Theres a few satire channels that have blown up in popularity actually lol but these news stations arent being banned from airwaves, their press privlages to enter the white house have been revoked
What the hell Trump...
Started by Sha-doh [4453054] on in Politics & Law.
Posts archived: 70 / 70 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
“Sewing division” and it’s just reporting things that don’t make the president look good.
Find me a few examples of this fake news in recent weeks? Some objective, provable lies?
Whether they are or not, you can't ban press from reporting. It's up to the readers to make that decision...
Not a fat fucking idiot wearing makeup and a nappy. He can fuck off...
Can we leave Joe Biden out of this just because he shat himself on live tv we shouldnt judge
Didn't he stop being president two years ago?
Think we are talking abot the orange shit machine right now...
You know Trump is President, right?
Trump is surely sewing division, and attacking his political opponents, for criticizing him, and calling him out.
Also, I don't think he can ban people from regular press briefing, or the white house. He may have a loophole(that can be challenged), in regards to access to specific areas, but not the white house, or press briefings in general. He's not banning them from the oval office due to lack of space, its due to their lack of support, criticizing him, and calling him out. We, the people, can challenge him as well.
The democrats used taxpayers money to fund outlets to support them and watching these conferences they sure the hell are bias and lie.
No loop hole, it's illegal...
And Trump doesn't? Fuck me, I never realised you were this dumb...
Stay with me here, you really suck his bullshit on a daily basis? You think the Straight is open and oil prices are coming down as your boy has control?
Fuck me, I have learned a lot about you tonight...
Think of it this way. Should every independent journalist have a default "right" to enter classified spaces by simple virtue of filming themselves? These are privlaged meetings that only top media and specific pre-approved independent platforms can attend. Legal precedent merely requires a strong reason for removal, and years of intentional misrepresentation may meet that requirement. Regardless theyre SOL until a judge rules one way or another
The Public Boadcasting Act, was a bipartisan decision. It wasn't just democrats that decided that. There were some people on both sides that had concerns about it being used for propaganda, and government influence. They were right, but if democrats get targeted, the republicans in government would still have that influence, and the power of propaganda. It takes away the balance, and starts looking more authoritarian. No one should be able to use their government positions, or powers, to eliminate their political opponents, censor views that are different than theirs, or thwart criticism of them.
Well, if he was to flood the oval office with people, and then tried saying something like, "the oval office is small, and we don't have enough space for more people", it would be a loophole, but we would challenge it.
Yes, as the US bill of rights promotes freedom of the press...
Just because Baby Trump doesn't like what they say should not exclude them. That is a basic right of the constitution...
And if it takes an english person explain it to your dumb arse, that is the issue..
No, they shouldn't, because they wouldn't all fit in these spaces, which is why permanent seats exist, and why everyone else just fills the room. He is not getting rid of liars and propagandists. He is only getting rid of the peoples who oppose him. If he was doing it to get rid of liars, and propagandists, the room would be empty, not just a few people he doesn't like. He is removing the balance, and balance is important.
If on torn, a few of you right wing people got banned, this would turn into a left wing echo chamber(cesspool). It's already getting pretty bad, since some of the other retards on the right got banned, or stopped interacting. Imagine this on a national level.
I see your point, but it wont matter much if there isnt a country left to manage. When mainstream media is celebrating "Kirkiversary" and glorifying political assassination, you cant just ignore it. Directly attempting to control what people say would be unconstitutional, so thats not an option. At this point CNN has as much credibility of TMZ, except TMZ has 50x the audience base (not an exaggeration). Their platform alone suggests theyre more of a candidate for a permenant seat given CNN has lost 2/3 of its viewership since 2020 alone. At what point do we acknowledge someone else may be more deserving of such a coveted spot?
If trump gets everything he wants, he will eventually blunder, and there won't be a country anyway, which is more likely than losing our country because someone cheered for kirk getting assassinated. Balance can prevent shit way more crazy than someone getting assassinated. Balance can prevent genocide, ethnic cleansing, apartheid, etc. If trump was to eliminate his political opponents, and Republicans from his ilk maintained power for a long time, the future will be extremely brainwashed, and propagandized, potentially causing genocide, ethnic cleansing, or apartheid, against minorities.
I don't know the exact method used for selecting outlets for rhe press pool, but it used to be decided by the WHCA, until trump wanted to be an authoritarian. Not sure what the standards/requirements were for the WHCA, and why TMZ wouldn't qualify.
When I think TMZ, I think drama, and entertainment, not news. Maybe they changed, idk.
Theres been such a demographic shift this decade that democrats arent looking forward to the 2030 census, especially if it is determined that illegal immigrants do not count towards the delegation of Congressional seats. Even if immigrants are counted theyre still projected to lose 8 seats to red states from the census alone. 11 if its determined that only citizens count (according to Google AI). We'll see how midterms turn out, but the next presidential cycle will likely cement Republican authority unless Dem leadership rallies under something aside from reforming our Constitution into something more socialist
Although some sources are saying that the illegal population has been underestimated to the extent that as many as 28 seats may be redistributed to blue states if it is determined that illegal immigrants count on the Census
If I was in charge right now, I'd completely monitor the border to prevent illegal entry, and literally offer every illegal in the u.s. an opportunity to come forward, to immediately become legal, so we get rid of this "illegal problem", and at least actually have a document of everyone. At that point, I'd just keep the border secure, and allow legal migration and citizenship(potentially after a longer process, and classes and such), conservatively, after vetting everyone, documenting them, and not overdoing it. Our country is not the only place in the world people can go to, after all. If a republican was to do that, at least there would be a chance some of those immigrants become Republicans, rather than mostly democrats.
Also, I'm not one of the "America is white" people, so I can't say I see a problem in my plan, even if after a few hundred years, some of their descendants end up having a little pigment in their skin. They won't be here to see it, and their descents may not mind it either. I believe there are many who wouldn't disown their family, simply for them having a mixed baby, though it happens occasionally. Maybe, eventually, the country will be more accepting, and it would be rare for someone to do that. It takes alot of work, and alot of improvements in people's quality of life, and programming.
There is way more that I'd do in/for my country, and some may seem a bit extreme to some.