HellToupee
Footballguy
I don’t see it that way at allWow. This is like saying that rape victims are culpable for "dressing provocatively".
I don’t see it that way at allWow. This is like saying that rape victims are culpable for "dressing provocatively".
No but they should be responsible not to spread lies and as their reputation, make stuff up. They’ve been caught time and time againWait, what?
The Boston Globe is culpable for the violent threats against their employees by the guy who was arrested?
What way do you see it?I don’t see it that way at allWow. This is like saying that rape victims are culpable for "dressing provocatively".
Nice tryDescribing your behavior isn’t calling you a name. HTH.
maybe go start a thread to complain and then shut it down again?
Also pathetic.
So are you okay with violent threats against the president for this very reason?No but they should be responsible not to spread lies and as their reputation, make stuff up. They’ve been caught time and time againWait, what?
The Boston Globe is culpable for the violent threats against their employees by the guy who was arrested?
Violence isn’t a solutionSo are you okay with violent threats against the president for this very reason?
To be fair we are talking about violent threats, and if Trump received them. If you are consistent you'd think Trump also would be culpable of threats against himself.Violence isn’t a solutionSo are you okay with violent threats against the president for this very reason?
Now the libs are arresting people who disagree with them in order to silence free speechHmmm...I wonder where he got the enemy of the people line from?
But if someone assassinated Trump for being a liar it would partially be Trump’s fault, right?Violence isn’t a solution
Can you provide an example?No but they should be responsible not to spread lies and as their reputation, make stuff up. They’ve been caught time and time again
You're vsDescribing your behavior isn’t calling you a name. HTH.
maybe go start a thread to complain and then shut it down again?
Also pathetic.
In 2014 they won a Pulitzer based on columnist Kevin Cullen’s lies . I’m not searching out and linking , if I throw a dog a bone I dont want to know if it tastes good or notCan you provide an example?
In 2014 they won a Pulitzer based on columnist Kevin Cullen’s lies . I’m not searching out and linking , if I throw a dog a bone I dont want to know if it tastes good or not
I would've gone with "HT is a vile piece of something or other, probably nothing pleasant" but namecalling is frowned upon so I didn't.I would have went with "Thinking that is horrible".
I think that type of post is above boardI would've gone with "HT is a vile piece of something or other, probably nothing pleasant" but namecalling is frowned upon so I didn't.
sort of misses the point. this case established the actual malice standard for public figures. Trump campaigned on this--wanting to be able to sue the press for negative stories about him.:(
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1097873609006157824
Justice Thomas says SCOTUS should reconsider New York Times v. Sullivan.
That was a case in which police in Montgomery, Ala. complained that an advertisement in the Times made them appear to have been somewhat more racist than was actually the case.
Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1 14m14 minutes ago
NYT v. Sullivan is the landmark Supreme Court case that has defined libel laws in the U.S. for more than 50 years. Clearance Thomas now wants to reconsider that ruling.
From Attorney Ted Boutrous:https://twitter.com/christinawilkie/status/1232747251606401024
The Trump campaign has sued The New York Times for libel over an opinion article. Suit claims the Times must've known the *March 2019* op-ed was false because of what was in the *April 2019* Mueller report.