jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (18 posts)

Will the Editor of the NY Times be jailed for illegally printing 20 yr old Trump

  1. RJ Schwartz profile image92
    RJ Schwartzposted 19 months ago

    Will the Editor of the NY Times be jailed for illegally printing 20 yr old Trump tax returns?

    "The only news here is that the more than 20-year-old alleged tax document was illegally obtained, a further demonstration that the New York Times, like establishment media in general, is an extension of the Clinton Campaign, the Democratic Party and their global special interests,” the Trump campaign said in a statement about the publishing of the documents.


    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/13218415_f260.jpg

  2. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image60
    Dont Taze Me Broposted 19 months ago

    https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13218530_f260.jpg

    If Hillary was found uninditeable by the FBI, who can be found inditeable? That is as long as they are a Democrat, apparently. He'd risk jail? Obviously he doesn't think he is risking jail (he knows he isn't) or why would he say that he would risk jail?

    As you mention the Trump campaign says, "the New York Times, like establishment media in general, is an extension of the Clinton Campaign, the Democratic Party and their global special interests,” the Trump campaign said in a statement about the publishing of the documents. “What is happening now with the FBI and DOJ on Hillary Clinton’s emails and illegal server, including her many lies and her lies to Congress are worse than what took place in the administration of Richard Nixon – and far more illegal.”

    This is the plain truth and it isn't just the Trump campaign that has said it but the media goes out of their way to shill for Hillary like Jester Lester did in the 1st debate, like cutting off guests' mics to protect her. Here you go https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdYRN8Clddw or editing tapes like http://freebeacon.com/culture/katie-cou … cumentary/

    Here is a list of some of the things THE LEFT criticizes Hillary for (with thanks to Mass Southpaw for compiling the authoritative list) :

    Previous opposition to marriage equality
    Previous support for harmful welfare “reform”
    Previous support for harmful 2001 bankruptcy bill
    Support for harmful public education “reform,” including No Child Left Behind
    Support for private prison industry
    Support for continued use of death penalty
    Record of support for “free trade” agreements that encourage outsourcing of U.S. jobs
    Opposition to a subsistence-level minimum wage
    Opposition to aggressive re-regulation of Wall Street
    Appearance of impropriety in accepting large speaking fees from financial corporations
    Vote in favor of Authorization of Use of Military Force in Iraq
    Vote in favor of continued use of cluster bombs overseas
    Inadequate support for human rights, particularly in the Occupied Territories
    Close association with Henry Kissinger
    Uncertain support for meaningful action against climate change

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/02/2 … ong-Choice

    It sounds like the left has a lot of problems with Hillary but notice none of their criticisms of her have anything to do with her lying to the nation, to the UN, to Congress & the world about Benghazi, her email server, deleted emails and compromising our national security. Those things are all quite acceptable to the left who know they can't get anywhere politically without a cadre of lies and liars, secrecy and clandestine operations like an unauthorized email server to hide the truth.

  3. lovemychris profile image64
    lovemychrisposted 19 months ago

    No. Jason chaffets presented a false document in a congressional hearing. Nothing happened to him.i highly doubt we ought to hold newspsper editors to a higher standard than a gvt representative. Do you?

    1. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image60
      Dont Taze Me Broposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      ReallY? What false document did Chaffetz present in what congressional hearing? And what law did he break? Specifics that can be verified pleased, not your usual innuendo which I'll bet is exactly what your statement is.

    2. lovemychris profile image64
      lovemychrisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Planned parenthood hearing. He showed chart said was from pp. It was from an anti abortion group. False information(lie) designed to hurt pp in public hearing which we pay. Gvt rep lying using tax payer money. Illegal? I dont know. Nothing done

    3. RJ Schwartz profile image92
      RJ Schwartzposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      So he showed some facts and the PP people didn't want them seen.......

    4. lovemychris profile image64
      lovemychrisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      It wasnt facts. It was lies. And he tried to pawn it off as the truth. In a public hearing.  Where is his punishment? How about a congresssional investigation on that? Oh i forgot. Its a gvt of by and for republicans.

    5. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image60
      Dont Taze Me Broposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      OK again Leslie making things up, throwing around false accusations,purposely ignoring the facts.Chafaetz presented a chart to a judiciary committee tha tmay have been misleading,not a crime,hardly=to lying to congress in an investigation.

    6. lovemychris profile image64
      lovemychrisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Hmmmm, "may have been misleading" republispeak for LIE

    7. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image60
      Dont Taze Me Broposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      If you were even interested in the truth Leslie you'd be pointing out that here are the liars, your NY Times : http://www.naturalnews.com/055502_New_Y … taxes.html

    8. lovemychris profile image64
      lovemychrisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      I pointed out the liar. Chaffets. And nothing at all happenef to him. And he is running hearings which people are forced to endure. No one is forcing u to read nyt. Chavetts is the gubmint everyone is sick of.

    9. RJ Schwartz profile image92
      RJ Schwartzposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      so how does this connect to a newspaper illegally publishing stolen federal information?

    10. lovemychris profile image64
      lovemychrisposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Both trying to bring ruination by unethical means. If its not illegal to present false documents in front of congress, and pass them off as truth, it should be.

  4. PDXBuys profile image76
    PDXBuysposted 19 months ago

    The media routinely publishes information illegally obtained by Wikileaks.  Have there been prosecutions for this?  I don't think anything obtained illegally should be published but our laws seem to allow it, as long as it is not too much of a danger to national security.

    1. Dont Taze Me Bro profile image60
      Dont Taze Me Broposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      There's a difference between illegally obtaining info&publishing info illegally obtained by another organization.Legal precedent suggests if the publisher has“undisputed participation”in obtaining it the media outlet will be found liable.

    2. RJ Schwartz profile image92
      RJ Schwartzposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Is their a Federal stature regarding reprinting e-mail?  There is legal precedent on publishing someone else's tax returns without permission

    3. tamarawilhite profile image93
      tamarawilhiteposted 19 months agoin reply to this

      Good point, and since Wikileaks affected national security and this is less severe, only the person who leaked it if caught will end up going to jail.

  5. promisem profile image98
    promisemposted 19 months ago

    I understand the person who obtains the documents illegally should be prosecuted. What law does the media violate by publishing those documents?

Closed to reply
 
working