Skip to comments.Exclusive: John Cornyn Rips Chuck Schumer's Media 'Shield Law'
Posted on 03/27/2014 5:58:34 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
The number two Republican in the Senate is lambasting a media shield law proposed by New York Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer, potentially imperiling its shot at passage.
This is a bad idea and one whose time has not come, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the Senate minority whip, told Breitbart News in an exclusive interview. Believe me, we will not be rolled over.
Schumers Free Flow of Information Act passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in September, and he recently said he already has the 60 votes needed to pass the bill on the floor. Well get a few more Republicans, not many more, but we have the 60 votes, Schumer told reporters in New York last week.
He's bluffing, Cornyn retorts.
If he had the votes to pass it, it already would have been passed, Cornyn says, adding, This isnt about passing legislation, this is about distracting the publics attention and changing the subject from the failed policies of this administration. I think you could put this in that same category.
Schumer's proposal would exempt a covered journalist from subpoenas and other legal requirements to expose their confidential sources in leak investigations and other areas. Other lawmakers have proposed similar ideas in the past, but the effort gained new momentum after a series of revelations about controversial tactics the Justice Department was using to target journalists.
For instance, the Department of Justice secretly monitored Fox News reporter James Rosen in the course of a leak investigation, even claiming in a court filing he was a subject of investigation himself. In another instance, the government had secretly monitored numerous phone lines used by the Associated Press, including one in the U.S. Capitol.
Cornyn says Schumer's proposal is fatally flawed and may be an unworkable idea altogether.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Don't waste your time. He'll revert to the "old" Cornyn the day after he's re-elected.
Agreed! So why is Breitbart (they’re on our side?!), or at least the article author Boyle, writing such a puff piece?
News organizations are secretly hoping Putin invades Ukraine.
Funny how Marxist dictators always call their countries "Peoples' Republics". Looks like Schumer and the RATs have taken a page from that playbook.
How 20th century. Back then, news creation and consumption was very bimodal. There were a lot of consumers, a few and clearly delineated producers, and and very few people printing newsletters on mimeographs in the gray zone between. Now the difference is blurring because just about anyone can post news reports on the internet. If I were to take the time to attend and report on my city's council and various board meetings I would be doing a more thorough job than the region's newspapers, radio and television. Would I then have press protection or even first amendment freedom of the press according to Schumer? Especially if I have a non-leftist editorial approach? Sorry, Chuckie, freedom of the press is for everyone, not just an anointed few.
Exactly! And we sure don't need Schmuckie's version he can twist since the First Amendment already capably enshrines this freedom of speech right for all!
p.s. Go Flyers!
Appropriate they named it the SHIELD law, since it’s a PROTECTION racket.
Schumer’s a gayer, more nasal, Al Capone.
It shields state-run media from getting raided and shut down by Schumer as long as they play by his rules.
> Other lawmakers have proposed similar ideas in the past, but the effort gained new momentum after a series of revelations about controversial tactics the Justice Department was using to target journalists... secretly monitored Fox News reporter James Rosen in the course of a leak investigation, even claiming in a court filing he was a subject of investigation himself. In another instance, the government had secretly monitored numerous phone lines used by the Associated Press, including one in the U.S. Capitol.
IOW, Schumer doesn’t want to hold hearings ripping Holder a new one for that stuff, but wants to make it look like he’s actually doing something about it. We all know that the only journalists who’d be covered by this law would be approved by the same kind of process used by the IRS to grant tax-exempt status.
Also, Upchuck knows his Demagogic Party is going to lose both houses and the White House, and wants to build in protections for his leaks to various Partisan Media Shills for use in the future. Thanks Servant of the Cross.
Happens every six years, After election, he reverts to the same old RINO he's always been under his sheep's clothing.
The New York Times boys might think this law would reestablishes their 'gate keeper' status... it won't in the long run.
Newspapers fought for free speech for decades...
If Schumer can make case laws ONLY applicable to journalists - ('licensed by the State') here's ONE of the things that could happen: A freeper calls some blowhard democrat a criminal or a liar... and that democrat turns around and sues for slander. The reason that doesn't happen now is because we have the press-fought protection that if someone holds themselves out to the public (becomes a public figure) that they're fair game as far as criticism is concerned.
If we lose first amendment protections, places like FreeRepublic becomes mine fields.... and lawyers will swoop down to shut us up. The same will happen with all speech on the internet - liberal and conservative...