Trump pushes censorship as "libel laws" changes

[pcosmar]

We are going to take a strong look at our country’s libel laws, so that when somebody says something that is false and defamatory about someone, that person will have meaningful recourse in our courts,” Mr. Trump said during a public portion of a cabinet meeting in the White House.

The president added, “Our current libel laws are a sham and a disgrace and do not represent American values or American fairness.”

I honestly do not see anything wrong with that..

and there are recent news worthy headlines as example.

[Superfluous Man]

Firstly I don't see any specifics to debate.

Of course you don't. And you won't get any from Trump, which is why your remark about the delicate balance was so funny.

His only concern is shutting down criticism of himself. That's it. He has never once in his life given a moment of thought to this issue on a philosophical or legal level.

[Swordsmyth]

Of course you don't. And you won't get any from Trump, which is why your remark about the delicate balance was so funny.

His only concern is shutting down criticism of himself. That's it. He has never once in his life given a moment of thought to this issue on a philosophical or legal level.

If DJTvsg doesn't DO something then there is nothing to discuss and this is a stupid thread like I said, and my statement about the delicate balance was my position on the issue in general and was aimed at those who were saying that we shouldn't have libel laws etc.

[donnay]

The adulterous pornographer would have to have a good name to smear first.

LOL! "Adulterous pornographer." You guys are too much.

And yes, people are allowed to say what they wish. That is what "freedom of speech" is all about- the freedom for me to use speech in any way I choose and you have no power to use violence to limit me.

Along with freedom of speech, their are consequences to those who intentionally defame others. No one is talking about violence here, so don't be so melodramatic.

[nobody's_hero]

The adulterous pornographer would have to have a good name to smear first.

And yes, people are allowed to say what they wish. That is what "freedom of speech" is all about- the freedom for me to use speech in any way I choose and you have no power to use violence to limit me.

But can I sue you?

Say, if you put out a book like . . .

[Zippyjuan]

Trump Lawyer letter to the publisher of Wolf's book: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/04/u...publisher.html

The president’s blast at Mr. Wolff came at the end of a day in which Mr. Trump’s effort to stop publication failed. In an 11-page letter sent in the morning, a lawyer for the president said the book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” as excerpted in a magazine article, includes false statements about Mr. Trump that “give rise to claims for libel” that could result in “substantial monetary damages and punitive damages.”

“Mr. Trump hereby demands that you immediately cease and desist from any further publication, release or dissemination of the book, the article, or any excerpts or summaries of either of them, to any person or entity, and that you issue a full and complete retraction and apology to my client as to all statements made about him in the book and article that lack competent evidentiary support,” the letter said.

Undeterred, Henry Holt and Co., the publisher, announced that instead it would make the book available for sale starting at 9 a.m. Friday rather than wait for its original release date on Tuesday.

US Supreme Court has ruled that public officials must demonstrate serious maliciousness to be able to sue for libel. Disagreeing with what was written does not reach that standard.

https://billofrightsinstitute.org/ed...sullivan-1964/

In a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of the New York Times. In order to prove libel, a “public official” must show that the newspaper acted “with ‘actual malice’–that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard” for truth. The Court asserted America’s “profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.” Free and open debate about the conduct of public officials, the Court reasoned, was more important than occasional, honest factual errors that might hurt or damage officials’ reputations.

[devil21]

I honestly do not see anything wrong with that..

and there are recent news worthy headlines as example.

Hence my original post. The creation of the problem by the deep state controlled media (check), the reaction by the deep state controlled President and his dumb supporters (check) and finally, a subsequent solution offered by the deep state controlled legislature (remains to be seen).

It's an ongoing agenda and Trump is playing his part in the script. Facebook announced today they're bigly changing their news feed to censor the crap out of anything they don't deem appropriate or factual. Facebook Ministry of Truth. What we're not told is that most of what the media puts out is fake news and they know it. They simply don't like their created narratives being countered or exposed.

eta: easy to assume Trump's statement was regarding the Wolff book. Wolff said he doesn't know the truth of much of the contents of his own book and much of it is recycled from media stories. Safe to say that Wolff is also controlled since the media blared about the book from the rooftops.

[nikcers]

Hence my original post. The creation of the problem by the deep state controlled media (check), the reaction by the deep state controlled President and his dumb supporters (check) and finally, a subsequent solution offered by the deep state controlled legislature (remains to be seen).

It's an ongoing agenda and Trump is playing his part in the script.

if you don't learn from history

[enhanced_deficit]

I fully support free specch. But to be devil's advocate, can't claims like these put in print desatbilize "stable genius" like the holder of the office of the POTUS?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2zm3KmUqJ4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF5DzSpunTg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOjldTiyCXQ

[Raginfridus]

If Hildabeast said we're seriously going to review our un American libel laws, the entire forum would be pissed. Trump's different, because he fights for the little guy. He says so. I hope he gets some good ol boys on the case straight away.

[Influenza]

If Hildabeast said we're seriously going to review our un American libel laws, the entire forum would be pissed. Trump's different, because he fights for the little guy. He says so. I hope he gets some good ol boys on the case straight away.

"I love trump more and more every day. I salivate just thinking about him" - a large portion of RPF posters