DEAR CNN: Circulation Of FALSE Information To SABOTAGE A Presidency Is A FELONY

a reply to: xuenchen

if this was true.

Then FOX News anchors should all be in prison.

Along with all the other right wing news sites that lambasted Obama for the past 8 years.

It's not a Felony.

The burden of proof is not on me the skeptic.
It is on the claimant of the original claim.

18 U.S. Code § 1038 alone does not constitute a crime, it MUST be in conjunction with :

"chapter 2, 10, 11B, 39, 40, 44, 111, or 113B of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284), or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123(b) of title 49"

Please explain to me how they are committing a felony.

I am pushing you folks towards excellence and doing diligent research in your reporting and ensuring that your thought patterns are well constructed. I expect professionalism from journalists, even those here on ATS.

23 flags (and rising), most people seem to agree with the claim....

But no one knows why?
Say it ain't so ATS!

#journalismisdead

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Lying is still free speech and free speech is not illegal. People should be able to decide for themselves what to believe or not believe without government or authorites getting involved.

Who is going to decide what is true or false and how will it be enforced? I can see it now, Trump deciding what's true and what's false and him being the "Ministry of Truth" and I'll bet my last dollar that people would be more than happy to accept that and like it.

I think the issue presented is not about the 1st Amendment.

But the 1st could be a valid legal challenge.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Yes I am presenting the claim that is authored by somebody else, but I'm not challenging anything either way (yet).

originally posted by: muzzleflash
23 flags (and rising), most people seem to agree with the claim....

But no one knows why?
Say it ain't so ATS!

#journalismisdead

How do "Flags" on a topic make a claim automatically accepted by Members here?

Allah Obama made propaganda against American citizens legal.

Allah this bickering is moot until this change is reversed.

Waste of finger muscles

a reply to: burntheships

We can start with the GOP impeaching Clinton over his affair with that woman but only got him when he lied about it. Meanwhile, the very same GOP'ers pushing for it were also having affairs themselves. Or we can start with their constant attacks on Obama, e.g. The Birther BS. Right Wing media was always attacking Obama trying to find a way to get him out of office & not every attack was at all based in reality. How do you forget this?

a reply to: xuenchen

Fair enough.
In your OP you did cover yourself:

Interesting story here about the possibility that some of the disinfo being thrown around by the MSM might be illegal. The article cites a law that might be relevant.

Possibility, 'might be relevant' being the key words.

If anyone is willing to spend the next hour digging through the law, perhaps this could turn into:
1) "Oh wow it IS illegal!", or
2) "Ahh it seems this doesn't apply after all".

This is a significant problem with our current legal system, no one wants to read it. It's become that repulsive, almost as if it was magnetically charged to push our minds and eyes away.

a reply to: randomthoughts12

Ace in the hole? It wouldn't be an ace if it weren't true. Trump is the embodiment of hypocrisy.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Thank You for interpreting the opening post correctly.



and note this thread is in the "dissecting disinformation" forum.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: muzzleflash
23 flags (and rising), most people seem to agree with the claim....

But no one knows why?
Say it ain't so ATS!

#journalismisdead

How do "Flags" on a topic make a claim automatically accepted by Members here?

They don't.

I actually flag threads I disagree with to generate discussion by getting it seen by others.

My point was that this is being viewed by many many people (each flag represents a much larger population) and yet no one actually seems to have read deeply into it yet to really figure this out.

I didn't mean to come off as attacking you personally because I'm actually attacking the headline:
"DEAR CNN: Circulation Of FALSE Information To SABOTAGE A Presidency Is A FELONY"
which is a definitive claim rather than a speculative musing.

I am also attacking our apathetic culture in general and the culture of journalism today.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: muzzleflash

Thank You for interpreting the opening post correctly.

and note this thread is in the "dissecting disinformation" forum.

I want to be honest and attack myself equally because it's clear that I am also too busy/apathetic to read through all of those chapters and sections of law.

I'm no better than anyone else here.
But I'd like to know if anyone is heroic enough to rise to the challenge though.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Lying is still free speech and free speech is not illegal. People should be able to decide for themselves what to believe or not believe without government or authorites getting involved.

Who is going to decide what is true or false and how will it be enforced? I can see it now, Trump deciding what's true and what's false and him being the "Ministry of Truth" and I'll bet my last dollar that people would be more than happy to accept that and like it.

Its not about conflict of ideas, political views ect. We are talking liable here, slander with criminal intent.

Oh and Trump cant defend himself or talk back? The press wants to keep the stories in the press like Elvis sightings then they are fair game for Trump.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Lying is still free speech and free speech is not illegal.

So is threatening to kill someone, or calling in a bomb threat, both very illegal.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Everything is so convoluted and complicated when it comes to the laws, it's ridiculous and intentional in my opinion.

It's that way so that the average person will not know how to read or understand it, only the people who work for the ones who wrote it can understand it and take advantage of all the loopholes.

You're 100% right, our legal system does not work for the greater good anymore.

a reply to: Swills

None of that has a relation to the law though.
So, are you saying that because some people
were mean to Barack Obama after Hillary
started the birther thing, that CNN can
commit crimes and be excused for it?

Sure seems like that is what your saying!

a reply to: Vector99

And your point is? Until said action is carried out nothing anyone says (lies or otherwise) is illegal or should be punishable.

No one in the media, to my knowledge, has threatened to kill or bomb Trump so I don't think your arguments fits here.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: xuenchen

Sounds like someone needs to appoint a special prosecutor to 'look into' all this CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, WaPo, and TNYT noise.

Maybe some charges could be filed?

I am beginning to think you are right on this. Our government should appoint a special prosecuter to investigate all the articles that MSM has been spewing out of their mouths. We have the right as citizens to get the real news so we can decide if it is real. Not interpretations made by reporters.

a reply to: Logarock

And who is to say they are slandering him instead of telling the truth? What if they're punished for "lying" and then later on down the road it comes out that they were actually telling the truth and exposing things that he has actually done?

If you try to give the government full possession of what is or is not true then you run the risk of one agenda being pushed more than anything else. Do you trust the government or authorities to tell you what is or is not true?