Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44
Thanks Tree46Thanks

Thread: Iowa Judge Fucks Up Freedom of the Press

  1. #11
    Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,995
    Thanks
    650

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by carpe diem View Post
    The fourth estate has been lost and in it's place we have sound piece for all things liberal. Yes, the liberal left that wants authoritarian control...until they don't.
    True. The whole concept of "fourth estate" is that the press will be an additional check and balance on the concentration of power, prevention of which is the entire point of our Constitution. Instead the vast majority of press outlets are partisan to the point of blatant dishonesty, and in the last administration the powers that be'd were doing their best to silence the outlying dissenters. All of you who have ever used the phrase "faux news" while ironically considering yourselves well informed because you watched John Stewart's actual fake news show have played into that effort.
    But for the record, John Stewart was actually a good comedian who understood that being funny is integral to the job description. Trevor Noah on the other hand, or Samantha Bee, or Colbert or multiple other alleged comedians seem to have forgotten that in their quest to be ever more blatantly partisan.
    And that's not trivial; it's another manifestation of the appropriation of the first amendment for partisan purposes, the intent being to impose liberal thought orthodoxy on people who didn't even think they were political.
    Thanks from Madeline

  2. #12
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,908
    Thanks
    30282

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    I don't think that "sealing court records" protects against the publication of records that have already been released.
    Hey @Ian Jeffrey - Can you weigh in on this? If court records are obtained by the press on June 14th, and the records are sealed on June 15th, can the press publish them on June 16th?
    Thanks from Friday13 and jacobfitcher

  3. #13
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    62,481
    Thanks
    31215

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    Hey @Ian Jeffrey - Can you weigh in on this? If court records are obtained by the press on June 14th, and the records are sealed on June 15th, can the press publish them on June 16th?
    I would imagine that once the records are "sealed," it might be legitimate to prevent publication, but I don't think so. Sealing the records means no one can get them, but here the reporter got them legitimately. I would have to review New York Times v. U.S. (the Pentagon Papers case), however, and at the moment I don't have the time. Perhaps later, if I don't forget (it'll be a few hours yet).
    Thanks from Friday13

  4. #14
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    45,908
    Thanks
    30282

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    I would imagine that once the records are "sealed," it might be legitimate to prevent publication, but I don't think so. Sealing the records means no one can get them, but here the reporter got them legitimately. I would have to review New York Times v. U.S. (the Pentagon Papers case), however, and at the moment I don't have the time. Perhaps later, if I don't forget (it'll be a few hours yet).
    Thanks - I'm curious about the answer. Obviously, if records are sealed a year after they're published in a book, the courts can't stop book sales as a result. So "sealing" applies retroactively, there must be a time limit of some sort.

  5. #15
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    49,591
    Thanks
    35356

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    I don't think that "sealing court records" protects against the publication of records that have already been released.
    But I bet the Supreme Court would not rule the same way now.

    All you have to do is look at the The Rehnquist Court. I notice they skip over the fact that Rehnquist started his career blocking blacks from voting.

    https://www.biography.com/people/wil...nquist-9454479
    Last edited by MaryAnne; 16th February 2018 at 12:59 AM.

  6. #16
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    49,591
    Thanks
    35356

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    True. The whole concept of "fourth estate" is that the press will be an additional check and balance on the concentration of power, prevention of which is the entire point of our Constitution. Instead the vast majority of press outlets are partisan to the point of blatant dishonesty, and in the last administration the powers that be'd were doing their best to silence the outlying dissenters. All of you who have ever used the phrase "faux news" while ironically considering yourselves well informed because you watched John Stewart's actual fake news show have played into that effort.
    But for the record, John Stewart was actually a good comedian who understood that being funny is integral to the job description. Trevor Noah on the other hand, or Samantha Bee, or Colbert or multiple other alleged comedians seem to have forgotten that in their quest to be ever more blatantly partisan.
    And that's not trivial; it's another manifestation of the appropriation of the first amendment for partisan purposes, the intent being to impose liberal thought orthodoxy on people who didn't even think they were political.

    I listened to Jon Stewart all the time. Knew it was Satire,not to be taken literally.

    Most,who only listen to Fox News take it as Gospel. I know a lie when I see one, as most normal people do. There is a huge difference between fact and fiction.
    Thanks from Friday13

  7. #17
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    24,525
    Thanks
    20636

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post
    I don't think that "sealing court records" protects against the publication of records that have already been released.
    It doesn't, even in tech, if you do not designate information as confidential and its deemed confidential after publication, it doesn't hold up in court.
    Thanks from Friday13 and Madeline

  8. #18
    Dick with my Buzz...Try DebateDrone's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    35,979
    Thanks
    30652

    From
    SWUSA
    Quote Originally Posted by carpe diem View Post
    The fourth estate has been lost and in it's place we have sound piece for all things liberal. Yes, the liberal left that wants authoritarian control...until they don't.
    What ever your beliefs of liberalism is...does not negate the function of the court. You may want to live in a "free sovereign citizen" world, but the is not the system we were all born into.
    Thanks from Friday13 and Madeline

  9. #19
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    24,525
    Thanks
    20636

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by MaryAnne View Post
    But I bet the Supreme Court would not rule the same way now.

    All you have to do is look at the The Rehnquist Court. I notice they skip ove the fat that Rehnquist started his career blocking blacks from voting.

    https://www.biography.com/people/wil...nquist-9454479
    Rehnquist was the lawyer for the justice department that tried to block GRAHAM and Bradlee from publishing the follow up to the New York Times report on the Pentagon Papers, until every single major newspaper published them also.
    Last edited by PACE; 21st January 2018 at 02:16 AM.
    Thanks from Friday13, MaryAnne and Madeline

  10. #20
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    49,591
    Thanks
    35356

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by PACE View Post
    Rehnquist was the lawyer for the justice department that tried to block GRAHAM and Bradlee from publishing the follow up to the New York Times report on the Pentagon Papers, until every single major newspaper published them also.
    Rehnquist was a right wing thug from the beginning, trying to block blacks from voting! Why do you think the famous Welfare Queens chose him? Concealed bigotry has existed in that party as long as I can remember.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Obama vetting an Iowa Judge for SC
    By OldGaffer in forum Current Events
    Replies: 172
    Last Post: 7th March 2016, 06:47 AM
  2. Iowa Press
    By MaryAnne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11th April 2015, 02:42 AM
  3. So much for freedom of the press in America
    By The Man in forum Current Events
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 14th August 2014, 07:29 AM
  4. Freedom of Press
    By CBaz in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 13th July 2011, 05:16 AM
  5. Georgia accused of press freedom violations
    By North Pole Resident in forum World Politics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12th September 2008, 11:26 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed