If Trump collusion is proven, should "conservative" media be prosecuted?

Here on ATS, more than one member has suggested that the "liberal media" be "punished for their election tampering," or even be charged with treason! Some have suggested that the evil force behind the disinformation be arrested or taken "dead or alive." The worm is turning, and it is beginning to look like several people close to President Trump are going to be charged with crimes that can be construed as treasonous. (Acting as an undeclared agent of a foreign power, accepting bribes from a foreign power to influence American policy, conducting secret meetings with foreign agents, etc.) If these charges are true, then certain media outlets have aided and abetted this collusion by not reporting or denying the facts. Others have actually manufactured fictions designed to influence public opinion, thus actively assisting a hostile foreign power undermine America's political process.

How do the members who believed that the "left wing" media should be held accountable feel about applying the same standards to the "right wing" media, especially given that they may have assisted actual treason? (For the record, I believe strongly in the First Amendment. As a "liberal," I believe that the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even America's enemies. It is up to we, the people, to educate ourselves and apply critical thinking to evaluate what we read, see, or hear. False propaganda cannot work on a populace that knows how to discern the truth. Of course, it is up to individual media and social platforms to determine what sort of speech they will allow, this is the "flip side" of that Amendment. No-one should be forced to express something they do not believe is true, helpful, or necessary.)

So what do you think, ATS? If the right wing media and blogosphere have aided and abetted treason, should they be punished? Sued? Lose their broadcast license? Be banned from media platforms? I have intentionally posted in this forum to encourage thoughtful responses.

originally posted by: JinMI
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

[snipped]
Hypothetically, if it turns out that Team Trump is proven to have been colluding with a foreign power, do you think "conservative" media should be held accountable?

Trump is going to demolish both sides anyways. The corruption runs very deep and he is sick of it. I'm all up for it though. D.C. needs a purge and i can't wait to watch the MSM squirm and try to apologize for all the anti-trump propaganda to avoid law suits.

Trump never colluded with Russia. Mark my words. It's gonna come out and a lot of people are going to feel really stupid.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Trump never colluded with Russia. Mark my words. It's gonna come out and a lot of people are going to feel really stupid.

The question is not whether or not collusion actually happened, the question is whether media can be held accountable for the way they may or may not have aided in the hypothetical collusion.

Well, they have been trying to find collusion for months now and nothing out of the ordinary other than normal business transactions of a businessman has shown up. I would say more that if it is found he is not colluding, the news media that is spreading misappropriate information to try to get him impeached should be disbanded. Just because most of MSM is doing it does not mean it is right. This twisting of things by the Media has to stop. On both sides.

Let's start a list of top "Conservative" media stories that would be "suspected".

Fill inz ze blanksz

Disbanded and punished for asking for proof beyond "anonymous sources" and "memos read over the phone"?

I don't think that's anything more than asking for due diligence.

a reply to: ketsuko

Disbanded and punished for asking for proof beyond "anonymous sources" and "memos read over the phone"?

I don't think that's anything more than asking for due diligence.

Journalists have resources that most people do not have. They can confirm "anonymous sources" through back channels. Since no serious publication would risk losing their credibility by printing a story without doing their due diligence, one can assume that the stories, as reported, have substance behind them. If a publication takes an editorial stance that tries to deny or minimize the story after using their back channels to confirm it, that becomes collusion, does it not?

Even the Wall Street Journal, the conservative organ of America's capitalist establishment has run editorials confirming that the stories about chaos in the White House are genuine leaks, not rumors or fictions. The denialism one sees online is clearly an attempt to cover up what is going on.

a reply to: DJW001

Even when story after story has said openly that they could not verify the memos?

I have no doubt they are getting leaks, but they don't seem very interested in independently substantiating their leaks to verify.

It's a giant gossip mill.

a reply to: DJW001

Not sure why you feel the need to split the media into liberal and conservative - any media outlet that has colluded to interfere in free and fair elections and/or pushed fake news/false information/hoaxes should be hammered so all that fall into that category should be targeted.

Those that commit crimes should be held responsible so if team-Trump has colluded & committed crimes then team-Trump should be prosecuted and by team-Trump I mean any and all who were in on the act with team-Trump - not 3rd party independent commentators, unless those 3rd party commentators are part of team-Trump.

Now, substitute 'team-Trump' for 'team-Hillary' and re-read.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander - if an illegal act has been committed then prosecute and if necessary punish - this is the law and it is totally irrelevant what political persuasion you have when exercising freedoms and rights under that law (The Constitution)

Interesting.
The same people that think that it would be impossible to win a case against Hillary Clinton for improperly handling of classified information believe that there is a Comey memo.

There is no lack of evidence against Hillary.

There is zero evidence that the Comey memo even exists.

a reply to: DJW001

For starters there was no collusion.

With that said point out the law Trump would have violated if he colluded with Russia. If you dont want to look I can help you out - there is no law for collusion.

a reply to: xuenchen

Let's start a list of top "Conservative" media stories that would be "suspected".

Fill inz ze blanksz

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Do I need to continue?

a reply to: butcherguy

Half an hour in and the usual suspects have turned up to deny that any collusion has taken place. That is not the subject of the OP; please read it all the way through. It is about the First Amendment and journalistic responsibility.

a reply to: DJW001

Its not the fault of the Media if members of Trump's Team is found to have participated in illegal acts, none you mentioned are considered treason by the way. However we can prove collusion of the media and the DNC without a doubt. Should those organizations be prosecuted ? It was the media who provided questions to one candidate in advance of a debate.

This same media organization also allowed one candidate to edit news stories before they appeared. The media has widely reported on the allegations against the President so not sure what the beef is. By the way, you should look up the definition of treason just so you are aware of its meaning before you throw it around, basically it is the murder of the sovereign of a country or overthrow of the country, President Obama is still alive and President Trump was elected by the people.

trea·son [ˈtrēzən] NOUN the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government: "they were convicted of treason" synonyms: treachery · disloyalty · betrayal · faithlessness · sedition · subversion · mutiny · rebellion · high treason · lèse-majesté · apostasy · perfidy the action of betraying someone or something: "doubt is the ultimate treason against faith" synonyms: treachery · disloyalty · betrayal · faithlessness · sedition · subversion · mutiny · rebellion · high treason · lèse-majesté · apostasy · perfidy historical the crime of murdering someone to whom the murderer owed allegiance, such as a master or husband.

a reply to: DJW001

One side is pushing an agenda, the other questioning it. There is a really big #ing difference.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Do you think that newspapers and other media should be punished by the government if they knowingly pass on false news?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: butcherguy

Half an hour in and the usual suspects have turned up to deny that any collusion has taken place. That is not the subject of the OP; please read it all the way through. It is about the First Amendment and journalistic responsibility.

Denying collusion? Or wanting to see the proof before I make up my mind one way or the other?

Btw, your OP is not about collusion but about punishing conservative sources for skepticism.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Do you think that newspapers and other media should be punished by the government if they knowingly pass on false news?

Do you? Where are the memos?