Is impeachment the new political weapon? (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Joined
    Sep 13, 2019
    Messages
    22
    Reaction score
    10
    Age
    50
    Location
    The Grave
    Offline
    I posted this over on the conservative board but I think it is a good subject. Will this be a new political weapon of the future. Once a president is elected the other side spends its time trying to dig up anything they can that could be a possible impeachment act and force investigations?
     
    We have had magazines convicted of KNOWINGLY receiving stolen "goods" (aka electronic information) where the publisher went to JAIL for 6 months and several others for shorter time.

    Rather a big scandal. They were offered information on celebreties whereabouts by an employer at one of the major creditcard companies, who pulled the information out of the company system. He did not sell "billing" information - ONLY location but that was considered "stolen private digital property" by both the original and the appel courts.
     
    We have had magazines convicted of KNOWINGLY receiving stolen "goods" (aka electronic information) where the publisher went to JAIL for 6 months and several others for shorter time.

    Rather a big scandal. They were offered information on celebreties whereabouts by an employer at one of the major creditcard companies, who pulled the information out of the company system. He did not sell "billing" information - ONLY location but that was considered "stolen private digital property" by both the original and the appel courts.

    I’m guessing there is more to this story. I’m not disagreeing with you, or saying you are spreading falsehoods, I would like to read more about it. (I realize by me asking this, there will be posters criticizing me for whatever the reason is for the day)
     
    I’m guessing there is more to this story. I’m not disagreeing with you, or saying you are spreading falsehoods, I would like to read more about it. (I realize by me asking this, there will be posters criticizing me for whatever the reason is for the day)


    https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se_og_Hør-sagen


    Notice that it is not getting information from sources or paying them that is why they were convicted, but because they KNEW the information was procured illeagally. And you should know by now that I can always back up what I write with multiple sources if necessary :)
     
    https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se_og_Hør-sagen


    Notice that it is not getting information from sources or paying them that is why they were convicted, but because they KNEW the information was procured illeagally. And you should know by now that I can always back up what I write with multiple sources if necessary :)

    can you send in english. Lol

    again I wasnt questioning you, I just like to read things I am not familiar with.
     
    Last edited:
    well, yes, campaigns coordinate with media on normal articles all the time. I don’t see it as the same thing when it is a dump of illegally obtained material.
    I do not know why the legality of the source material would be material. I certainly wouldn't have thought less of a Democratic candidate urging the NYT to publish the Pentagon Papers.

    But we’ve gotten a bit afield of what we were originally talking about. Wikileaks is not a media company in any real sense of the word. In this case they are more like a fence for stolen property, and the Trump campaign’s willingness, even eagerness, to contact them and figure out how to profit from the stolen material seems problematic to me.
    I am not sure what you mean by "media company" but I think Wikileaks is part of the press and worthy of press protection. To say "in this case they are more like a fence for stolen property" can set a dangerous precedent imo. You can say that about more traditional press companies at times.

    My guess is that if Obama had done this, it would be problematic for every single Republican in a Congress.
    I am sure you are right.
     
    We have had magazines convicted of KNOWINGLY receiving stolen "goods" (aka electronic information) where the publisher went to JAIL for 6 months and several others for shorter time.

    Rather a big scandal. They were offered information on celebreties whereabouts by an employer at one of the major creditcard companies, who pulled the information out of the company system. He did not sell "billing" information - ONLY location but that was considered "stolen private digital property" by both the original and the appel courts.
    The USA has actively sought to silence Wikileaks and is (I believe) prosecuting Julian Assange for his part in releasing the information provided by Chelsea Manning.
     
    I do not know why the legality of the source material would be material. I certainly wouldn't have thought less of a Democratic candidate urging the NYT to publish the Pentagon Papers.

    An indictment filed by Robert Mueller, the special counsel, said Russian hackers attempted “for the first time” to break into email accounts used by Clinton’s personal office “after hours” on 27 July 2016.

    That day, at an event in Florida, Trump invited the Russian state to search for the approximately 30,000 emails that Clinton was found to have deleted from her private server on the grounds that they were not related to government work.

    “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

    Well those emails procured by Wiki leaks by the way of russian hackers was done so by request. So basically someone asked that they broke the law.

    Which is similar to the Danish case I cited earlier, when a magazine publishing house, asked someone to break the law to get information on celebraties and their whereabouts.. Not just publishing stolen "goods" but also soliciting the same.
     
    What does being part of the press entail? Is it enough to just have a website and publish stolen property? What makes Wikileaks part of the press?

    I would argue that Wikileaks is no more part of the press than Infowars is. I think journalistic ethics are real and that we should require some sort of minimum ethical commitment from an organization before we consider them part of the press.

    I know this may be problematic in some ways but I do think we can protect freedoms without completely losing standards. At least I hope we can.
     
    What does being part of the press entail? Is it enough to just have a website and publish stolen property? What makes Wikileaks part of the press?

    I would argue that Wikileaks is no more part of the press than Infowars is. I think journalistic ethics are real and that we should require some sort of minimum ethical commitment from an organization before we consider them part of the press.

    I know this may be problematic in some ways but I do think we can protect freedoms without completely losing standards. At least I hope we can.
    What standards are you claiming are violated? Does the NYT and Post not publish information that was obtained illegally or somehow violated the law?
     
    What standards are you claiming are violated? Does the NYT and Post not publish information that was obtained illegally or somehow violated the law?

    If they did the same standard should apply to them. You asked me for an example. Could you please provide the same with one of the above?
    Preferably one where they encouraged the illeagal act ?
     
    What standards are you claiming are violated? Does the NYT and Post not publish information that was obtained illegally or somehow violated the law?

    what I am saying is that what I would consider members of the press have journalistic standards, they monitor themselves for abuses, they strive to report truthfully and hold themselves accountable when they fail. By that I mean transparently accountable. There is a wide gamut of organizations with all types of ideologies that practice these standards. It’s not too much to expect.

    I do not believe Wikileaks does any of that. I think to be considered a member of the press, you need to demonstrate that you have and adhere to certain standards.
     
    what I am saying is that what I would consider members of the press have journalistic standards, they monitor themselves for abuses, they strive to report truthfully and hold themselves accountable when they fail. By that I mean transparently accountable.

    That's a hard sell don't you think? We just had the "Syria nightfire" fiasco and ABC has been far from transparent, only admitting what it absolutely had to in a manner calculated to draw as little attention as possible and with no follow up whatsoever.

    Furthermore, when Project V came out with it's video on CNN, the most common response was something like, "yeah, well we already knew CNN is biased and it's not really journalism anyway."

    And now we know that ABC buried the Epstein story.

    And the NY Times now more resembles the National Inquirer than the paper of record it used to be.
     
    You have a maybe one and a half salient points, yet you cannot resist adding hyperbole.

    I never said they are perfect, just that they strive to be better and hold themselves to standards. We are comparing them to the likes of Wikileaks and Infowars, remember. It’s not hard to see the difference.

    I wouldn’t put any of the tv cable news networks on the same level as the elite news organizations, anyway. So your arguments about CNN, ABC, etc. are sorta off topic. They‘re more entertainment, I think.

    I’m speaking about WSJ, NYT, WaPo, Reuters, AP, etc. These are the types of organizations I’m speaking of that have and demonstrate journalistic ethics and standards.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom