Is he going too far?

Is he going too far?

Sure, these outlets are devoutly anti-Trump but is silencing free speech warranted here?

Other urls found in this thread:

judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/documents-show-obama-white-house-attacked-excluded-fox-news-channel/
youtube.com/watch?v=jq6BFyZj8v0
google.com/amp/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/2/23/14703472/cpac-trump-travel-budget
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

everyone still has their free speech. what a stupid meme.

judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/documents-show-obama-white-house-attacked-excluded-fox-news-channel/

I'm not even really a Trump supporter but I understand why he did it. The big news companies are pretty much national enquirer tier when it comes to Trump.
It's been that way since the moment his campaign began and they kept up the biased shit into his presidency.
I mean there have already been things he's done that I really didn't like such as his cabinet picks largely being utter trash and completely against what his campaign was run on, but I at least want to be mad about things that are actually legitimate and not lies from the left who just can't handle the fact that Hillary was an even shittier candidate than Trump.

>free speech
When they practice it, they came back to the table with the Adults.

Blocking unfettered access to (((news))) outlets that are demonstrably trying to undermine our president isn't an assault on free speech. They are still free to print and broadcast their lies. This is just a big "fuck you," and it's glorious

How is this silencing free speech?

Those privately owned businesses can keep reporting their opinions just as well without hearing the briefings. Its not like they fairly reported what was said when they attended.

Is there a concern that they won't be able to give debate questions to democratic candidates in the next cycle?

This.

I didn't trust the mainstream media before Trump announced his presidency but I still watched it for that kernel of truth they occasionally reported on.

After the elections I realized that we're literally North Korea in terms of propaganda. I don't even know where to start with CNN and NYT. Every single story they run is about Donald Trump. I mean, it's funny the first couple of times, then it gets boring, then annoying, and finally there's a point you can't take it anymore.

I didn't even like Trump that much but this insane media bias has convinced me, instead of him being Literally Hitler, he might not be such a bad guy. I mean I have never seen such an assassination of imagery as I have recently. Even Fox didn't go all out on Obama like these wackos.

I don't know why it even matters. They can still take what fox news records and garble it in their narrative and feed the goys. We will still get the same quality and fidelity of news reporting as when they had full access to the white house.

>silencing free speech
stop this, they're allowed to speak and write whatever they want

...

makes sense when they are doing everything they can to shift public opinion to impeach him.

obvious.

the deck is stacked against trump. I thought people would have shut the fuck up about it now. but theres constant bs noise.

from a pure political standpoint, he really should have waited on the executive order on immigration.

But if there was a president that the media largely supported the same action could have been largely well received by the masses by changing the rhetoric and narrative of the reporting.

Goy do you have any idea what this will do to our share price???

You want that dividend don'tcha?

didn't obongo do the exact same thing to fox?

DELET THIS

>silencing free speech

Please explain how this is happening.

"silencing free speech"

They can write whatever they want, Trump's just not going to give them special access to his briefings that they can use to bump their site traffic. It's a wallet punch and that's all, suppressing free speech would be Trump issuing an EO that said the given outlets were not allowed to publish articles about him.

Not gonna lie, former CNN viewer here. This is fucking hilarious watching CNN crash and burn. but in all seriousness we can't let these guys get the press credentials.

Free speech doesn't mean free reporting. CNN can still report whatever the fuck they want, they just don't get to attend White House functions. Fuck em.

was cnn ever watchable?

litterally hitler u guys impeach now drumf is done this time for sure

is free entry to an event free speech? they can still bash trump till they are blue in the face, dont think any certain group as a right to be there.

No, fuck these (((news))) outlets. But he really should just stop playing with his food and just outright ban CNN as a whole from existence.

How can blacks even compete?

>insert shitty Bleached image.

>Is he going too far?
how many of these threads you going to make before you realize we can tell it's all the same pɹɐʇǝɹ?

>implying that we are dying to fuck black girls.
I'd stick it in a slim bodied black girl (rare) if I was on a dry spell but I wouldn't go around bragging about it.

kek

>HURR DURR TRUMP TWEETED THIS HURR
They don't even ask good questions nowadays

>If they say anything mean about Trump, they deserve to be excluded

Do you understand how freedom of the press works?

Not far enough, idiot.

They're not silenced. Nothing at all is stopping them from reporting anything.

>anything mean

They're being deliberately deceitful in their cover out of pure spite. The press still has freedom, even if every (((major))) outlet isn't included in every single meeting. Obama did side meetings frequently with his preferred outlets.

Hell, Obama imprisoned more journalists than all previous presidents combined. Where were you faggots then.

>silencing free speech warranted here
literally kill yourself. They are not being stopped from publishing anything, they got uninvited to a meeting because they spew bullshit every chance they get.

Also the fact that they can cry about this and support twitter censoring it's users makes them even more disgusting and hypocritical.

>oh no every media outlet on earth wasnt there, what fascism

Do you? Nothing stopped them from reporting.

If trump invited them to a briefing then had them jailed, I'd be with you. But not being invited to something isn't the same as being silenced.

fuck CNN

>Is he going too far?

Not at all, but prepare for media backlash. They are considered the fourth pillar of democracy.
The one that keeps everyone in check. They got corrupt and now it's time to clean them up. It will not be easy but if trump succeeds this will be the sign of traditional media crashing and burning.
If trump succeeds others will try the same. "muh rights" never meant anything, trump is just showing it to them.

>implying the oppressed mooslum didn't accidentally into a Christmas market

he's not silencing them, he just doesn't have to let them attend briefings

From the same day, hours after the crash.

why didn't anyone care when Obama was doing the same thing?

The only reason these outlets were banned was because they published stories critical of the Trump administration.

They're being punished for exercising their freedom
.

>Obama did it so that means its okay

shit like this makes me sick to my stomach, we need another world war to get these fuckers in check

don't be fucking retarded

excluding someone is not the same thing as suppressing someone

>they got uninvited to a meeting because they spew bullshit every chance they get.

this
>talk shit all the time
>"but I am a journalist, literally the most important person on this planet. it cannot have any consequences for me, all these subhumans should be glad I am gracing them with my presence"

how is he preventing them from free speech? you dont have a right to enter someone elses property.

It's almost like Hillary shouldn't have gone against kek and called news outlets that exposed her, "fake news". It's as if shit comes back 10x or something.

>it's a freedom to be invited to a special white house briefing

lolno

i like how its literally the same reporter

The argument is that Drumpf is a big bad dictator who is breaking precedent by banning outlets he doesn't like. When confronted with examples of previous presidents doing the same thing, you can only reply with memes.

Fuck off. The president doesn't have to include every fucking outlet in every briefing. Obama did this, Bush did this, Clinton did this, etc.

Obama actually IMPRISONED journalists who wrote critical pieces against him. There wasn't half as much outrage as these is now.

>wahh trump didn't invite CNN to a press conference my freedom to report lies is being threatened!

When a news organization has lowered itself to the same level as a satire news site like the Onion, there's no point in taking their questions. Stop pretending that they're innocent journalists out to discover the truth like one of your Harry Potter books. They're deliberate misinformation campaigns designed to destroy someone's image.

>It's like deja vu or something:
youtube.com/watch?v=jq6BFyZj8v0

...

FUCKING STOP IT!

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE YOU HAVE TO STOP USING "FAKE NEWS"!

I've been saying for months that CNN and New York Times are fake news sites.

The reason is not partisan, nor does it have to do solely with the content of the stories themselves.

It has to do instead with the fact that they don't have comments sections. Note how CNN and The New York Times cover stories, how much hyperbole there is compared to other outlets - I think you'll find that because they won't be called on it on their own sites, they are a little more "bold" with it.

>Is he going too far?
Hasn't gone far enough. He should definitely keep going and vindicate basically every prediction libtards ever made pre-election.

Weak example. I think you know that though.

But he is not blocking free speech. They can say whatever. They just arent invited to press briefings. Pretty simple. Ya?

>silencing free speech...

WTF I almost like Canada now.

>get your shit pushed in by the alternative media
>make up a new term to slander them
>backfires
>get your shit pushed in even harder by the alternative media
>"reee, stop using that term!"

they can continue to peddle their fake news and they will, just without press access. their free speech hasnt been obstructed in any way.

checked and praised

Now Bannon is co-opting their 'alt-right' meme for his own ends as well. Since the news' narratives are fabricated bullshit anyway he's just rewriting them to whatever he wants and the news has no response.

So huffpo isn't fake news then? Lol

>they are fake news sites because they have no comments sections

huh, quit the leap you made there buddy.

>what is the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition

He's right to some degree. The outlets that don't allow comments are way more bold when it comes to spouting flat out lies, because they don't have to fear that their readers could scroll down and see someone calling them out on it as the top comment.

I mean he gave them a chance and they just keep riding the same wave and lies from the campaign because they ad revenue bucks go down on the spring

They were too busy yukking it up about how great it would be to legalize penis in a 12 y/o girl's locker room.

the first thing i do if i read an article that i find dubious is i go and look for other articles or counter articles. i don't scroll down to the comments section like a fucking giggling schoolboy on youtube because i'm not a fucking idiot.

>you arent allowed in my house cause youre disrespectful
>MY FUCKING FREEDOM OF SPEECH YO

I forgot to say I would do it if I'm taking up even a quarter of my time addressing a readdress to addressing the way I addressed the news would be the final straw

>Is he going too far?
No.

>Sure, these outlets are devoutly anti-Trump but is silencing free speech warranted here?
No speech is being silenced, these news outlets aren't barred from the press conferences just an informal meeting with the press secretary. And on that, fuck these organisations. They have unsalvageably shredded their own reputations, even with access what would they do with it? Probably what they've always done up until now, produce astonishingly incompetent journalism. Boo-fucking-hoo.

>I didn't see it so it didn't happen: the post

Trump is on his way to destroying the free press.Trump is trying to put out there that only he is the source of accurate news and everyone else is fake news. The move today was a baby step in this grand process. Trump is normalizing the silencing of certain news outlets while inviting certain organizations that he likes. He's constantly pushing the envelope further and further. Next thing you know the only news allowed will be controlled by him.

that's nice and all, but most people giggle like a schoolboy and scroll down to the comment section. so your point is literally of no relevance at all to his argument.

I do love how "fake news" came back to bite them.

>silencing free speech

I didn't realize that you are incapable of expressing opinions if you haven't been to the White House. Thank God I took that middle school field trip, otherwise I don't think I would even be capable of posting this message.

Good Fuck the BBC

>Milo Yiannopoulos is trying to convince colleges that hate speech is cool

I believe also that CNN was the outlet where Katy Tur was able to say that Pepe had white nationalist _origins_ despite the fact that the origins would come up #1 in the Google results, which pointed to the Wikipedia article.

There's probably some stuff like that about the New York Times, too.

Just a smoke screen so people pay less attention to his Russian ties.

I can't wait to see what's at the bottom of this smoke stack.

And they deserve it.

We've seen examples of bullshit contradictory stories time and time again from these outlets, and without their precious access, they don't have any valid claims if they decide to twist something.

Everyone tries to counter the argument that similar instances in the past led to news outlets banding together, but they came no where near the level of bullshit they're spewing out at this point.

>Do you understand how freedom of the press works?

Do you? No one is entitled to be at a White House press briefing - it's always been very limited, exclusive access.

They are not forcing these outlets to stop reporting things, or limiting their speech.

Better than the official "News" channel over here

yesterdays top story was a 400k followers instagram battle claiming her ex had a small penis

they don't really have another choice anyway. they are dying, and have been for years. they have significant layoffs, and shitting on Trump is the only thing that brings in people.

they'll die sooner or later, if Trump cuts them off from the source it will just speed up the process a bit

Yep. Really no matter what the outcome the fallout will be huge.

Love the meme transformation

I think the worst is The Daily Beast.

the tax returns, goyim!

totally warranted and not unprecedented.

they don't if the site doesn't have comments. look comments sections on news sites is a relatively recent thing. news sites are there to report the news and not to be a fucking forum for debate under every article. i mean if you want to discuss an article you can always link to it on your favourite forum or imageboard for chinese cartoons. saying that just because a site doesn't allow comments makes it fake news is one hell of a fucking logic leap.

Something you lefty retards don't understand is that your freedom to do something does not free you of the consequences.
You publish bullshit news all the time, you get your pass revoked.
It's not surprising, and not a freedom of press issue in the slightest. And I'd like to see you actually provide an argument that it is.

It's like me saying that because my blog doesn't get a white house press pass my free speech is being suppressed.

It's an absurd argument.

I appreciate you trying user but the cucks in this board won't care. Trump could do literally anything and Sup Forumstards would fall in line. As long Trump keeps pissing off liberals, Sup Forums will gladly take any and all corruption that comes with the Trump administration.

google.com/amp/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/2/23/14703472/cpac-trump-travel-budget

>i go and look for other articles or counter articles
>i don't scroll down to the comments section

Why wouldn't you see if someone else pointed out an obvious falsehood first? Why re-do work that others have done?

Silencing free speech? What free speech is being silenced by those fucking global kike shill cobra entities? Not a dam real shred of intellectual or other mongrel shit worth speech is being hindered by not letting them in. Fuck them, they covered the election like shit, they dont report real news and haven't for nearly 150 years. Now piss off you fucking kike.

obama never let infowars into press conferences. where was the free speech advocates on the left then?

>silencing free speech

what the fuck? they aren't saying shit, they're there to listen, you fucking retard dipshit moron idiot motherfucker.

hypocrisy is not in the liberal dictionary

They have free speech, they're still allowed to talk all the shit they want.

.....But because they did that, they no longer have the PRIVILEGE of attending WH briefings :)