Donald Trump threatens Amazon as payback for Washington Post articles he doesn't like

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by ericgtr12, May 13, 2016.

  1. ericgtr12 macrumors 6502a

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    #1
    If you're going to dismantle the Constitution you may as well start with the first amendment.

     
  2. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #2
    Bezo's strident efforts will run off the cliff like everyone else's efforts.

    NBC and Univision are the ones who should be shuddering. They were the first ones to make a larger example out of someone like Trump, when beforehand such efforts at financial destruction were limited to cake bakers. BIG mistake.
     
  3. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #3
    I'm finding it difficult to feel sorry for Jeff Bezos, but, yes, Trump is threatening the First Amendment. Again. And, his loyal followers will love it I'm sure. I wonder what the Republican "establishment" will say-- the ones who are trying to convince themselves to support Trump.
     
  4. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #4
    Bezos and Musk are living Gods and should hold dominion over all.
     
  5. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #5
    Silly Eric, don't you know that the First Ammendment only applies to Lord High Trump?
     
  6. thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #6
    I for one do not agree that injurious slander should be considered a 1rst amendment right.
    Opinions are one thing, falsifying facts another.

    What about hate speech? one ideology pushing to make "hate speech" illegal, is definitely crossing the line of the 1rst amendment.

    Holding news agencies accountable for lies would be a good thing, promoting investigative news based on facts not propaganda.
     
  7. ericgtr12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    #7
    If they did that every 24 hour cable news station would be gone. Nobody's fact checking the fact checkers and when you insert ideology into it, it will never objectively happen.
     
  8. thewap macrumors demi-god

    thewap

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2012
    #8
    It used to.. at least much more than now.
     
  9. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #9
    You have t listen to the tape of "Trump's publicist" at WaPo today. Sounds like Donny. He says he never did it. OK then, produce your publicist named John Miller.
     
  10. ericgtr12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    #10
    Sad but true, the days of Walter Cronkite are long gone, replaced by cable networks and social media channels where news flies in so fast that there's no time to absorb and digest it. It's a different world now, sonny (in my really old man voice).
     
  11. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #11
    If the problem is "liberalism", then the best solution is "fascism."
     
  12. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #12
    i see a lot more 'liberalism' in the republican party than in the dems... just saying.
     
  13. ericgtr12 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    ericgtr12

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2015
    #13
    Trump today on ABC news regarding the unfair tax system: We pay $4 trillion for wars in the Middle East yet we have crumbling roads and bridges here in the US [sic].

    Stuff like that is why the Republicans have a problem with him, he doesn't fit lock stock and barrel and it freaks them out. His honesty and candor are both scary and refreshing at the same time.
     
  14. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #14
    This is the kind of ****ing BS that I cannot get behind.
    Trump is an authoritarian bully and a cult of personality.
    He is not a classic liberal.
     
  15. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #15

    George Clooney recently said this: "24 hour news doesn't mean you get more news, you just get the same news more"
     
  16. Robisan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    #16
    Dude, do you own a mirror? smdh...
     
  17. chown33 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #17
    So does current slander and libel law in the US.

    Yes they are, and the standard for slander and libel are codified by law.
     
  18. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #18
    Well, that, and the fact that everyone goes rushing for that next big headline in order to beat out the competition, sometimes without verifying their sources.
     
  19. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #19
    George Clooney recently held a $353,000 per plate fundraiser for Hillary and the very next day decried the influence of money in politics. Immune to irony, I suppose.
     
  20. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #20
    LOL. Seriously, **** that guy and Ben Affleck.
     
  21. DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #21
    This is as outrageous as it would be if Obama was using the IRS to go after his political enemies! Of course that could never happen because the zealots on the Left, such as the OP, would never let such an immoral act occur.

    It is interesting that the WaPo hasn't told the public about the team of reporters looking into Hillary's shadowy nooks and crannies <shudder>. I'm sure they've been assigned, the WaPo just forgot to mention them.
     
  22. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #22
    First, injurious slander simply means that you have been defamed and the action hurt you. This is already codified in current law, but you're asking for a lower standard that would allow for damages if the statement was wrong and hurt you.

    But, U.S. law holds a higher standard, which is "actual malice." This means that the person knew the statement was untrue, or was reckless with the truth, based on the 1964 SCOTUS decision in New York Times v. Sullivan.

    First, it's interesting to see Trump supporters—and apparent 'conservatives' suddenly in for "hate speech"— but "hate speech" falls under a different set of rules, which are built on the idea that such speech constitutes "fighting words" and that this speech can incite violence or constitute a direct threat. And, the courts have often held that a public person—like the President and Donald Trump—have a higher bar when it comes to attacking speech.

    Years ago, conservatives were allergic to a government body holding such sway over a news agency. And, for good reason, can we imagine how Fox News would do in the 9th Circuit Court? That alone is a dangerous set of precedents that I'd fight against tooth and nail.

    The usual hypocrisy. I argue that there's no proof that Obama ordered the IRS to do this, but it's still wrong. You argue that it's wrong only when it hurts your friends.

    I find this story endlessly hilarious.
     
  23. Snoopy4 macrumors 6502a

    Snoopy4

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2014
    #23
    I seem to remember some dude named Obama saying similar things about Fox News and Talk Radio, so spare us the phony outrage.

    Let us know when you come to terms with the IRS targeting that actually did happen, not some hypothetical comment that's nothing more than a call to arms for people to protest a bunch of media slime balls.
    --- Post Merged, May 13, 2016 ---
    Teams looking into Hillary? I won't be holding my breath for sure.
    --- Post Merged, May 13, 2016 ---

    Only people in complete denial don't think Obama knew nothing about the IRS. Nobody farts on the left without Obama knowing.
     
  24. DUCKofD3ATH Suspended

    DUCKofD3ATH

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Location:
    Universe 0 Timeline
    #24
    Obama joked about auditing his political enemies! Then the IRS audited his political enemies.

    Hmmm.

    Obama's administration corrupted the election process by using the IRS as a weapon against his political opponents; making it harder for them to campaign against him. And he got away with it!

    Doing the same thing to Trump's opponents isn't hypocritical, it's necessary. Democrats won't learn from anything except painful experience.
     
  25. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #25
    Did I miss something in the original post? Amazon has an unfair advantage by not having to charge tax (fact), Trump says they are using the post to maintain this advantage?

    Where is the first amendment overstep?
     

Share This Page