Replies

our traitorous press needs to be called out every time they repeat a CCP talking point.

“called out” by whom???
I’ll tell you how ~~the press~~ the journalism cartel has to be “called out.” It must be sued into oblivion.

Q:wasn’t Sullivan unanimous, and doesn’t NY Times v. Sullivan prevent that?

Yes - unanimous by the Warren Court. And no - in the sense that Sullivan is bad law.
Sullivan justified itself with the claim that
". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment” - Wm. Brennan
That sounds good, but on close inspection it is poppycock. As of 1963, no court had held that the First Amendment affected libel law - at all. Just as no court has held that pornography restriction was affected by the First Amendment.
And, to switch gears with a ludicrous comparison, no one in or out of a court has ever suggested that the RKBA protected by 2A affected laws against armed assault or murder.
The reason is that “the” freedom of the press - freedom as it existed in 1788 was noncontroversial, and controversy was precisely what the Federalists who created the Bill of Rights were desperate to delegitimate (they had won ratification of the Constitution only by promising the addition of a bill of rights to the Constitution by amendment). Freedom from armed assault on one’s person was a right, and freedom from “armed slander” (a.k.a., libel) was a right as well. Those rights weren’t “enumerated,” because no tyrant had ever claimed the right to suppress them. They fall under the Ninth Amendment,
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
The above rationale (minus the 2A reference) was voiced by Antonin Scalia.
In addition, the wire services are continual virtual meetings of all major journalists and
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations (1776)
From that alone it is naive to assume that wire service journalism is not a cartel. What does that cartel do? It defines “objectivity” as “the negative perspective of the ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ press. It also defines “liberal” and “progressive” as meaning the same as their definition of “objective” - but require that it be used only to fellow travelers, never to journalists in the cartel. “Liberals” go along and get along with the cartel, and thus never are libeled. So Sullivan enables the cartel to libel conservatives without fear of libel judgment.
So the way to “call out the media” is to sue the wire services and their members/subscribers for antitrust violations and for systematic libel of “conservatives.” The Warren Court no longer sits, and a majority of its justices knows that what I’ve said above is true. SUE!