to host speech that they disagree with or don't want to host.

Its a terrible idea.

I have to say, it's nice to see you actually standing up for individual freedom. It'll be fun to quote these posts when you switch sides again.

It's a smokescreen, because the people being banned, and the views being suppressed are views she hates and/or disagrees with.

 

[dblack]

I disagree as long as it is narrowly constructed to certain parameters, i.e. social media sites that claim to be "open forums" and avoid liability for content via saying "it's not ours, it's theirs"

Of course..... we are so fucked.

I understand your position as an absolutist on this, however the problem is platforms like twitter and facebook are so ubiquitous in the digital age that allowing them to pick and choose what positions they will allow on their platform is basically allowing them to shape viewpoints on those positions.

Wonderful. This is the standard socialist line. Have you been in touch with Bernie?

 

[dblack]

I have to say, it's nice to see you actually standing up for individual freedom. It'll be fun to quote these posts when you switch sides again.

It's a smokescreen, because the people being banned, and the views being suppressed are views she hates and/or disagrees with.

Yeah. There's a lot of that going around.

 

[dudmuck]

When the President's people are 'signalling' that Truth isn't Truth....such a resolution becomes a might bit more.

The fact that such a resolution of basic constitutional principles is necessary today is yet another in an endless swamp of fetid demonstrations of the depth and severity of the corruption of this president.

How is he violating the constitution by bashing a press that bashes him?

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

The president's lawyers need lawyers. His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

Lay off the Democrat Fake News, kid. Trump has done nothing to 'silence' Democrat Fake News. They've been completely free to rant & rave about him being a 'Racist Nazi.' Stop going all-in on Democrat propaganda. It's rotting your brain.

Although NBC isnt fake news, Trump has threatened their broadcast license.

But more recently, Trump call the press enemy of the people, which is why the senate passed this resolution?

 

[martybegan]

I disagree as long as it is narrowly constructed to certain parameters, i.e. social media sites that claim to be "open forums" and avoid liability for content via saying "it's not ours, it's theirs"

Of course..... we are so fucked.

I understand your position as an absolutist on this, however the problem is platforms like twitter and facebook are so ubiquitous in the digital age that allowing them to pick and choose what positions they will allow on their platform is basically allowing them to shape viewpoints on those positions.

Wonderful. This is the standard socialist line. Have you been in touch with Bernie?

Wow, that's a fucking retarded statement.

Absolutists are the most annoying type of people on either side of the aisle.

 

[Skylar]

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

This administration is so corrupt the president's lawyers need lawyers a this point.\

His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

And the best you got so far is a tax evasion case that looks like it is heading to a hung jury.

There may be a hung jury on 1 of the 18 charges. The rest they've apparently reached a decision.

You start with hating Trump, then fill in as much shit as you can against him to justify your hatred of him. Any accusation is taken as fact, any leaked information treated as truth as long as it supports the narrative inside your head.

Pathetic.

I start with the evidence and move out from there. You start with feeling and emotion and begin your argument.

As demonstrated by our respective posts. I show the evidence of rampant corruption, lies, plea deals, crimes, investigations and russian collusion in the Trump campaign.

And you reply with *feelings* about Trump. While ignoring the evidence entirely. Given the *mountains* of evidence agianst Trump and his people, I can understand why you'd want to double down on emotion rather than face the evidence.

But the unprecedented corruption of this administration, so loathsome that the Senate found it necessary to pass a unanimous resolution reaffirming some of our most basic liberties.....won't change no matter how hard you 'feel' about Trump.

Some reports say otherwise.

Jake Gibson on Twitter

What evidence? People saying things to others behind doors and reporting to people who then say something to someone else who finally gives it to the press?

We have released emails where Don Jr. is told that the information he will be given at the meeting is from 'high sources' and part of the Russian government's effort to aid the Trump campaign.....to which Jr. replies 'Love it'.

We have Trump's own tweets....in which he insists that the meeting was about Russian adoption, only to months later admit (again publicly) that the meeting was get dirt on Hillary.

We have Trump's own lawyer admitting that Trump personally dictated the statement released by Don Jr on the meeting in which Trump compels Jr. to lie about that the meeting.

We have the Russian lawyer that Trump's people met with in Trump tower to receive this information from Russia......admiting publicly that she's a Russian Operative.

We have Trump publicly calling on the Attorney General to end the investigation that was looking into that meeting between Russian operatives and the Trump campaign.

We have Trump's own lawyers admitting that Trump personally dictated that statement on Air Force One.

We have dozens of indictments on Trump campaign officials, guilty pleas from Foreign Policy advisers, National Security Advisers, and even his deputy campaign chair.

We have James Comey testifying that Trump told him to 'go easy' on Flynn.

And you ignore it all and then offer your emotion in its place. Sorry, buddy....but your feelings aren't compelling. The evidence is. And the evidence overwhelmingly shows a rampantly corrupt administration rotting from its head.

You are treating accusations as fact, innuendo as evidence, and assumption as proof.

But keep thinking you are not letting your emotion cloud your judgement if it allows you to function.

You're projecting. You, Marty.....are motivated by pure emotion. You, Marty.......allow your feelings to utterly overshadow you reason. And predictably you project your emotion and feeling based reasoning to me. And it doesn't fit....

....as demonstrated by the evidence I cite. And the evidence you utterly ignore.

 

[martybegan]

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

This administration is so corrupt the president's lawyers need lawyers a this point.\

His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

And the best you got so far is a tax evasion case that looks like it is heading to a hung jury.

There may be a hung jury on 1 of the 18 charges. The rest they've apparently reached a decision.

You start with hating Trump, then fill in as much shit as you can against him to justify your hatred of him. Any accusation is taken as fact, any leaked information treated as truth as long as it supports the narrative inside your head.

Pathetic.

I start with the evidence and move out from there. You start with feeling and emotion and begin your argument.

As demonstrated by our respective posts. I show the evidence of rampant corruption, lies, plea deals, crimes, investigations and russian collusion in the Trump campaign.

And you reply with *feelings* about Trump. While ignoring the evidence entirely. Given the *mountains* of evidence agianst Trump and his people, I can understand why you'd want to double down on emotion rather than face the evidence.

But the unprecedented corruption of this administration, so loathsome that the Senate found it necessary to pass a unanimous resolution reaffirming some of our most basic liberties.....won't change no matter how hard you 'feel' about Trump.

Some reports say otherwise.

Jake Gibson on Twitter

What evidence? People saying things to others behind doors and reporting to people who then say something to someone else who finally gives it to the press?

We have released emails where Don Jr. is told that the information he will be given at the meeting is from 'high sources' and part of the Russian government's effort to aid the Trump campaign.....to which Jr. replies 'Love it'.

We have Trump's own tweets....in which he insists that the meeting was about Russian adoption, only to months later admit (again publicly) that the meeting was get dirt on Hillary.

We have Trump's own lawyer admitting that Trump personally dictated the statement released by Don Jr on the meeting in which Trump compels Jr. to lie that the meeting

We have Trump's own lawyers admitting that Trump personally dictated that statement on Air Force One.

We have dozens of indictments on Trump campaign officials, guilty pleas from Foreign Policy advisers, National Security Advisers, and even his deputy campaign chair.

We have James Comey testifying that Trump told him to 'go easy' on Flynn.

And you ignore it all and then offer your emotion in its place. Sorry, buddy....but your feelings aren't compelling. The evidence is. And the evidence overwhelmingly shows a rampantly corrupt administration rotting from its head.

You are treating accusations as fact, innuendo as evidence, and assumption as proof.

But keep thinking you are not letting your emotion cloud your judgement if it allows you to function.

You're projecting. You, Marty.....are motivated by pure emotion. You, Marty.......allow your feelings to utterly overshadow you reason. And predictably you project your emotion and feeling based reasoning to me. And it doesn't fit....

....as demonstrated by the evidence I cite. And the evidence you utterly ignore.

All this and no actual prosecutions for anything.....

Just a guy avoiding his taxes.

You are not presenting ANY evidence, you are presenting assumptions about occurrences that may or may not be true, you are reading into things of varying reliability in a light that reinforces your own biases, and you keep doing this to justify your own TDS as "not being TDS"

 

[Skylar]

This administration is so corrupt the president's lawyers need lawyers a this point.\

His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

And the best you got so far is a tax evasion case that looks like it is heading to a hung jury.

There may be a hung jury on 1 of the 18 charges. The rest they've apparently reached a decision.

You start with hating Trump, then fill in as much shit as you can against him to justify your hatred of him. Any accusation is taken as fact, any leaked information treated as truth as long as it supports the narrative inside your head.

Pathetic.

I start with the evidence and move out from there. You start with feeling and emotion and begin your argument.

As demonstrated by our respective posts. I show the evidence of rampant corruption, lies, plea deals, crimes, investigations and russian collusion in the Trump campaign.

And you reply with *feelings* about Trump. While ignoring the evidence entirely. Given the *mountains* of evidence agianst Trump and his people, I can understand why you'd want to double down on emotion rather than face the evidence.

But the unprecedented corruption of this administration, so loathsome that the Senate found it necessary to pass a unanimous resolution reaffirming some of our most basic liberties.....won't change no matter how hard you 'feel' about Trump.

Some reports say otherwise.

Jake Gibson on Twitter

What evidence? People saying things to others behind doors and reporting to people who then say something to someone else who finally gives it to the press?

We have released emails where Don Jr. is told that the information he will be given at the meeting is from 'high sources' and part of the Russian government's effort to aid the Trump campaign.....to which Jr. replies 'Love it'.

We have Trump's own tweets....in which he insists that the meeting was about Russian adoption, only to months later admit (again publicly) that the meeting was get dirt on Hillary.

We have Trump's own lawyer admitting that Trump personally dictated the statement released by Don Jr on the meeting in which Trump compels Jr. to lie that the meeting

We have Trump's own lawyers admitting that Trump personally dictated that statement on Air Force One.

We have dozens of indictments on Trump campaign officials, guilty pleas from Foreign Policy advisers, National Security Advisers, and even his deputy campaign chair.

We have James Comey testifying that Trump told him to 'go easy' on Flynn.

And you ignore it all and then offer your emotion in its place. Sorry, buddy....but your feelings aren't compelling. The evidence is. And the evidence overwhelmingly shows a rampantly corrupt administration rotting from its head.

You are treating accusations as fact, innuendo as evidence, and assumption as proof.

But keep thinking you are not letting your emotion cloud your judgement if it allows you to function.

You're projecting. You, Marty.....are motivated by pure emotion. You, Marty.......allow your feelings to utterly overshadow you reason. And predictably you project your emotion and feeling based reasoning to me. And it doesn't fit....

....as demonstrated by the evidence I cite. And the evidence you utterly ignore.

All this and no actual prosecutions for anything.....

Actually, no. Flynn has already plead guilty. Gates has already plead guilty. Papodapolous has already plead guilty. These are all prosecutions. None of which you claim ever happened.

Alas, reality doesn't work that way. It doesn't matter how you 'feel', Marty. Reality doesn't magically change to match it.

You are not presenting ANY evidence, you are presenting assumptions about occurrences that may or may not be true, you are reading into things of varying reliability in a light that reinforces your own biases, and you keep doing this to justify your own TDS as "not being TDS"

Don Jr. Emails where he is told that the information he will be given at the meeting is from 'high sources' and part of the Russian government's effort to aid the Trump campaign.....is evidence.

Trump's own tweets in which he insists that the meeting was about Russian adoption, only to months later admit (again publicly) that the meeting was get dirt on Hillary.....is evidence.

Trump's own lawyer admitting that Trump personally dictated the statement released by Don Jr on the meeting in which Trump compels Jr. to lie that the meeting.....is evidence.

Dozens of indictments on Trump campaign officials, guilty pleas from Foreign Policy advisers, National Security Advisers, and even his deputy campaign chair, all of which are evidence of rampant crimes in the Trump Campaign.

Trump calling on the Attorney General to end the investigation looking into the meeting between his cmapaign and a Russian operative.....is evidence.

Former FBI head James Comey testifying that Trump told him to 'go easy' on Flynn.....is evidence.


And you ignore it all and replace it with blanket denial based in pure emotion. Again, Marty.....your feelings don't matter. You do this in virtually every debate, where you demand we accept you emotions and feelings as evidence.

And no one ever does. Your feelings are not evidence. Get used to the idea.

 

[Dschrute3]

How is he violating the constitution by bashing a press that bashes him?

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

The president's lawyers need lawyers. His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

Lay off the Democrat Fake News, kid. Trump has done nothing to 'silence' Democrat Fake News. They've been completely free to rant & rave about him being a 'Racist Nazi.' Stop going all-in on Democrat propaganda. It's rotting your brain.

Laughing...by all means, show me the 'fake news'. Your ilk have been trained to equate anything that criticizes the president as 'fake'. Alas, reality doesn't work that way.

Do you deny that Cohen admitted that Trump was fully aware of the meeting between his people and a Russian operative? That Trump admitted that the purpose of the meeting with the Russian operative was to collect information.

Do you deny that Trump lied about that meeting....insisting it was about adoption, only later to admit it was to collect political information on his opponent. That Trump personally dictated a statement about that meeting filled with the same lies about 'adoption'? That Trump has called for the Attorney General to shut down the ver investigation looking into the meeting?

Do you deny the rampant crimes found among Trump's 'best people'? That Manafort is on trial? That Flynn, Papoldapolous, and Gates all plead to serious crimes? That Cohen, Trump's former personal attorney, is reported to have reached plea deals with the FBI? That Cohen has implicated Trump in the meeting with the Russian Operative, admitting that Trump was well aware of the meeting?

Oh, by all means.....get specific. Tell us, what is 'fake news' of this rampantly corrupt administration.

Can you provide us with any evidence proving Trump has 'silenced' Democrat Fake News in any way? Cause i just don't see it. Democrat Fake News is completely free to lie to its sycophants. But hey, if you have evidence proving otherwise, lay it on us.

 

[Skylar]

How is he violating the constitution by bashing a press that bashes him?

He's already had his people float the idea that the President should have the power to shutdown any news agency the president deems is propagating 'fake news'.

With a full 43% of republicans polled supporting empowering the President to shut down any news agency that is engaged in 'bad behavior'.

Resolutions such as those passed by the Senate are necessary due to the loathsome and rampant corruption of the President and how eager many republicans are to grant the President unprecedented powers to attack the press.

Until something actual happens it's nothing but words, and no constitutional violation. Dems have been bitching about "doing something" about Fox News for a decade now with nothing actually happening, where was your angst about that?

And you keep using the word corruption without any evidence of actual corruption.

The president's lawyers need lawyers. His campaign is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department for collusion with Russia...which the President admitted to. Trump himself is reluctant to testify for fear he will perjure himself. His former Campaign chair is on trial as we speak, his deputy campaign chair has plead guilty to numerous crimes, with his former foreign policy adviser and national security adviser.

Trump's own son was recorded by Spanish authorities arranging a meeting with Russian Intelligence Handler Alexander Torshin during the administration. The same son that arranged a meeting with a Russian operative in Trump Tower, after being told that the information he would receive was part of the Russian government's efforts to aid Trump.

And Cohen, Trump's former lawyer (a man who just arranged his own plea deal with the FBI) admitting that Trump was fully aware of the meeting. A meeting Trump has lied about repeatedly, has compelled others to lie by personally dictating a statement on the meeting filled with lies, with Trump trying to shut down the investigation into the meeting between an operative from Russia and his own campaign.

The level of corruption in this campaign and administration are unprecedented.

But you ignore all this. A rational person wouldn't. And Mueller certainly won't.

Lay off the Democrat Fake News, kid. Trump has done nothing to 'silence' Democrat Fake News. They've been completely free to rant & rave about him being a 'Racist Nazi.' Stop going all-in on Democrat propaganda. It's rotting your brain.

Although NBC isnt fake news, Trump has threatened their broadcast license.

But more recently, Trump call the press enemy of the people, which is why the senate passed this resolution?

And Fox News presidential sycophant Lou Dobbs insisted that Trump should have the power to shut down any media outlet that he feels is propagating 'fake news'.....on air, on FOX. Insisting that when he said 'shut down' he meant 'shut down'.

And 43% of republicans polled believe that Trump should have the power to shut down media outlets who are 'behaving badly'. 43 fucking percent. The authoritarian streak in republicans runs deep.

With Trump insisting he can pardon *himself* for any crimes he commits.

Its yet another demonstration of the rampant, systematic corruption within the Trump administration that the Senate found it necessary to pass this resolution.