Posted on 03/28/2019 4:20:29 AM PDT by Kaslin
The truth is that the Kenyan from Indonesia is NOT a natural born citizen and BOTH parties conspired to violate the Constitution.
We are so much farther down the rabbit hole than most can even acknowledge to themselves.
Mueller was their to distract from the dirty deeds committed by his friends. Now his friend Comey is still running at the mouth. These guys are egotistically stupid. Also, Schiff has no credibility and Nadler is a joke. They should both resign from being elected officials. People with common sense will quit watching the media outlets who lied and will still continue to lie.
It all started way back with Williams James: ‘Damn the Absolute.”
It’s been the Liberal creed since then
The left is emotion driven and will cling to their preconceived notions rather than look at any fact. When you believe that Trump is evil and Hillary should rightfully have won the election because she had the “right” ideas on everything, no facts are going to change that belief. Global warming is the same...oil companies are evil, nuclear power will despoil the earth and we have just a few years to save the planet...no facts are needed
All those you mention would most likely be happy to slink off to their cozy retirements they are sure to get, but their puppet master/owners won’t let them. There are many more evil deeds to be done.
It's not merely that TRUTH doesn't matter: TRUTH is held in contempt.When The Truth Doesn’t Matter
Contempt for TRUTH, scorn of TRUTH--TRUTH for its own sake--is the evil most fundamental to the decadence of Western Civilization.
Rush Limbaugh will tell you, based on the New York Times v. Sullivan decision, that the First Amendment makes it impossible for a public figure to sue for libel.The nine SCOTUS justices of the Warren Court who unanimously agreed to Sullivan, some of them writing concurrences which would have gone further, would have agreed. But Justice Scalia asserted that the First Amendment did not modify or restrict libel law. At all.
His point was that freedom of speech and freedom of the press existed, with limits for libel/slander and for obscenity, at the time of the ratification of the First Amendment. And the language of the First Amendment is tailored to make no changes in that.
- Amendment 1:
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Without the highlighted “the” in the amendment, 1A would have abolished restrictions on libel, slander, and pornography and (arguably) it would not have been ratified. But that is not what happened, and that is not what the Constitution is. The Constitution simply does not affect libel law at all.
The Sullivan decision was handed down in 1964, at a time when people took the conceit of “journalistic objectivity” seriously and there was no major organization dedicated to the proposition that journalism was not objective but rather “liberal.” That was several years before Tet and the abandonment of the military by Walter Cronkite. Since then it has become abundantly clear that “objective” journalism, ain’t. It is joined at the hip with the Democrat Party.
I argue that that is the inevitable result of the virtual meeting of journalists known as the wire service - especially the AP, but all of them have the same tendency. As Adam Smith put it, “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.” And since journalism knowingly prospers reporting bad news, journalism claiming objectivity is cynical journalism. But since nobody can be cynical about one thing without being naive about its opposite, journalism’s cynicism towards society is journalism’s naiveté towards the party of big government.
The upshot of the fact that journalism is joined at the hip with the Democrat Party - thus that Democrats don’t need to sue for libel - and the Sullivan conceit that politicians (i.e., Republicans) can’t sue for libel - is the fact that the Democrat Party is entitled to its own facts.
Republicans have to sue for libel, asserting that Sullivan is irrelevant either because it is wrongly decided on its merits, or because “objective journalism” is a monopoly in violation of antitrust law. And SCOTUS must agree, because while the intent of the First Amendment is to “Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred thoughts contend,” the intent of the Democrats/journalists, and effect of Sullivan is precisely the opposite. And if Republicans cannot resort to libel suits, they will be forced into more drastic measures.
To protect their own unique set of facts they will refuse to debate or discuss; even in the scientific realm of climate change, refuse even to acknowledge that there are data to be explained. They manufacture their own “data” by playing computer games as if they were doing something real; and of course their games are rigged to end with them winning, their assumptions unexplored and unexamined.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.