Redpill me on the media ban. Is it constitutional? Are people willing to support ot for fear of fake news?

Redpill me on the media ban. Is it constitutional? Are people willing to support ot for fear of fake news?

>wake up
>still don't have an IRL Asuka gf

asuka is shit

misato is best girl

Red Panels sucks dick, where are the jokes?

no joke in that misato is best

Wasnt a problem when Lincoln did it.

Trump didnt allow large conglomerate global news networks to report on him, because he knew they were going to ask him shit to make him look bad, it's not unconstitutional,

>Muslim ban
>media ban

take note how neither was a ban and neither targeted Muslims or the media

I dunno faggot is it constitutional to not allow the dailystormer in ?

No, Yui is the best girl

When a maple syrup fag understands the constitution better than a burger eating OP

>implying

I don't see what the problem is. They can just re-report from the outlets that were there. They do that all the time anyway. Why do you think headlines and content are always the same just with different journalist names on them.

Holy shit I loved that fucking game

It was a Muslim ban but I don't see anyone actually complaining, only bleeding hearts.

They are just mad because they can no longer twist the truth.

>It was a Muslim ban

>constitutional
it has fuck all to do with the constitution, there is no amendment that gives the press the right to be anywhere they please.
That is why its called a press PASS.
It is the prerogative of the president to have whom he wants there, hence why Obama also had the choice to not have the likes of Infowars there.

no

is constitutional that media twist the news?
is constitutional that media insinuate to kill president?

I don't see why they need to be there. They can just use those anonymous sources they're so fond of

It's completely constitutional. The president is not obligated to provide a platform for the media to mock him, although he still doesn't have the power to censor them on their own property.

>Is it constitutional?

Christ, what the fuck. OP, analyze the situation, it's very basic.

It's not a free speech thing. It would be if Trump used government power to completely shut down CNN, MSNBC, NYT, LAT, etc. But that's not the case. They're free to rant, rave, and generate fake news. They're just no longer allowed in the press briefings because they're shitters.

Media access to government was never a matter addressed in the founding documents. The right to free press does not equate to an obligation to host hostile media and provide access.

In the past, before media consolidation, a careful balance was struck between the government and press. A sort of checks and balances. Modern media expects to be subsidized and used as a propaganda tool.

The issue is that the media bet on the wrong party. Their efficacy was proven to be low, so why would this administration bow to a weak and invalid form of coercion that is also proven hostile?