Meme Thread v37: Impeach This

[regmma123]

 

[regmma123]

 

[regmma123]

 

[Lord Coke]

 

[Cherry Brigand]

Explain how Obama earned that peace prize. If he had any character at all he would have turned it down.

 

[Fugazy]

Ed Solomon wrote men in black

This makes me sad, legitimately, that a lot of young people think it's okay to operate in this fashion and treat others in this way. Their parents ought to be ashamed. To shit on someone who is being friendly for their age, race and sex all at once, gross.

 

[Fugazy]

Explain how Obama earned that peace prize. If he had any character at all he would have turned it down.

Hell explain how Trump oppresses the press. Telling people who are shit at their jobs to fuck off isn't oppression.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Hell explain how Trump oppresses the press. Telling people who are shit at their jobs to fuck off isn't oppression.

Yes. It. Is. Reporters have fucking feelings and hurting those feelings is wrong.

 

[GtehMVP]

I don't know if they'd be as all over him as Mike's balls are, but it would be quite the shitstorm

 

[regmma123]

Hell explain how Trump oppresses the press.

“President Donald J. Trump’s frequent threats and hostile acts directed toward journalists and the media are not only offensive and unbecoming of a democratic leader; they are also illegal. In the Trump era, nasty rhetoric, insults and even threats of violence have become an occupational hazard for political reporters and commentators. To be sure, a good portion of President Trump’s verbal attacks on journalists and news organizations might be considered fair game in this bare-knuckled political moment. The president has free-speech rights just like the rest of us, and deeming the news media “the enemy of the American people” and dismissing accurate reports as “fake news” are permissible under the First Amendment.

But the First Amendment does not protect all speech. Although the president can launch verbal tirades against the press, he cannot use the powers of his office to suppress or punish speech he doesn’t like. When President Trump proposes government retribution against news outlets and reporters, his statements cross the line. Worse still, in several cases it appears that the bureaucracy he controls has acted on his demands, making other threats he issues to use his governmental powers more credible. Using the force of the presidency to punish or suppress legally protected speech strikes at the heart of the First Amendment, contravening the Constitution. Presidents are free to mock, needle, evade and even demean the press, but not to use the power of government to stifle it.That is why this week PEN America, an organization of writers that defends free expression, together with the nonprofit organization Protect Democracy and the Yale Law School Media Freedom and Information Clinic, is filing suit in federal court seeking an order directing the president not to use the force of his office to exact reprisals against the press.

While the president’s actions are unprecedented, the law here is established. A 2015 judicial opinion by the Seventh Circuit’s (now-retired) Judge Richard Posner makes clear that “a public official who tries to shut down an avenue of expression of ideas and opinions through actual or threatened imposition of government power or sanction is violating the First Amendment.” Similarly, a 2003 Second Circuit opinion found that the First Amendment was violated when an official’s statements “can reasonably be interpreted as intimating that some form of punishment or adverse regulatory action will follow the failure to accede to the official’s request.’”

https://pen.org/press-clip/trumps-attacks-on-the-press-are-illegal-were-suing/

 

[Witchhunt]

 

[Fugazy]

“President Donald J. Trump’s frequent threats and hostile acts directed toward journalists and the media are not only offensive and unbecoming of a democratic leader; they are also illegal. In the Trump era, nasty rhetoric, insults and even threats of violence have become an occupational hazard for political reporters and commentators. To be sure, a good portion of President Trump’s verbal attacks on journalists and news organizations might be considered fair game in this bare-knuckled political moment. The president has free-speech rights just like the rest of us, and deeming the news media “the enemy of the American people” and dismissing accurate reports as “fake news” are permissible under the First Amendment.

But the First Amendment does not protect all speech. Although the president can launch verbal tirades against the press, he cannot use the powers of his office to suppress or punish speech he doesn’t like. When President Trump proposes government retribution against news outlets and reporters, his statements cross the line. Worse still, in several cases it appears that the bureaucracy he controls has acted on his demands, making other threats he issues to use his governmental powers more credible. Using the force of the presidency to punish or suppress legally protected speech strikes at the heart of the First Amendment, contravening the Constitution. Presidents are free to mock, needle, evade and even demean the press, but not to use the power of government to stifle it.That is why this week PEN America, an organization of writers that defends free expression, together with the nonprofit organization Protect Democracy and the Yale Law School Media Freedom and Information Clinic, is filing suit in federal court seeking an order directing the president not to use the force of his office to exact reprisals against the press.

While the president’s actions are unprecedented, the law here is established. A 2015 judicial opinion by the Seventh Circuit’s (now-retired) Judge Richard Posner makes clear that “a public official who tries to shut down an avenue of expression of ideas and opinions through actual or threatened imposition of government power or sanction is violating the First Amendment.” Similarly, a 2003 Second Circuit opinion found that the First Amendment was violated when an official’s statements “can reasonably be interpreted as intimating that some form of punishment or adverse regulatory action will follow the failure to accede to the official’s request.’”

https://pen.org/press-clip/trumps-attacks-on-the-press-are-illegal-were-suing/

You truly are terrible at this.

 

[GtehMVP]

 

[regmma123]

You truly are terrible at this.

you got me

 

[uppercutbus]

 

[uppercutbus]

 

[uppercutbus]

 

[uppercutbus]

 

[uppercutbus]

 

[uppercutbus]