Spaceman Spiff
Well-known member
Dude, she lost. Just let it go.
Donald John Trump is no longer president: what does it mean for you?
- Thread starter Rick 944
- Start date
illuminance
Legacy Member
dude i am a bystander posting news i am not judicial watch (the people pushing for this) :dunno:
Ex-Navy sailor pardoned by Trump plans to sue Obama
Spaceman Spiff
Well-known member
You missed an occasion to denounce a waste of $200 millions by needlessly deploying the military at the frontier in an attempt to sway the mid-terms.
Yeah you're right. He's getting constantly criticized because he's a nationalist, not because he's constantly lying, is using his position as president to fatten his pockets, is completely incompetent and has no idea how the Constitution works, has tried to screw over our country with ridiculous tariffs, is basing his protectionism on false data and spends way too much time golfing.
It must be the nationalism thing...
illuminance
Legacy Member
you forgot : threat to journalism 
The First Amendment Is Not the ‘Be Nice to Journalists Act of 1791’
Let’s review some of the most obvious cases in which presidents merrily stomped all over the First Amendment. President John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. This led directly to the arrest, conviction, and imprisonment of Americans for expressing ideas. Some were journalists; one was an actual U.S. representative: Matthew Lyon, a Democratic-Republican congressman from Vermont, spent four months in prison under the acts for writing a column (he charged Adams with “ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice”) that Charles Blow’s editors at the New York Times would today reject for being too mild.
Abraham Lincoln personally issued an executive order to close two New York newspapers he hated and had their editors arrested. His army also closed down a telegraph service, and with the approval of his secretary of war, Edward Stanton, a military governor destroyed the offices of the Washington, D.C., paper the Sunday Chronicle. Americans were arrested for singing Confederate songs or for wearing Confederate buttons. President Grant signed the Comstock Act of 1873, which made it illegal to send through the mails obscene material or even letters discussing sexual matters.
President Wilson pushed for and won passage of the Sedition Act of 1918, which made it illegal to use “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the government. Among those convicted and imprisoned under the act was Eugene V. Debs, the socialist labor leader and five-time presidential candidate, who spent two and a half years in prison because he gave a speech urging men to resist the draft. President Franklin Roosevelt signed an executive order creating an “office of censorship.”
Even if Hunt’s historical memory goes no farther back in time than hit movies released in the last year, she should know that President Nixon’s Justice Department enjoined the New York Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers under the dubious logic that release of historical documents from years past constituted a threat to national-security secrets. The Times was forced to sue the U.S. in order to continue publishing.
Trump doesn’t even take the prize for being the president who made the most outrageously personal threats to journalists. President Truman threatened to beat up a Washington Post music critic for writing that Truman’s daughter Margaret couldn’t sing. President Clinton said through a spokesman that he wanted to punch a New York Times columnist in the face for (correctly) describing Hillary Clinton as a liar.
Even President George W. Bush did more damage to the First Amendment than Trump ever will when he signed the single most pernicious threat to it that has arisen in recent decades — the McCain-Feingold law that gave the federal government the power to ban political books and movies. Not only were the leading journalistic outlets sanguine about this, when it came to the Citizens United decision that struck down aspects of the law, they loudly supported the forces of censorship, not the First Amendment. The media are therefore (much) more dangerous opponents of the First Amendment than is the president they despise.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/first-amendment-donald-trump-journalist-attacks/
The First Amendment Is Not the ‘Be Nice to Journalists Act of 1791’
Let’s review some of the most obvious cases in which presidents merrily stomped all over the First Amendment. President John Adams signed the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798. This led directly to the arrest, conviction, and imprisonment of Americans for expressing ideas. Some were journalists; one was an actual U.S. representative: Matthew Lyon, a Democratic-Republican congressman from Vermont, spent four months in prison under the acts for writing a column (he charged Adams with “ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice”) that Charles Blow’s editors at the New York Times would today reject for being too mild.
Abraham Lincoln personally issued an executive order to close two New York newspapers he hated and had their editors arrested. His army also closed down a telegraph service, and with the approval of his secretary of war, Edward Stanton, a military governor destroyed the offices of the Washington, D.C., paper the Sunday Chronicle. Americans were arrested for singing Confederate songs or for wearing Confederate buttons. President Grant signed the Comstock Act of 1873, which made it illegal to send through the mails obscene material or even letters discussing sexual matters.
President Wilson pushed for and won passage of the Sedition Act of 1918, which made it illegal to use “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the government. Among those convicted and imprisoned under the act was Eugene V. Debs, the socialist labor leader and five-time presidential candidate, who spent two and a half years in prison because he gave a speech urging men to resist the draft. President Franklin Roosevelt signed an executive order creating an “office of censorship.”
Even if Hunt’s historical memory goes no farther back in time than hit movies released in the last year, she should know that President Nixon’s Justice Department enjoined the New York Times from publishing the Pentagon Papers under the dubious logic that release of historical documents from years past constituted a threat to national-security secrets. The Times was forced to sue the U.S. in order to continue publishing.
Trump doesn’t even take the prize for being the president who made the most outrageously personal threats to journalists. President Truman threatened to beat up a Washington Post music critic for writing that Truman’s daughter Margaret couldn’t sing. President Clinton said through a spokesman that he wanted to punch a New York Times columnist in the face for (correctly) describing Hillary Clinton as a liar.
Even President George W. Bush did more damage to the First Amendment than Trump ever will when he signed the single most pernicious threat to it that has arisen in recent decades — the McCain-Feingold law that gave the federal government the power to ban political books and movies. Not only were the leading journalistic outlets sanguine about this, when it came to the Citizens United decision that struck down aspects of the law, they loudly supported the forces of censorship, not the First Amendment. The media are therefore (much) more dangerous opponents of the First Amendment than is the president they despise.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/first-amendment-donald-trump-journalist-attacks/
Spaceman Spiff
Well-known member
Well, at least Lincoln never doctored a video to falsely accuse someone of physical assault.
illuminance
Legacy Member
you just get that new vocab update 'doctored a video' ?
Buzzfeed: It’s Not Clear That The Video Shared By The White House Was Doctored
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/11...-not-clear-video-shared-white-house-doctored/
Welcome To The Dystopia: People Are Arguing About Whether This Trump Press Conference Video Is Doctored
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/charliewarzel/acosta-video-trump-cnn-aide-sarah-sanders
PsychoBandito
New member
As of today, NYSE has lost all it's gains from 2018, with fears of more to drop due to low oil, trade wars, and the diminishing effect of the tax cuts.
But you're right. Aliens.
But you're right. Aliens.
Spaceman Spiff
Well-known member
This tweet hasn't aged well:
PsychoBandito
New member
I'm calling full civil war if they try and impeach him.
PsychoBandito
New member
Should Trump pardon Cyntonia Brown?
If you don't know who she is, she has to serve a minimum 51 years for killing her rapist at the age of 16, after being trafficked for months. If Trump wants to be the face of saving the children, this is his time to shine.
If you don't know who she is, she has to serve a minimum 51 years for killing her rapist at the age of 16, after being trafficked for months. If Trump wants to be the face of saving the children, this is his time to shine.
250Rocket
Well-known member
He should but it should first try to be appealed so it doesn't set precedent. Don't have time at the moment to read up on all the details of the story but anyone facing a criminal situation as the victim, they should almost have carte blanche.
Trouble now is will people hear about this. If it's a story that remains on the fringe, how can you expect anyone to be up in arms.
infinite
Legacy Member
Lol
Judging by how passionately hateful you are toward this man you will then say he is unfit to be president for supporting murder.
Yea, you are that guy
Sent from my SM-G950W using Tapatalk
PsychoBandito
New member
I think you've got the wrong guy. I don't like him, but passionately hateful is a stretch. I just think he's an idiot.
lord_galathon
Well-known member
Wait. What?
She's been in jail for over a decade, why would they wait until now for an appeal?
She's been in jail for over a decade, why would they wait until now for an appeal?
Broody
Well-known member
Moi pas comprendre non plus, les nouvelles américaines sont de vrais torchons et ça a l'air plus compliqué qu'ici leur système.
Ici c'est 30 jours pour appeler (là bas aussi je pense). L'appel qu'elle a fait récemment était sur une décision récente sur une demande pour post-conviction relief basée sur un précédent de 2012, c'était pas un appel de la décision de 2004.
"Ms. Brown filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief, in which she claimed her life sentence was unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 132 S. Ct. 2455, 183 L. Ed. 2d 407 (2012). The post-conviction court denied relief, and that decision was affirmed on appeal."
Il y avait un autre appel entendu en 2009 pour des questions de preuve et facteurs aggravants.
Last edited: