Nicky Haley fires back at the anonymous 'source'

It's her, isn't it?

The user source is bait so DoJ can investigate in the interest of national security.

I said yesterday it was her. This Op-ed makes it ever more clear she is behind it. She was always anti-Trump and wants to become president one day.

Im sorta surprised that no one is going hype crazy that Trump may FISAfuck the shit out of NYT and libs. T-that is the only recourse, right?

Attached: download.png (347x145, 6K)

the implication is that democracy doesn't work -- that no matter who you vote for (even donald trump) -- there will always be a shadowy cabal of unelected officials making the real decisions behind the curtain. alone, on the face, that is far into dangerous territory. even stranger, this op-ed comes hot on the heels of years of the media pushing denials, debunks, and so on of a deep state. what shows up in the times? an op-ed from the self-confessed and identified deep state, or as they apparently prefer to be called, "the steady state."
it's being waved in your faces that democracy is a sham. furthermore, if the political system is broken, then it follows that the american federal government is illegitimate and should be overthrown. surely the times realizes this and if we pursue that assumption, what were their motivations in publishing such a thing? are they agitating for civil war? does the pope shit in the woods? do dc politicians like pizza?

>I said yesterday it was her. This Op-ed makes it ever more clear she is behind it. She was always anti-Trump and wants to become president one day.
I suspected it was her trying to cover her own ass if she gets revealed as source. But i´m not sure it´s her though.
EITHER WAY. This is sedition and trying to mess with the lawful operations of the trump administration. This is making up slander and then running away so nobody can call you on it. And admitting you are trying to undermine the entire administration. .And the stupid comments in the comment section of the article also makes it clear. They are trying to conjur this bullshit up to say where there is smoke there is fire. THIS IS SEDITION. It´s such a clear case of it. This person should be identified immediately and should publically state these things and then resign. It´s ON PURPOSE trying to get people to not trust the trump administration by just pretending everything is out of control and trump doesn´t know what he´s doing etc. And then conveniently refusing to tell who you are that apparently are running the trump administration FOR trump like some kind of deep state operative for your own agendas apparently since you don´t agree with the elected US presidents agendas and promises to those who elected him.
This is precisely why it is illegal. It´s government sabotage. This is not whistleblower stuff. This is pretending to be a whistleblower to avoid slander and sedition laws. See if you publically as part of the trump administration state this. And it´s true. Then that´s fine it´s still sort of seditious and can still be punished. HOWEVER if it isn´t. Then it´s seditious slander and you can actually end up in jail! Do you see why that 'source' if exists wants to remain anonymous?
These MORONS should realize that the US has SEDITION LAWS ON THE BOOKS. That can punish these individuals like this. Just go search US laws on sedition and you find many examples of it being used.

Nikki is the patrician choice
Zina is for plebes

Kinda funny though
>Washington Post
>Amazon
>Jeff Bezos
>CIA
Hmmmm

These people like the far left etc. should realize that the US has sedition laws ON THE BOOKS that has been used very recently against commmunists who like to do these kinds of things! The most classic example of sedition is really to embed yourself in that organization and then tell others that organization is bad eventhough you know it´s not true. In the hopes that others then bring down this organization which you don´t like. THIS IS EXACTLY what this person who wrote the anonymous op-ed admits to doing. Just in this case they are trying to bring down a lawfully operating US government by spreading seditious lies that trump doesn´t know what he´s doing and that other people are basically running the show for him. Which hilariously in attempt to slander trump like that. They are doing exactly the side effect of what you just described. The entire thing these assholes have been doing for the last 1½ year is essentially sedition, and nobody is calling them out on it, which is actually amazing restraint in and of itself.

Fuck that dumb traitor and fuck you and fuck Trump (even though I love him) for hiiring that dumb bitch. I can't wait till he tells her she's fired!

Didn't that one book say she's Trump's mistress

very well said user

But the libshits go in lockstep together. Pocahontas already came out today referencing this "op-ed" as the last straw and now must invoke 25th amendment and impeach. Its just one of many piles of shit thrown at the wall and next week won't change.

>Also i´m fairly certain that their anonymous source doesn´t even exist in the first place. And that it´s just some idiot 'journalist' from the new york times

ya think???
>article is released with 'lodestar' oddly forced into it
>hours later social media campaigns heavily push the idea that the source is vice president pence, who also uses this rare word

Well you don´t think very far do you. It´s someone trying to pretend to be VP Pence. Just as easy as you think it´s pence. Just as easily could someone try to make it out as if it looked like it was pence. Pence and others have already distanced themselves from it and calling to find out who the source is. Just look how stupid you are and how easy you are to trick. JUST THAT EASILY. I don´t even have to have been within a thousand kilometers of the white house to be able to trick you to think that VP pence wrote that op ed.

i hope you're a bot, because if your reading comprehension is this bad you need to redo all your schooling

if the us had a functioning justice department, courts not packed with communists and prosecutors willing to bring a sedition case then they would have reason to be scared. but they aren't because the courts are on their side. wouldn't surprise me if sessions himself wrote it if it weren't a total fabrication.
however, the fact is that the administration has been plagued by leaks (although those seem to have dried up) and is therefore suspicious of itself. what i think is that the times made it up to throw the administration into confusion and paranoia -- some jews are laughing about it right now i'm sure. in doing this, the nyt ed board have laid a clever trap. if they are investigated, they shall reveal it was fabricated and then at that point the op-ed becomes real when the white house looks incompetent and paranoid. they're pulling the nixon tricks out of the bag for this, the fact that nikki is in the washington post of all papers professing her innocence makes it all the more suspicious.

at the least, i believe it to be a conspiracy between government organs and the media to entrap the administration. primer for a palace coup for the left, civil war for the right.

She's still a jew-loving cunt.

>A journalistic article is supposed to have no bias and just objectively report what is going on.
Kek, not in the land of Bernays.
>Yes. It is most likely some stupid 'journalist' for the New York Times who thought.
I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it's Omarosa.
statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2018/09/new-york-times-anonymous-author.html

Don´t talk to me about stupid you fucking retard. You are literally so stupid you think you talk to russian bots if someone doesn´t agree with the psyop and sedition of the US democrat party. Because you are so gullible and naive you might aswell be living on the fucking moon.
Let´s recap.
You are implying that pence wrote the article since it it includes the word lodestar. This is how you suspect that it´s pence that is the anonymous source and not just some journalist. Ok. Well i can easily pretend i am pence if your verification of that is someone using the term lodestar into it. Because pence's speeches you can find on the internet. They are matter of public record. So i can find some phrases he uses so i don´t give myself away by trying to talk like someone else. In this case VP pence. This is how you know that it´s NOT pence. Because it takes 2 seconds to find out it´s him to write like that so why even be anonymous. This is how easy it is to trick you Unbelievably dumb far left americans that somehow always vote for the US democrats.

>the US has sedition laws ON THE BOOKS that has been used very recently against commmunists who like to do these kinds of things
But these are Establishment hacks. Sedition is against the Order, not against the people who happen to occupy it.

>I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it's Omarosa.
That does make sense.

Doesn’t matter to me how many turds they try to throw at this guy.
He could murder someone on cam and I’m still voting for him

Nikki Haley is a globalist mouth piece and a liar.

Attached: zionist-traitor-nikki-haley-with-zionist-traitor-henry-kissinger.jpg (1155x1200, 146K)

>But these are Establishment hacks. Sedition is against the Order, not against the people who happen to occupy it.
No it is very much sedition against the US government, or US military, or other such things is what sedition is. And US has had pretty strong laws about it including laws implemented fairly recently not that many decades ago. You really should look up what it means and what laws US have and the history of it. Oh you didn´t realize this was what you were doing all along?

hey, dipshit we're in agreement
you misread my post
fucking foreigners, if you aren't proficient in english don't be so confident

what do you call those benis envy bitches who'll do literally anything to brove she also has a big benis? that's her

What you don't seem to understand about the USA is that our regent is a piece of paper, not a person. We distinguish between the system and the people who hold positions in it. Parliamentary states may not respect such a distinction, and that's okay.
>And US has had pretty strong laws about it including laws implemented fairly recently not that many decades ago
Yes, and they were enforced only against people who went against the system of government by the ruling class, of the ruling class, for the ruling class. Omarosa and her "colleagues" don't actually oppose the system and its order., in fact, they see themselves as preserving their power as ranking officials of the Executive Branch to have meaningful "input" into its decisions.
May I suggest you learn more about common-law systems and aristocracies before opining quite so confidently?

Try to be clearer in your own language instead of expecting people to be mind readers. Your statement was very ambiguous. Ya think could aswell have meant. Oh really? in this case. Because that´s exactly the narrative that was pushed that VP pence wrote it because it has Iodestar in the anonymous op-ed. To try to say that the closest to trump his vp thinks he´s a bumbling idiot. They were clearly out to try to damage trust in the trump administration as much as possible by lumping that in. But good that we understand eachother now.
Yeah good post.
Weither it is omarosa or not i would put nothing past that charicature of a negro woman. Stabbing trump in the back, recording conversations (which isn´t that technically illegal unless it shows illegality being performed). And then tilting so much after apparently not getting her way/trump not doing what omarosa says. That she betrays him after 15 years of friendship, a friendship she has bragged about. And then goes for some lucrative bookdeal to go and get money from the democrats or anyone else who want to hear her bullshit story.

>Ya think could aswell have meant. Oh really? in this case.
this is my point exactly
foreigners don't know that "ya think" is a common phrase used to mock those who say obvious things

like i said, just be less confident that you understand things fully

>Yes, and they were enforced only against people who went against the system of government by the ruling class, of the ruling class, for the ruling class. Omarosa and her "colleagues" don't actually oppose the system and its order., in fact, they see themselves as preserving their power as ranking officials of the Executive Branch to have meaningful "input" into its decisions.
May I suggest you learn more about common-law systems and aristocracies before opining quite so confidently?
No you may not!
You seem to claim that people like omarosa can´t be charged with sedition. Apparently you are too stupid to look up your own laws in your history that are about sedition and what they say. Here´s an example.
>In 1798, President John Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts, the fourth of which, the Sedition Act or "An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States" set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment for "opposing or resisting any law of the United States" or writing or publishing "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the President or the U.S. Congress (though not the office of the Vice-President, then occupied by Adams' political opponent Thomas Jefferson). This Act of Congress was allowed to expire in 1801 after Jefferson's election to the Presidency
And here´s two others you might find interesting. the tl;dr is that you could not be more wrong.
It´s illegal to interfere with the US government or trying to sabotage it´s operation when it is following the constitution and otherwise doing what it is supposed to be doing. Yes omerosa and others who are involved with this are guilty of sedition. You can´t just shittalk the entire US administration with slanderous sedition for the span of an entire administrations tenure. You can disagree with it all you want but this kind of shit this is called sedition and is entirely different.

Attached: US_sedition_example.png (1338x233, 55K)

This is an opening shot for seditious conspiracy.

Who wrote it matters, so that we can give it the weight it is due. Since it's literally just a disgruntled former employee who's ass-combobulated and now playing for the other team in the Constitutional order, it's nothing.

>it's still 1798
>press freedom hasn't developed AT ALL since then
K
>You can´t just shittalk the entire US administration with slanderous sedition for the span of an entire administrations tenure
This is literally what the entire US political system does. Anything short of advocating the overthrow of the government is today considered fair game.
Lurk more, autist.

The entire point of sedition is on purpose lying and decieving and manipulating to try to instill a lack of trust against an administration or other part of government or military or other things. That is otherwise operating lawfully. You can agree with trump all you want politically. But you can´t like the US democrats call for trump to be thrown out of office because you would rather be in office, and try to manipulate for this to occur. If trump and the administration is otherwise following US law etc. Nor can you try to undermine that trust that way. By claiming anonymously or otherwise that trump is a bumbling idiot etc. To try to get the population to go against him just because you don´t like his policies. This is ALSO sedition. Trump is in office because he got elected. You might not be one of the ones who voted for him. Nobody should care. Enough voted for him that he got elected. He is there to serve the ones who elected him. He should principally not give a fuck about those who want entirely different policies. That´s not what he is there for.

You are just as stupid as omarosa. And you didn´t even read the picture did you so let´s try this again.
>In the Espionage Act of 1917, Section 3 made it a federal crime, punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to willfully spread false news of the American army or navy with an intent to disrupt its operations, to foment mutiny in their ranks, or to obstruct recruiting. This Act of Congress was amended by the Sedition Act of 1918, which expanded the scope of the Espionage Act to any statement criticizing the Government of the United States. These Acts were upheld in 1919 in the case of Schenck v. United States, but they were largely repealed in 1921, leaving laws forbidding foreign espionage in the United States and allowing military censorship of sensitive material.
>In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or "Smith Act", was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government, or to be a member of any organization which does the same. It was often used against Communist Party organizations. This Act was invoked in three major cases, one of which against the Socialist Worker's Party in Minneapolis in 1941, resulting in 23 convictions, and again in what became known as the Great Sedition Trial of 1944 in which a number of pro-Nazi figures were indicted but released when the prosecution ended in a mistrial. Also, a series of trials of 140 leaders of the Communist Party USA also relied upon the terms of the "Smith Act"—beginning in 1949—and lasting until 1957. Although the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the convictions of 11 CPUSA leaders in 1951 in Dennis v. United States, that same Court reversed itself in 1957 in the case of Yates v. United States, by ruling that teaching an ideal, no matter how harmful it may seem, does not equal advocating or planning its implementation. Although unused since at least 1961, the "Smith Act" remains a Federal law.

i've been telling you guise nikki haley is /our poo/

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

Note the phrase "by force." So far, no force, just seditious speech.

Lynching for the NYT then. Suits me.

Nono. saying you disagree with the US administration is one thing and making jokes. But pretending you are part of the government and seditiously claiming the president is unfit to serve like that op-ed that is classic sedition. Calling to overthrow the trump administration and throw them out and put democrats in charge. That´s sedition. Sitting on your news show and fabricating craplike innuendo all day about trump and calling him a bumbling idio, claiming he doesn´t know what he is doing etc. That´s interfering with US government operations. You essentially are spreading anti american propaganda. It´s not only harmful for your own governments operation. It´s also bad for the US's foreign policy and other relations to spread that slander. Because they see this propaganda and thinks it´s true because nobody is trying these people for sedition or slander etc.. You see at the end of the day they just don´t like his policies. This is why they are losing their minds so badly that they are not in control. That they resort to these sorts of things. It kind of shows you however what these people would like to do once THEY are in charge.
This stuff is the same like not following US illegal immigration law. These people it´s just their luck that nobody is going after them. Because the legal framework is there to prosecute these people. It´s not illegal to say what´s going on. It is however illegal to spread fake news. To slander your government when it´s otherwise working lawfully and everything. And to call for literal insurrection when the administration is doing what it is supposed to. Following the US constitution and trying to fullfill the wishes of those who elected it.

Attached: US_sedition_examples2.png (1604x317, 67K)

>but they were largely repealed in 1921
>No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Where's the crime, then?
>overthrowing the United States Government
>is exactly the same as counseling officials to disobeying the President to the extent their offices allow
Need to pee?

>The entire point of sedition is burble burble blah
The only definition of sedition that matters is the one in the United States Code. Find text or gtfo.

I've always advocated going full Charlie Hebdo on the neoliberal bourgeois press. Since they are for most practical intents and purposes the government of the United States, does that make me seditionist? ))

Attached: 1524535448849.jpg (1241x821, 239K)

they fucking ALL are

Attached: satan.jpg (330x550, 63K)

Without seeing the text of her letter, the Laura Berg case is probably the closest to this one, and charges were clearly dropped. Also, note all the acquittals.
Repeating your definition doesn't give it any force in law. You have to go back, Joy Behar.

Only Neocons and Israelis like her. Most remember how she took down the Stars and Bars

Its her. Dumb neocon cunt

You are having a wakeup call now aren´t you. I bet you probably didn´t even know what sedition meant before this conversation.
>I've always advocated going full Charlie Hebdo on the neoliberal bourgeois press. Since they are for most practical intents and purposes the government of the United States, does that make me seditionist? ))
No since it´s not a duly elected part of the government etc.
>The only definition of sedition that matters is the one in the United States Code. Find text or gtfo.
Why don´t you find it yourself you fucking moron. 2 seconds ago you didn´t even know sedition was a thing at all. I was trying to explain to you the concept for you of what sedition means. The concept is the basis for the legislation. You´re like some person with a 10 second timespan that think your laws were recieved on some stone tablet. They are based on the concept of trying to interfere and fuck with or undermine the operation of the US, it´s military its government it´s other internal operations in a saboteurish fashion. Or with lies and slander and manipulation. As long as they are operating as intended. This should not be allowed hence the point. It´s not about not overthrowing a tyrranical government that is just breaking the us constitution and the bill of rights and any laws you have. That´s as american as apple pie.
The problem with a lot of americans is you are bumbling fucking morons who don´t understand even your own laws. Just that picture is brilliant about these idiotic women on that talkshow who got it 180. Largely because the mass immigration that allowed people to enter that think they should live as back in their home country, and they don´t even care about it whatsoever. Just like freedom of speech not even that, they don´t understand even the concept. They think it means they can say everything and people they don´t like can´t say nothing.

um bro, Trump likes her obviously

Bump

You are possibly into something.
Any law anons here: when could the media enter a dangerous territory of legal wrongdoing? Is it even possible? I actually don't think it's possible but, one can hope.

Kys

Attached: goolet .jpg (474x492, 25K)

>Any law anons here: when could the media enter a dangerous territory of legal wrongdoing? Is it even possible? I actually don't think it's possible but, one can hope.
Why wouldn´t it be. I mean if media organizations sit down and spread fake news constantly to try to claim that trump is a bumbling idiot, he´s this and that, he doesn´t know what he´s doing. And it technically isn´t true. That´s seditious libel. And these companies do it on purpose. The irony of it is what these fake news media are afraid of is that they can´t do their propaganda anymore. Sedition laws and the concept that laws should exist to prevent this is PRECISELY to prevent stuff like this from happening. The media should be protected so that it can accurately objectively and without bias report the news so the government can´t just tell the media to tell the public something that isn´t true for example. But it works both ways. Sedition is basically encouraging insurrection on false pretenses because of your own personal motivations that are against the interests of thee elected US government and against the interests of the american people in this case. If the media does this that´s a seditious conspiracy. there´s plenty examples of sedition laws and trials in US history, from the earliest to the even just a few decades ago with the commmunists in the 1940's50's charged with sedition against the US government. But also just even fewer decades ago. It´s just a matter of going there really. These people know what they´re doing, they just don´t call it sedition. But it´s exactly what they are doing. They are trying by hook or by crook to undermine the trump administration and get him out of office. Even pretending to be part of his staff, or trying to turn some of his staff against him etc. whilst spreading seditious lies about that he´s a moron that doesn´t know what he´s doing so that those around him have to do everything so he doesnt blow up the world or something. Like that oped.

>Nickey Haley

Totally would still fuck her. Idc what she does i'd fuck her.

here's how this works, morons: an "anonymous source" writes an op-ed, which is responded to by a "trusted source". that "trusted source" is actually working with the "anonymous source" to build a greater relationship of trust with trump, which is then used to engineer compromising situations with trump and other members of the administration. why do you think the washington post and new york times are the ones getting these articles?

(cont)
Because what does it do when media does this crap? Well it gets people to lack of trust of the administration. Exactly what they want. The media is not supposed to be allowed to propagandize and undermine the government. And really try to decieve the people like this. The government has been WAY TOO SOFT on the US media in this regard. So that the media is now consolidated and doesn´t even objectively and unbiased report the news. No they sit and tell you what to think. And since the average person doesn´t have time to go around and figure out what is going on in the world and eventually have to rely on some kind of news source. Well then these people get literally brainwashed to think in a certain way about whatever. What you think it does to people for 1½ year sit and hear nothing but trump is an idiot trump is bad, trump and wwII trump hate mexicans etc. A president that really is following US law every step of the way. This is the media on the side of the political opposition of the ones who voted for trump and his administration. This is just total sedition. And this should not be allowed. And now they gone so far as try to pit his administration against him. And meanwhile he´s just scrambling to do good to the american people. I mean he has already delivered on his campaign promises a lot of them. US democrats might not like him following US immigration law. But those that voted for him do, and those are the ones he serve along with the US constitution and all of that. It´s treason and sedition. But these words have been removed from the vocabulary of the average people. Ask one of these bumbling idiot people with communist flags.
>do you know what treason and sedition is?
>what dat?
That´s what they´re doing. This situation that is going on is precisely why there was such a thing as treason, and such a thing as sedition etc. Because they fuck up the country whatever it is that way.

The right wing is still on the brink of revolution. Trump is temporary even with two terms.
Don't empower the corrupt machine in the delusion that the left will never return.
The left is trying to kill free speech right? Do all these educated foreigners in this thread pushing to dust off the old sedition laws, have some agenda?

>>seditious libel
We know that but I think this is almost impossible to prove in the court precisely because of what happened during the McCarthy years.
Don't get me wrong, I wish it was easier a little(not too easy though, because the media is important when they report the truth) but it's not as easy as we would like it to be.
There is a need for the media reform, they just don't know it yet. I think that what could happen would be that Dems lose in November and journos will lose their jobs AGAIN and maybe, just maybe they will rethink their strategy. If they won't then it's possible that one or more of them will cross the line where the "inciting violence" or libel or sedition will be easy to prove, because of their emotional reaction, and we will get the reform through the courts.
The bottom line is that something will change in the positive direction(through the market or the courts) because it's clear to me that the media is on a very dangerous collision course. And the enduring collision with the reality won't be pretty.
They never had this little of support from the masses. Basically only Democrats trust media and even they don't really trust them and understand the politics behind it. It's pretty clear when you look into the poll numbers and it's getting worse.

red herring . . . smart move from the right...

She supports the press though

>all?
Do you hear ANYONE ELSE talking about it?
>The left is trying to kill free speech right
yes communists do not accept free speech this is well know. Their regiment is political terrorism and annihilation of their opponents. Not talking with them.
>Do all these educated foreigners in this thread pushing to dust off the old sedition laws, have some agenda?
No not other than to say that if you think sedition means you have no free speech you don´t know what you are talking about. Seditious slander is saboteurish propaganda meant to be dishonest trying to spark false insurrection inside a nation, mess with your government your military or other internal operations. And can be done by outside governments, people who are against your people. Or simply political opponents in this case who are pissed they didn´t get elected. It´s not saying something that is true and letting people think for themselves. It´s saying something they know is not true, with the intent of getting a negative reaction on false pretenses. This is also exactly how communists operate which is a side issue but a relevant one. Which is why both communists back in the 40's and 50's but also i think recently some jihadis have been tried for sedition in the US. Both of these practice political subversion like this.
>red herring . . . smart move from the right...
It´s not a red herring. You don´t know anything that is not manipulation. You gigantic morons live your entire lives conjuring up some boogeyman in your heeads because all you can do is try to lie to get your way. Don´t pretend for a second all people are as disgusting as yourselves.

Well what is obvious is that ofcourse the government should not control the media. But the media should not be able to brainwash the people and steer them towards whatever government or oppinion they want. Because if that is allowed that´s a) sedition b) for point of entry you just have to buy up the media companies and make sure people loyal to you control them. And then just basically start doing it. And that´s what seems to have happened. US acts as if it has free media and it´s the evil government they should be worried about. Nope. The US media has been engaged in full seditionous propaganda against the US government for 1½ years, even in comedy shows, just week after fucking week to try to instill in peoples minds that this is what they should think. and the only thing to come out of it is that the US government has kept doing it´s job. Acheving reasonable results with regards to what they have promised to do for those who elected it. And just having the elected president make some tweets in resentment of it. That´s it. Oh what a boogeyman huh.
It´s not the media people should be busy to protecting here ironically enough. Infact the US media conglomerates should be broken up into fewer independent companies with different stockholders and ceo's etc. AND not just be used for propaganda for those who owns them and their personal political stance. It needs to return to the point that medias only role is objectively report the news. If they can´t do that they should not be allowed to call themselves news media. Because their purpose is simply to try to sway people with their own political bias. Rather than just reporting as is and letting people formulate their own oppinions. I mean even that is subject to some thing because they can still choose just not to cover this at all. But literally sitting spreading propaganda and then acting as if the opposite is the case. That´s amazing.

youtube.com/watch?v=_fHfgU8oMSo The whole point media has rights is for it to be protected is so that it CAN STAY OBJECTIVE and NON BIASED. Not to give it immunity from critique so it can act as propaganda arm for whoever controls it. Or be seditious towards an operating US government that is operating lawfully.
If the media doesn´t want to play ball then it shouldn´t have any special rights or protections. Because then it´s just a free for all of peoples different political biases trying to win eachother over. No need to pretend it´s objective news that you pay for thinking it´s objective news. The recognition of protection from the state is the realization that people NEED news outlets since a person can´t go around chasing stories all day and find out what´s going on by each of themselves. So they need to pay someone to objectively and no bullshit just report what is going on without bias. Then you recieve this information and you make your own decisions upon this. This is what used to be called a journalist. They are NOT SUPPOSED TO TELL YOU WHAT TO THINK.

I agree with everything you said and I'm not trying to argue that it's not needed. It is. What I'm trying to figure out if there is a legal way to actually bring it to court. I don't know enough about the law but what media is doing is pushing me off so I did ask around about libel, and from what I gathered, without a reform in these laws it's practically impossible to bring the media to justice.
The one way it could be done would be through a whistleblower that would admit that there is an intentional smear campaign. Basically the media cam say whatever they want as long as they BELIEVE that it's true. The only way of proving the sedition or libel would be if there was a way to prove that they KNOWINGLY lied. And even that is not enough, because it could go against some specific journo, not the entire organization, most likely.
The situation is bad but I think it's going to get much worse before it gets better.

Well the media telling the truth is important no matter who is in government.
>Basically the media can say whatever they want as long as they BELIEVE that it's true.
It was true because in their mind they believed it. Well i mean that´s like carte blanché for just standing up saying whatever you want without checking anything. You don´t have to check anything in other words. Simply believing it´s true is enough. Well that´s not enough obviously. It should be the medias responsibility to fact check their own stories before they run them. Not everyone elses responsibility to just allow it and them go 'muh freedom of the press n shiiet' everytime someone catches them in something that appears to just be fake news/propaganda. Aswell as there should be changes in retractions and apologies for newspapers. Like some aggregate list where you can go to each news company by year or whatever and see all retractions they have made. Put it into a database.
I mean i don´t principally care if it´s against the government or if it´s against others. We all need the media to be honest. Because we all need honest media and good and honest reporting. To tell FOR EXAMPLE if the government is doing something bad. But not to tell us the government is bad just because the people who own the media have a different political oppinion. There has to be a stop to that, no matter who is in office this is not good.

>Basically the media can say whatever they want as long as they BELIEVE that it's true
Also the problem with this, and they know this very well. Nobody reads retractions. So whatever the original story was, that´s what people now believe is true. They get all the normies like that. It´s like the thing where what is it 98% of people don´t go further than 5 pages down in a google search or whatever. So technically you can hide a lot of shit algorithmically. You just don´t have the fucking time to go through newspapers and fact check everything. You expect news organizations to deliver the facts to you when you read it the first time about whatever they are reporting on. Oh and i like how the newspapers come up with independent fact checkers. Yeah like snopes? 2 degenerates in a basement with total political bias? That´ll fix everything. how about your own fucking journalists do their own fucking job and fact check. You know kind of like what people pay your company for? That´s what i´d say. Geez.

>The user source is bait so DoJ can investigate in the interest of national security.

Pretty much.

carte blanche, without any accent whatsoever

I completely agree with you and so far there is no legal way to force them to be more truthful, not in the US at least.
The laws on this subject are super subjective.
Basically if you are media you can lie your ass off and then lie that you didn't lie and you are all good. Seriously. That's not a good law. It looks like the freedom of speech that media enjoys is larger than the same right that is granted to a regular citizenry. One good thing though is that anyone can call themselves a journalist too. The problem of course is that companies like Zerogedge for example can be smeared as "fake news" by the establishment media because they don't have the "traditional of writing for decades.
They lie and create a hurtful propaganda and there is nothing legally that we can do. We can only chip at their reputation, which, actually is working recently.

Yeah and ironically. That was the opposite of the point of the whole thing. The point was that the media is protected from primarily the government. But essentially from other influence that would prevent it from factually, accurately objectively and unbiased reporting of whatever the situation was. So that people could read that and then now they were aware of such going ons. It was never meant to be able to just lie and get away with it. I mean that wasn´t the point. I guess that was the loophole that they didn´t expect the press to just start lying their ass off, telling people what to think instead of informing people. And slightly skewing things on purpose for some kind of private or other agenda. But that´s the problem with giving immunities. It can be abused if you don´t finetune the conditions of the immunity very carefully.

bump

>Nikki Haley
>WaPo
Gee, how fucking convenient that she gets an op-ed in one the screechiest of the screeching anti-Trump media. It may or may not have been her but she's probably part of this group. Shit it may be her. The writer was almost certainly a woman.