Support NeoGAF

[KarneeKarnay]

When did he threaten to censor the press? As far as I’m aware, he has only threatened to revoke White House press passes, which is not the same thing.

I would argue that is is a form of censorship, but he's also created his own news channel/web show, labelled media as fake news and verbally attacked individual reporters and media.

As a Private Citizen he can do this, but as the President, this shit is really worrying.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

Would they, though? Which branch of law enforcement? And how far would the Secret Service go to follow their mission to protect the president? Would they protect him from other LEOs?

This is how civil wars start. It scares me.

Any of them could do it depending on where he is.

Because of the President's legal priveleges and protection there'd be a negotiation to keep things civil and avoid a violent confrontation. No one would want that.

There's no need to feel scared. The idea that agents alone could or would want to protect a POTUS found guilty of serious crimes from the will of the other branches or the rest of law enforcement trying to maintain order is doubtful. People are going to abandon ship and any loyalists remaining are not the Avengers. Who knows one of them might make the arrest themselves once the SC or Congress reached a verdict.

For your fear to come to fruition the President would need a lot more help. I don't see where it would come from. The more likely scenario is that it's a witch hunt and there's no direct involvement from Trump.

 

[Papa]

I would argue that is is a form of censorship, but he's also created his own news channel/web show, labelled media as fake news and verbally attacked individual reporters and media.

As a Private Citizen he can do this, but as the President, this shit is really worrying.

Who is entitled to a White House press pass?

Nothing you listed is censorship.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

Who is entitled to a White House press pass?

Nothing you listed is censorship.

I feel like you saw the white house press part and didn't check out the rest. Do you agree that as President when he does the examples listed above, that is a worrying, if not an attack on free speech and freedom of the press?

As to the White House Press pass. Having a press pass is important. You get the news from the White House quicker than anyone else. It's a measurable advantage in both speed and economics. If you are a News Media you will want a press pass for that reason. If you don't have one you will lose out and this will damage your business.

So when Trump holds the Press Pass ransom, because he wants better news coverage of him, that's censorship. Even the threat of this, implicit or implied is a form of censorship.

 

[Breakage]

I think they are being hyperbolic.
Every time I see Trump speak, I can't shake the feeling that he didn't really expect to become POTUS, but now that he is, he is too proud to back out of it.

 

[Papa]

I feel like you saw the white house press part and didn't check out the rest. Do you agree that as President when he does the examples listed above, that is a worrying, if not an attack on free speech and freedom of the press?

As to the White House Press pass. Having a press pass is important. You get the news from the White House quicker than anyone else. It's a measurable advantage in both speed and economics. If you are a News Media you will want a press pass for that reason. If you don't have one you will lose out and this will damage your business.

So when Trump holds the Press Pass ransom, because he wants better news coverage of him, that's censorship. Even the threat of this, implicit or implied is a form of censorship.

No, I read your posts in full.

I don’t have a problem with him threatening to withhold White House press passes because they are a privilege (I normally despise this word, but it applies here) and we have all seen the abuses going on in the media. I don’t give a damn about their bottom line if they aren’t going to investigate and report responsibly. If Trump is holding press passes ransom for more favourable coverage, I have a problem with that, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that yet. I have only seen him threaten the likes of CNN and MSNBC who are demonstrably biased and manipulative in their reporting.

 

[Whitecrow]

Shamelessly stolen from ReeeeEra

""I'm having a mental breakdown. I cant enjoy anything because of Trump. Everything reminds me of him and the evil he is. The man is pure evil and he's destroying America or rather revealing what America truly is. I'm afraid to go outside these days. I ran into a Trump Supporter and nearly went ballistic. Everytime I see + news all I think about is how Trump probably paid that to be put there."

Yeah, definitely looks like a great place to have some laughs.

On topic, I think there are obvious reasons to think so, but that doesnt look like a well reasoned opinion, just the first thing that comes to mind.

 

[TTOOLL]

I found it very funny that some people may think the USA has the slightest chance of having a dictator.

 

[pramod]

Yes Trump lies. He likes to lie about stuff like the size of his crowds or other trivial stuff that doesn't really affect anyone.

On the other hand Obama told us if we liked our health plan we can keep it.

 

[JDB]

I think they are being hyperbolic.
Every time I see Trump speak, I can't shake the feeling that he didn't really expect to become POTUS, but now that he is, he is too proud to back out of it.

At least Eric is enjoying it

 

[KarneeKarnay]

No, I read your posts in full.

I don’t have a problem with him threatening to withhold White House press passes because they are a privilege (I normally despise this word, but it applies here) and we have all seen the abuses going on in the media. I don’t give a damn about their bottom line if they aren’t going to investigate and report responsibly. If Trump is holding press passes ransom for more favourable coverage, I have a problem with that, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that yet. I have only seen him threaten the likes of CNN and MSNBC who are demonstrably biased and manipulative in their reporting.

It sounds like your sticking point is that Trump hasn't explicitly stated or done so. Just so you know, I actually approve of the regulations on media, but it should be the media that hold them accountable. If I had my way no one involved in news media should be allowed to donate or support any party/politician.

Trump said:



The white house then backed this up by stating White House won't rule out banning press for 'negative' coverage.

You don't have to care about the bottom line of media companies, but taking away this privilege and only allowing those that Trump views favorable on him to stay, will only force news agencies to only publish positive stories, or scare them away from publishing bad ones. This is if not explicit, an implicit threat to news media to be nicer to him. The other problem here is what does Trump consider Fake News. He lies all the time on even minor things. When he's been called out on this, he's accused it of being Fake News.

This was the response by the WH Correspondents Association.

There was swift backlash from the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA). Its president, Margaret Talev, said: “Some may excuse the president’s inflammatory rhetoric about the media, but just because the president does not like news coverage does not make it fake.

“A free press must be able to report on the good, the bad, the momentous and the mundane, without fear or favour. And a president preventing a free and independent press from covering the workings of our republic would be an unconscionable assault on the first amendment.”

 

[Breakage]

At least Eric is enjoying it

Yup. Trump doesn't want to be there, but he doesn't want to look like quitter. I don't keep up with American politics, but I wouldn't be surprised if Trump just does the bare minimum to get through the day as President.

 

[Papa]

It sounds like your sticking point is that Trump hasn't explicitly stated or done so. Just so you know, I actually approve of the regulations on media, but it should be the media that hold them accountable. If I had my way no one involved in news media should be allowed to donate or support any party/politician.

Trump said:



The white house then backed this up by stating White House won't rule out banning press for 'negative' coverage.

You don't have to care about the bottom line of media companies, but taking away this privilege and only allowing those that Trump views favorable on him to stay, will only force news agencies to only publish positive stories, or scare them away from publishing bad ones. This is if not explicit, an implicit threat to news media to be nicer to him. The other problem here is what does Trump consider Fake News. He lies all the time on even minor things. When he's been called out on this, he's accused it of being Fake News.

This was the response by the WH Correspondents Association.

“Be nicer to me” and “stop lying about me” are very different things. I concede that “take away credentials?” is perhaps not as innocent as threatening to take away White House press passes; it all depends on what he means by credentials. It may mean press passes or it may mean something more serious, but with the latter there would be a whole heap of legalities that he would prevent him from just doing it on a whim. People think Trump is a loose cannon just tweeting a moronic stream of consciousness but I think he is quite careful with his words and deliberately vague enough to have plausible deniability.

 

[Red Crayon Aristocrat]

How could he?

The US Government and Military is setup to defend the Constitution with their very lives, it doesn't matter who the President is or what party they're a member of, if they went against the constitution they would be impeached and if they refused they would be kicked out by force if necessary.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

“Be nicer to me” and “stop lying about me” are very different things. I concede that “take away credentials?” is perhaps not as innocent as threatening to take away White House press passes; it all depends on what he means by credentials. It may mean press passes or it may mean something more serious, but with the latter there would be a whole heap of legalities that he would prevent him from just doing it on a whim. People think Trump is a loose cannon just tweeting a moronic stream of consciousness but I think he is quite careful with his words and deliberately vague enough to have plausible deniability.

First off accusing someone of Fake News and the White House response which explicitly stated that news media were lying about him, is the same as accusing a news media of lying. He's accused CNN multiple times, even when they have the audio excerpt of himself stating the thing he's accusing them of lying of. For reasons like that I do think he's an idiot and that what he's stating is a threat.

Hang on though. It sounds like you agree with me now. You think Trump choose his words carefully so that even though it was a threat he can still deny it. So you agree he was threatening the Press? How can you not see that as some sort of attempt at censorship then?

 

[Papa]

First off accusing someone of Fake News and the White House response which explicitly stated that news media were lying about him, is the same as accusing a news media of lying. He's accused CNN multiple times, even when they have the audio excerpt of himself stating the thing he's accusing them of lying of. For reasons like that I do think he's an idiot and that what he's stating is a threat.

Hang on though. It sounds like you agree with me now. You think Trump choose his words carefully so that even though it was a threat he can still deny it. So you agree he was threatening the Press? How can you not see that as some sort of attempt at censorship then?

No, I don’t agree with you that it’s censorship. What I said is that it depends what he means by credentials. He was specifically vague on that to have plausible deniability.

Even in that Guardian article you linked, none of the quotes so much as hint at what you are saying, and the headline and body of the article are entirely at odds with them:

“We’re very committed to a free press and I think we demonstrate that every single day, not only by me being up here and taking your questions as I’m doing right now,” she said.

...

“We are here, we are taking questions, we are doing everything we can to provide regular and constant information to the American people and there is a responsibility by you guys to provide accurate information, and we’re going to continue to try to work with you as I’m doing right here, right now, and as the president did a couple of hours ago.”

Yet the headline reads: “White House won't rule out banning press for 'negative' coverage”. Absolute rubbish.

If you tell a lie about me and I ask you not to, I’m not telling you to praise me. I’m asking you to stop bloody lying.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

No, I don’t agree with you that it’s censorship. What I said is that it depends what he means by credentials. He was specifically vague on that to have plausible deniability.

Even in that Guardian article you linked, none of the quotes so much as hint at what you are saying, and the headline and body of the article are entirely at odds with them:

“We’re very committed to a free press and I think we demonstrate that every single day, not only by me being up here and taking your questions as I’m doing right now,” she said.

...

“We are here, we are taking questions, we are doing everything we can to provide regular and constant information to the American people and there is a responsibility by you guys to provide accurate information, and we’re going to continue to try to work with you as I’m doing right here, right now, and as the president did a couple of hours ago.”

Yet the headline reads: “White House won't rule out banning press for 'negative' coverage”. Absolute rubbish.

If you tell a lie about me and I ask you not to, I’m not telling you to praise me. I’m asking you to stop bloody lying.

So you agree he was threatening the press, just that it's not censorship?

The Bolded part. Your issue with the article is that you don't see the White House stating in response to questions about whether the White House will ban press for negative coverage, that the press needs to stop lying. I know it doesn't state that, but that's the implication. Their response is essentially that they view think Press aren't being accurate so we reserve the right to take away press passes. If that's not their response then why not just say, we aren't going to ban press due to negative coverage? In other words the article headline is very appropriate.

The problem with the rehtoric of telling the press to stop lying is....
a) the President lies all the time. He is a pathological liar, who will lie about pretty much everything.
b) the President has a platform. He can use his influence with the American people to sway opinions. That's why it matters when he says things. No one cares about Bob when he says immigrants are criminals, people assume because the President is in a position of authority, he knows what he's talking about.
c) the Presidents job is not police the Press. The President is there to run the government, the Press are the ones to Police it not they other way round. If he was a private citizen I would have no problem with him attacking the Press, but as President he has a duty to the constitution that he is not following by attacking them.

 

[Papa]

So you agree he was threatening the press, just that it's not censorship?

The Bolded part. Your issue with the article is that you don't see the White House stating in response to questions about whether the White House will ban press for negative coverage, that the press needs to stop lying. I know it doesn't state that, but that's the implication. Their response is essentially that they view think Press aren't being accurate so we reserve the right to take away press passes. If that's not their response then why not just say, we aren't going to ban press due to negative coverage? In other words the article headline is very appropriate.

The problem with the rehtoric of telling the press to stop lying is....
a) the President lies all the time. He is a pathological liar, who will lie about pretty much everything.
b) the President has a platform. He can use his influenced with the American people to sway opinions. That's why it matters when he says things. No one cares about Bob when he says immigrants are criminals, people assume because the President is in a position of authority, he knows what he's talking about.
c) the Presidents job is not police the Press. The President is there to run the government, the Press are the ones to Police it not they other way round. If he was a private citizen I would have no problem with him attacking the Press, but as President he has a duty to the constitution that he is not following by attacking them.

Are you trying really hard to misunderstand what I’m saying? You don’t know that it’s censorship because you don’t know what he meant by credentials. If he takes away their White House press passes, they’re still free to investigate and report on him, they just don’t have it handed to them on a silver platter. They are not censored in this case. If he means something more than just White House press passes: a) good luck to him because that would be an incredibly difficult thing to do legally, and b) we will never know because he was deliberately vague.

I don’t agree with your take and I think you’re extrapolating too far based on your own personal biases. You state that he’s a pathological liar as though that is a demonstrable fact but have not provided any evidence of that. It’s a bold claim so you need to prove it to me.

 

[Alfadawg]

He's 71yrs old. He's not long for this world so when he says he wouldn't mind being president for life, he's just trolling.

Dude will be senile by 75 at the rate he's going

 

[KarneeKarnay]

Are you trying really hard to misunderstand what I’m saying? You don’t know that it’s censorship because you don’t know what he meant by credentials. If he takes away their White House press passes, they’re still free to investigate and report on him, they just don’t have it handed to them on a silver platter. They are not censored in this case. If he means something more than just White House press passes: a) good luck to him because that would be an incredibly difficult thing to do legally, and b) we will never know because he was deliberately vague.

You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Either you think he's an idiot or you are agreeing with me that it was a threat. You can't state he's being purposely vague and then ignore why he's being vague in the first place. Yes or no do you think he was threatening the Press?

You state that he’s a pathological liar as though that is a demonstrable fact but have not provided any evidence of that. It’s a bold claim so you need to prove it to me.

Really? I have to prove Trump is a liar...Even his supporters think he's liar, just that he's playing 4d Chess. But if I have to here ya go.

A list of Trumps Lies
President Trump lied more than 3,000 times in 466 days
PoliFact: Trump Honesty Scoreboard
Trump lies vs your Brain
25 Worst Lies told by Trump in the first 200 days of office
Trumps Biggest lies of 2017
Trump Pathological Liar

I've tried to cast a net on news sources on this, but this is a pretty undisputed fact.

 

[Papa]

You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Either you think he's an idiot or you are agreeing with me that it was a threat. You can't state he's being purposely vague and then ignore why he's being vague in the first place. Yes or no do you think he was threatening the Press?



Really? I have to prove Trump is a liar...Even his supporters think he's liar, just that he's playing 4d Chess. But if I have to here ya go.

A list of Trumps Lies
President Trump lied more than 3,000 times in 466 days
PoliFact: Trump Honesty Scoreboard
Trump lies vs your Brain
25 Worst Lies told by Trump in the first 200 days of office
Trumps Biggest lies of 2017
Trump Pathological Liar

I've tried to cast a net on news sources on this, but this is a pretty undisputed fact.

Threatening the press does not equal censoring them. As has been stated ad nauseum, it depends what he’s threatening them with.

As for the links, there’s a lot to take in so I can’t comment conclusively immediately. I will say that after a quick glance at the NYT article, it seems to contain mostly Buzzfeed and self-references. Some of the things purported as lies I would put in the who fucking cares basket, e.g. who has been on the cover of Time the most, who had the biggest inauguration. I also note that it is sneakily filed under “Opinion” - another criticism shield I’ve noticed media outlets using. This is the problem with allowing journalistic standards to slip - they only have to cry wolf once and moderates like myself are forever suspicious. Anyway, I’ll read more of the links tomorrow.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

Threatening the press does not equal censoring them. As has been stated ad nauseum, it depends what he’s threatening them with.

Would you agree the only real way to threaten a business is attacking it's income?

As for the links, there’s a lot to take in so I can’t comment conclusively immediately. I will say that after a quick glance at the NYT article, it seems to contain mostly Buzzfeed and self-references. Some of the things purported as lies I would put in the who fucking cares basket, e.g. who has been on the cover of Time the most, who had the biggest inauguration. I also note that it is sneakily filed under “Opinion” - another criticism shield I’ve noticed media outlets using. This is the problem with allowing journalistic standards to slip - they only have to cry wolf once and moderates like myself are forever suspicious. Anyway, I’ll read more of the links tomorrow.

I understand that and I would expect you take some time to go through them.

 

[Acerac]

Are you unaware what cult of personality means? Unless you are quoting me to put added emphasis on what I said..

My confusion rose from your use of a period to ask a question. It made it seem less like a question and more like a skeptical statement.

Punctuation can change the meaning of words or sentences.

 

[Deleted member 713885]

Mark my words...his son will be president in the next 10-15 years.

 

[HoodWinked]

Mark my words...his son will be president in the next 10-15 years.

surprise you think that, he's too unlikable and unremarkable, most people think the most likely is Ivanka.

 

[JDB]

surprise you think that he's too unlikable, most people think the most likely is Ivanka.

Apparently just stickin' it to the libs is charismatic enough for millions of people

 

[Papa]

surprise you think that he's too unlikable and unremarkable, most people think the most likely is Ivanka.

Imagine that: first female president named Trump.

 

[JDB]

Imagine that: first female president named Trump.

Nah, she'll lose to Chelsea Clinton after every poll predicts Ivanka has a 99% chance of winning.

 

[Grinchy]

Imagine that: first female president named Trump.

As horrible as that sounds, it would be great for online lunatic comedy.

 

[Papa]

Nah, she'll lose to Chelsea Clinton after every poll predicts Ivanka has a 99% chance of winning.

That would be a one horse race.

 

[bitbydeath]

Donald Trump does a lot of stupid shit, see his Twitter for many many many examples but it honestly doesn't compare to all the crazies coming out of closet on the opposing side.
I shouldn't be surprised though, American Horror Story did warn us.

 

[bucyou]

I don't think anyone is truly concerned with Trump as a Dictator. What they are concerned with is that he certainly acts like one.

- Attacking the press/Threats of Censorship.
- Attacking Freedom of Speech
- Lying to the public *

* = Every President does it, but Trump is a pathological liar about even the most minor shit.

There might be more, but those are the ones that come to mind.

EDIT: Outside of the Presidency, Trump is corrupt through and through. He is above the law, because if he wasn't he'd been arrested 6 times over by now for fraud, money laundering, racketeering, sexual assault, work place discrimination, breach of contract, hiring illegals. The list goes on and on...

91% of press coverage is negative for trump, sure he might sound like a stupid asshole going after nyt/washpo/etc, but he's not sending thugs to break journalists legs or anything, the issue is those who oppose him are too blinded by hate to think logically. Until the government shuts down all the major newspaper websites and print, you have no proof or evidence trump is trying to censor freedom of speech. In fact, there has been many more protests since he's been elected and they were allowed to continue, right?

And your edit looks like you read your post, got mad, and had to add some more. I would ask you if you believe Mueller and his team are in the pocket of Trump, because they have his and the trump organizations financials, so that would take care of any worries you have about the fraud, money laundering, rackeetering, and whatever else you can throw out there without providing anything besides jaded opinion with no basis.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

91% of press coverage is negative for trump, sure he might sound like a stupid asshole going after nyt/washpo/etc, but he's not sending thugs to break journalists legs or anything, the issue is those who oppose him are too blinded by hate to think logically. Until the government shuts down all the major newspaper websites and print, you have no proof or evidence trump is trying to censor freedom of speech. In fact, there has been many more protests since he's been elected and they were allowed to continue, right?

And your edit looks like you read your post, got mad, and had to add some more. I would ask you if you believe Mueller and his team are in the pocket of Trump, because they have his and the trump organizations financials, so that would take care of any worries you have about the fraud, money laundering, rackeetering, and whatever else you can throw out there without providing anything besides jaded opinion with no basis.

You ever wonder if 91% of all press coverage is negative, that it might be due to all the scandals, poor policy choices and lies he's said?

Here is a post I made with links to all the lies he's said recently.

You don't get to have your cake and eat it too. Either you think he's an idiot or you are agreeing with me that it was a threat. You can't state he's being purposely vague and then ignore why he's being vague in the first place. Yes or no do you think he was threatening the Press?



Really? I have to prove Trump is a liar...Even his supporters think he's liar, just that he's playing 4d Chess. But if I have to here ya go.

A list of Trumps Lies
President Trump lied more than 3,000 times in 466 days
PoliFact: Trump Honesty Scoreboard
Trump lies vs your Brain
25 Worst Lies told by Trump in the first 200 days of office
Trumps Biggest lies of 2017
Trump Pathological Liar

I've tried to cast a net on news sources on this, but this is a pretty undisputed fact.

As to the other claims:

Allegations of Trump Money Laundering
Trump Housing Racial Bias
Mafia & Trump Racketeering/MoneyLaundering
How I Intimidated Renters - Trump himself
Sexual Assault Allegations
Trump uses undocumented workers > reports them to ICE when he refuses to pay
Trump breaks contracts and refuses to pay workers
Trump uses charity money to settle his own legal disputers/more

After reading through all this, you still feel like I've been too harsh on Trump, then I want whatever cool aid you've been drinking. This isn't even a comprehensive list of all the despicable things he has done or has been accused of doing.

 

[highrider]

My confusion rose from your use of a period to ask a question. It made it seem less like a question and more like a skeptical statement.

Punctuation can change the meaning of words or sentences.

I’m looking at my original statement, not seeing how you could possibly interpret that as a question.

 

[manfestival]

I was in south america for a little time. I think I understand the difference between a dictator and Trump. There is a pretty significant difference. The easiest example is Maduro getting "reelected" yesterday.

 

[BANGS]

- Attacking the press/Threats of Censorship.
- Attacking Freedom of Speech

He's done no such thing...

 

[Ke0]

Donald is way too dumb to become a dictator. If he did it would prove how terrible of a system of government America has more than anything. And overall it would be a pretty bad look on the American people lol

 

[TheShadowLord]

Would be practically impossible no matter if the president was on the right or on the left.

 

[rokkerkory]

You ever wonder if 91% of all press coverage is negative, that it might be due to all the scandals, poor policy choices and lies he's said?

Here is a post I made with links to all the lies he's said recently.




As to the other claims:

Allegations of Trump Money Laundering
Trump Housing Racial Bias
Mafia & Trump Racketeering/MoneyLaundering
How I Intimidated Renters - Trump himself
Sexual Assault Allegations
Trump uses undocumented workers > reports them to ICE when he refuses to pay
Trump breaks contracts and refuses to pay workers
Trump uses charity money to settle his own legal disputers/more

After reading through all this, you still feel like I've been too harsh on Trump, then I want whatever cool aid you've been drinking. This isn't even a comprehensive list of all the despicable things he has done or has been accused of doing.

This country got exactly the president it deserved.

 

[HStallion]

91% of press coverage is negative for trump, sure he might sound like a stupid asshole going after nyt/washpo/etc, but he's not sending thugs to break journalists legs or anything, the issue is those who oppose him are too blinded by hate to think logically. Until the government shuts down all the major newspaper websites and print, you have no proof or evidence trump is trying to censor freedom of speech. In fact, there has been many more protests since he's been elected and they were allowed to continue, right?

And your edit looks like you read your post, got mad, and had to add some more. I would ask you if you believe Mueller and his team are in the pocket of Trump, because they have his and the trump organizations financials, so that would take care of any worries you have about the fraud, money laundering, rackeetering, and whatever else you can throw out there without providing anything besides jaded opinion with no basis.

You're surprised that Donald Trump is surrounded by negative news? If you'd have lived in the North East of the US you'd have known since the 80's what type of person Trump is and positive is not one of the words that you'd associate him with unless you ate up everything in his Art of the Deal book. This was a man whose image became a walking caricature of corporate hubris, incredible greed, gaudy taste and of course racism to the point his image was parodied in TV and film many times over.

 

[RokkanStoned]

Every time I see Trump speak, I can't shake the feeling that he didn't really expect to become POTUS, but now that he is, he is too proud to back out of it.

This sounds like the premise of an anime or a comedy series. I just don't know which.

 

[KarneeKarnay]

He's done no such thing...

I'll not repeat the arguments on this, because this is only a 2 page thread and some of the posts on this are on this page.

TLDR: Trump threats against the press are an attempt at censorship.

 

[Cato]

I'll not repeat the arguments on this, because this is only a 2 page thread and some of the posts on this are on this page.

TLDR: Trump threats against the press are an attempt at censorship.

Because Trump is the only president ever that has tried to shut out "wrong" media :
http://www.newsweek.com/when-obama-went-war-fox-news-632424

 

[KarneeKarnay]

Because Trump is the only president ever that has tried to shut out "wrong" media :
http://www.newsweek.com/when-obama-went-war-fox-news-632424

What do you think this article contains? At no point does it make reference to Obama threatening Fox News or anyone in hid administration. Instead the article goes into lengths as to why Fox attack on Obama was unjustified and that Turmps administration is built almost entirely on attack journalism. This is all in your article, I'm not sure what you were thinking you'd prove with it?

There are several key distinctions between then and now. Fox News commentators—in particular, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly—frequently maligned Obama and misrepresented his views, often in ways that seemed racially charged. On the converse, Obama didn’t tweet out doctored pro wrestling GIFs or obsessively rail about “fake news” and ratings.

Yet a comparison of Obama’s relationship with Fox News to the near-daily skirmishes between Trump and CNN highlights just how remarkable is Trump’s war on the mainstream media, how far outside the bounds of normal antagonisms between the White House and the men and women charged with covering it.

Obama’s anger at Fox News was justified. In January 2007, Fox & Friends made the false claim that Obama had attended an Islamic school in Indonesia. Two months later, a Democratic debate that was to have been hosted by Fox News was cancelled after the network’s chairman, Roger Ailes, deliberately confused Obama’s name with that of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, telling media executives in a speech, “It’s true that Barack Obama is on the move.”

As far as lowering the office, the right seems to have few qualms for treating press freedom with all the solicitude of a bloated despot in some forlorn post-Soviet backwater.

Unlike presidents before him, Trump doesn’t criticize the press when he feels his policies have been misrepresented or maligned. Attacking the press is the central policy of his administration. In fact, it may be the only one

 

[Cato]

What do you think this article contains? At no point does it make reference to Obama threatening Fox News or anyone in hid administration. Instead the article goes into lengths as to why Fox attack on Obama was unjustified and that Turmps administration is built almost entirely on attack journalism. This is all in your article, I'm not sure what you were thinking you'd prove with it?

I was lazy and didnt do my google-fu proper. Sorry.
I meant to link to something where Obama wanted to ban Fox news from attending the white house press briefings but had to back off that plan when all other media, including CNN, were very vocal and critizised Obama for it.

Sadly I have not seen Fox repay CNN the favor when Trump attacks them :-(

 

[KarneeKarnay]

I was lazy and didnt do my google-fu proper. Sorry.
I meant to link to something where Obama wanted to ban Fox news from attending the white house press briefings but had to back off that plan when all other media, including CNN, were very vocal and critizised Obama for it.

Sadly I have not seen Fox repay CNN the favor when Trump attacks them :-(

Fair enough. If you do find the article I'd like to see it. I've never heard of an attempted ban under Obama, but if there was one I'd like to know.

 

[Cato]

Fair enough. If you do find the article I'd like to see it. I've never heard of an attempted ban under Obama, but if there was one I'd like to know.

There were definitely "tension" between obama and the right wing press, so this conflict between preident and opposition press is nothing new or unique under trump.

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press...ite-house-attacked-excluded-fox-news-channel/
https://townhall.com/columnists/cal...ia-forget-how-obama-treated-fox-news-n2270406
https://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/69765861?access_key=key-1wzpikwzuir39w8uxutg&start_page=52

Yeah he kind of tried, very briefly but had to relent because backlash.

Everything is partisan and at best half-truths, but here we are.
Since both sides agree that there is only problem when the other side does it the outlook is not good for dialing down the partisanship.

(My google-fu is lacking. I can't even find the articles about when a google founder were banging a young, and pretty!, low level manager any more :-( )

 

[womfalcs3]

If the US-Chinese trade (im)balance is sorted out, this would be the biggest accomplishment of any recent president. It would certainly bolster the US economy. We'd be talking at least 100 billion USD per year added to US GDP.

If that happens, Trump's presidency is vindicated. Irrespective of his personal issues.

 

[Vicetrailia]

If the US-Chinese trade (im)balance is sorted out, this would be the biggest accomplishment of any recent president. It would certainly bolster the US economy. We'd be talking at least 100 billion USD per year added to US GDP.

If that happens, Trump's presidency is vindicated. Irrespective of his personal issues.

There are no plans from either country, it's just PR right now. Buy 200 billion more of what? See, it's silly, but IP protections and promoting fairness are what is important.

 

[BANGS]

Trump threats against the press are an attempt at censorship.

Except they're not. 2 pages of bullshit is still just bullshit...