February 16, 2017
These people are going off the rails.
Members of the mainstream media were left fuming this afternoon after President Trump refused to call on any of their organizations for the third straight press conference.
Yet many of these same news organizations have likened Trump to the Taliban and Adolf Hitler, floated false rumors about his use of a Russian prostitute, and accused his administration of being pro-slavery.
After Trump avoided calling on MSNBC during today’s presser with Benjamin Netanyahu, MSNBC’s Peter Alexander complained that the conservative journalists he did call on didn’t ask “real questions” like he would have.
“What was striking,” Alexander said, was that “President Trump, again, called on a series of more conservative leaning news organizations which didn’t allow for any real questions, trying to zero in on this issue of Mike Flynn, the now former national security advisor.”
On Trump’s Inauguration Day, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow likened Trump’s election to “Hitler’s rise.” Her colleague Chris Matthews described Trump’s inaugural address as “Hitlerian.” Matthews also mocked Trump’s family, likening them to the Russian imperial family, the Romanovs. He’s so fond of this metaphor he now uses it all the time.
That was particularly ominous.
We know (((what happened))) to the Romanovs.
CNN reporters were likewise angry at not being called on during today’s Trump presser.
“In the last three news conferences, Wolf, all of the questions to the American news media have been handled by conservative press, and I think, Wolf, there’s no other way to describe it but the fix is in,” CNN’s Jim Acosta vented during a post-press conference interview with Wolf Blitzer. “This White House, this president does not want to answer questions, critical questions, about his associates, his aides’ contacts with the Russians during the course of that campaign just as his national security advisor is being run out of this White House on a rail.”
Why might Trump be ignoring CNN?
Trump himself explained his frustration in an earlier press conference, when he noted that CNN ran a report about a rumor — since discredited — that he had used the services of a prostitute during a trip to Moscow. Trump even complimented The New York Times for passing on the story. CNN has since stuck by its decision to publish the uncorroborated report.
ABC’s Matthew Dowd went so far as to claim today that Trump is “shutting down” the First Amendment by not calling on liberal media outlets during these press conferences.
“Well, I was struck by — when you look at this, this is two democracies, two important democracies in the world and basically the President of the United States is shutting down the part of the First Amendment by not taking questions that are going to be any way antagonistic in this,” Dowd said.
What might Trump have against ABC? Well, Dowd himself has accused Trump of pushing legislation that plays to the racial “fears” of his base. On ABC’s political show, “The View,” hosts have likened Trump to the Taliban, claimed his administration wants to bring back slavery, and said his approach to the media mirrors a dictatorship.
Calling it an attack on the First Amendment is objectively retarded.
There is no part of the First Amendment that says the President has to call on specific journalists at press conferences. That is absolutely nonsensical.
Here is the First Amendment, just so we’re all clear on this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
They have their freedom of speech.
They have their freedom of press.
They don’t have the freedom to force the President to answer their snake questions so they can twist his words for their fake news hoaxes.
You know what does violate the First Amendment?
The way the SPLC and ADL have targeted the finances and the webhosting of this website, dailystormer.com. The fact that the government allows for webhosts to be non-objective in their choosing of what political content to host, and that they respond to political action organizations with the stated goal of shutting down the free speech of political opponents, is clearly an abridgment of our freedom of speech and freedom of press.
The webhosting aspect is extremely straightforward. The financial aspect – the way my PayPal, credit card processors, etc. have been shut down, along with my advertisement – is less straightforward, but as it is a part of a conspiracy to silence me, I think it can definitely be argued that it is a violation of my Constitutional rights.
This is something we are going to be looking into. We may be able to take this all the way to the Supreme Court.
Any lawyers who want in on this can contact me.