Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-effort-to-stop-publication-of-scathing-book-is-a-break-in-precedent/2018/01/04/057b70ce-f16f-11e7-97bf-bba379b809ab_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpbannon-835pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.282ef5fd09ac

Yeah, free speech is kinda overrated I guess. #MAGA

Looks like Obama will have company then.

Obama's Press Freedom

Is Trump actually pushing this from the vantagepoint of setting government policy, or is he just attempting to sue on the basis of current law?

Don't get me wrong both are sketch as ****, but the former is clearly a much bigger deal.

This is Trump's go-to defense against almost anything that inconveniences him. Historically he always threatens legal action to try to bully his critics and accusers into submission. Seldom does he actually follow through and when he does its with the assurance that few would actually want to pay the legal fees to stand up to him.

Originally posted by snowdragon
Looks like Obama will have company then.

Obama's Press Freedom
Can't read.

Feel free to quote what you think Obama has done that's comparably fcked up

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Is Trump actually pushing this from the vantagepoint of setting government policy, or is he just attempting to sue on the basis of current law?

Don't get me wrong both are sketch as ****, but the former is clearly a much bigger deal.
It's the latter.

That said, I find there to be a double standard policy wise as he's legally protected banks from legal action but is willing to use the law and the power of the presidency vs citizens.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Can't read.

Feel free to quote what you think Obama has done that's comparably fcked up

Obama was no saint when it came to releasing information to the public, HARDLY the most transparent administration.



Source: Press Freedom

"but obama" that's just f*cking brilliant.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
"but obama" that's just f*cking brilliant.

If the point is to paint Trump the villian for his last action regarding the book, the illustration to the previous administration is simply to provide comparison in regards to their behaviors in regards to the op comments on "free speech."

You are welcome.

This was indeed a dumb move by Trump. Streisand effect: learn that shit you chump.

Worst part is like most other shit, this book itself and its claims will have little overall impact on Trump. The media will whine and use it to attack. The book won't get him removed, nor will it get the 25th amendment invoked. Dumb, should have just let people enjoy the book.

Originally posted by snowdragon
If the point is to paint Trump the villian for his last action regarding the book, the illustration to the previous administration is simply to provide comparison in regards to their behaviors in regards to the op comments on "free speech."

You are welcome.

Dude you gotta learn: first you got in the way of their Trump bashing. Then you did so in a way that bashed their golden boy. That is equivalent to if you crucified Jesus in front of a bunch of Christians in this country.

Poor Trump he attacks others but cries foul when it happens to him. He's a child Surtur voted for.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Poor Trump he attacks others but cries foul when it happens to him. He's a child Surtur voted for.

^^Child in body and mind calls others children. Awesome

Originally posted by Surtur
^^Child in body and mind calls others children. Awesome You voted for the dumbest president in US history.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You voted for the dumbest president in US history.



I voted for the guy who defeated the, to quote leftist cucks, "most qualified candidate in history"

Originally posted by Surtur
I voted for the guy who defeated the, to quote leftist cucks, "most qualified candidate in history" You voted for the guy who is semi illiterate. How could you be so stupid ? Jobless, check. Aimless, check. Wants to escape from reality, check. You are one of the poor out there who is just taking up space.

Originally posted by Surtur
I voted for the guy who defeated the, to quote leftist cucks, "most qualified candidate in history"

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-effort-to-stop-publication-of-scathing-book-is-a-break-in-precedent/2018/01/04/057b70ce-f16f-11e7-97bf-bba379b809ab_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_trumpbannon-835pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.282ef5fd09ac

Yeah, free speech is kinda overrated I guess. #MAGA

Blame the lawyers, and the "sue everyone in sight" culture they created.

Originally posted by Surtur
You are someone trump would call a loser. You're poor, you are jobless, you aren't successful by any stretch of the imagination.

Originally posted by cdtm
Blame the lawyers, and the "sue everyone in sight" culture they created.

I blame Trump too for an over reaction. There was no valid reason to do this.

Originally posted by Surtur
I blame Trump too for an over reaction. There was no valid reason to do this. Trump would laugh at someone such as yourself and you champion him. The right would spit on you.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Trump would laugh at someone such as yourself and you champion him. The right would spit on you.

Nobody cares, Trump would call you a tiny little loser lol. Not up for debate.(Again, you see how I use the word correctly? Take notes)

Originally posted by Surtur
Nobody cares, Trump would call you a tiny little loser lol. Not up for debate.(Again, you see how I use the word correctly? Take notes) No, he wouldn't since I unlike you can survive on my own. You're just a vagina who would champion those who despise you. You're on a welfare program. You're a loser. You can work you choose not to aka deadweight.

Originally posted by quanchi112
No, he wouldn't since I unlike you can survive on my own. You're just a vagina who would champion those who despise you. You're on a welfare program. You're a loser. You can work you choose not to aka deadweight.

He would think you're a loser, look at you lol. Too funny you don't even see it, keep posting

Originally posted by Surtur
He would think you're a loser, look at you lol. Too funny you don't even see it, keep posting You are on welfare and can't even work because you're too lazy. He's a jobs president and you won't even work one. You're a loser.

Originally posted by cdtm
Blame the lawyers, and the "sue everyone in sight" culture they created.

/agreed

It has created a sick system that allows the wealthy to walk on the less fortunate using the "law."

Stupid move by Trump to try to block the book. Now more people will just be interested to see why Trump didn't want them to read this book in the first place, basically gave them free advertising.

Originally posted by BackFire
Stupid move by Trump to try to block the book. Now more people will just be interested to see why Trump didn't want them to read this book in the first place, basically gave them free advertising.

They even moved the date the book would be released lol. It released today I think, it was supposed to drop on the 9th.

Smart move. Capitalize on the free attention Trump is giving them.

Originally posted by BackFire
Stupid move by Trump to try to block the book. Now more people will just be interested to see why Trump didn't want them to read this book in the first place, basically gave them free advertising.

Bingo. Though I'd say free advertising and a nod directly from the president that whatever's in the book, is accurate. Who voted for this retard. LOlz.

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo. Though I'd say free advertising and a nod directly from the president that whatever's in the book, is accurate. Who voted for this retard. LOlz.

Except we have Tony Blair coming out to say shit was fabricated in the book, lol. But you go on believing it's all accurate champ.

I've said I wasn't interested in the book, it doesn't matter to me; it's just hilarious seeing Trump and Trumpers shit themselves over it though.

I also figured anger would be the coping mechanism you'd use over this newest Trump blunder. Seems I was correct :0

Lol, as if Blair has an ounce of credibility.

Originally posted by Robtard
I've said I wasn't interested in the book, it doesn't matter to me; it's just hilarious seeing Trump and Trumpers shit themselves over it though.

I also figured anger would be the coping mechanism you'd use over this newest Trump blunder. Seems I was correct :0

Lol do you ever think this thing where you just pretend I'm angry over something will ever get old? Just curious. I don't know who it fools other than the usual suspects.

And you not caring is irrelevant to me, you still felt the need to respond and thus I responded to what you said.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Lol, as if Blair has an ounce of credibility.

It's not like this author does, and he's been accused of this shit in the past too.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Lol, as if Blair has an ounce of credibility.

Also factoring in Surt's well known dislike/distrust of the British and politicians, it's hilarious seeing him go "but Tony Blair said!" as his Trump-defense here.

Originally posted by Robtard
Also factoring in Surt's well known dislike/distrust of the British and politicians, it's hilarious seeing him go "but Tony Blair said!" as his Trump-defense here.

Doesn't mean I dislike every politician there, and I don't recall ever saying anything about Blair. But hey you do you.

TIL: Surtur is a huge Tony Blair fan; thinks he's a standup guy, who knew (even Surtur didn't until today)

Originally posted by Robtard
TIL: Surtur is a huge Tony Blair fan; thinks he's a standup guy, who knew (even Surtur didn't until today)

Lol I'm a huge Tony Blair fan now? Does this mean the folk taking the book as gospel are huge fans of the author?

Originally posted by snowdragon
Obama was no saint when it came to releasing information to the public, HARDLY the most transparent administration.



Source: Press Freedom

Yeah, one didn't want classified information going out, the other used legal power against mean books, there's no equivalency.

Deflection noted.

Originally posted by cdtm
Blame the lawyers, and the "sue everyone in sight" culture they created.
No, we blame the president. as he is the one threatening to use legal action. Why does personal responsibility not apply to the president?

Originally posted by Surtur
Except we have Tony Blair coming out to say shit was fabricated in the book, lol. But you go on believing it's all accurate champ. You mean Tony "There are WMD in Iraq, this war is legal, I'm not a war criminal" Blair? Yeah, super trustworthy.

As far as I know, no-one quoted in the book has accused it of being untrue or of mis-quoting them. Except for Trump obviously. In fact people have admitted they did say those things.

I think thats pretty significant. I'm sure the Trump team must be furiously contacting people to deny the book statements and that if they things were untrue they would be mercilessly doing so. That it stands more or less unchallenged is a testimont to its credibility imo.

Originally posted by Nephthys
As far as I know, no-one quoted in the book has accused it of being untrue or of mis-quoting them. Except for Trump obviously. In fact people have admitted they did say those things.

I think thats pretty significant. I'm sure the Trump team must be furiously contacting people to deny the book statements and that if they things were untrue they would be mercilessly doing so. That it stands more or less unchallenged is a testimont to its credibility imo.

That is probably because the author conducted over 200 hours of recorded interviews in order to write the book.

Trump may be in the habit of denying he has said things which there is recorded evidence of him saying, but most sane and rational people are not.

Looks like Adam bought the hype on the back of the cover.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Yeah, one didn't want classified information going out, the other used legal power against mean books, there's no equivalency.

Deflection noted.

You clearly didn't read everything in the article.

You are expressing that Trump is stifling freedom of speech by exercising his individual rights to pursue legal action.

Obama used his executive powers to stifle communications among other things in the article.

Which one of those has a larger impact on freedom of speech, executive actions as president or individual legal action taken as a citizen.............

No deflection, your lack of comprehension is noted.

No, Rocky's right. It's a laughable deflection. The actions of Obama have literally zero bearing on the conversation at hand. He isn't President. Trump is. And preventing the release of classified information that could put America's national security in jeopardy is not even remotely comparable to the President himself trying to block a book simply because it was critical of him. Can you even imagine how bad of a precedent would be set if he was successful in not only doing that, but also "opening up the libel laws", which he has expressed support for before and reiterated in his recent speech? If you're peddling Obama-Trump false equivalences, then you're abetting a dangerous man setting a precedent which could allow him and even more dangerous men to shut down critical press, and put democracy itself at risk.

And on the topic of whistleblowing and government surveillance, Trump has called the likes of Chelsea Manning a 'traitor', whilst Obama commuted her, and also called for Edward Snowden to be killed. Furthermore, Trump has expressed support for increased powers for intelligence services, including allowing them to torture 'even if it doesn't work', and he constantly demonises the press. Obama may have crossed some lines, but the idea Trump is even remotely better in the realm of press freedom and liberty in general, is snortworthy. He just hasn't been faced with the same intelligence-based scandals that Obama faced. And when he does, his words and actions would suggest a draconian approach that would make Obama look like a child.

Yes it's shitty, but him pursuing legal action via lawyers within the current paradigm of policy is =different from him actually changing policy to lash out at criticism.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yes it's shitty, but him pursuing legal action via lawyers within the current paradigm of policy is =different from him actually changing policy to lash out at criticism. True, but his end intention is to change policy, as he has said publicly on several occasions. And regardless, when a public figure acts in this way, they are shifting the Overton window in a way which could aid Trump or an aspiring tyrant to change the laws in the future. Deflection and apologia aren't appropriate here.

Yeah I'm not disagreeing it's shitty, I'm just not sounding the alarm bells as I would if it were an actual policy change.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yeah I'm not disagreeing it's shitty, I'm just not sounding the alarm bells as I would if it were an actual policy change. Ah okay, understood.

Originally posted by Scribble
You mean Tony "There are WMD in Iraq, this war is legal, I'm not a war criminal" Blair? Yeah, super trustworthy.

Lol and uh, our own intelligence agencies said that too, about the WMD's at least.

Awesome, dipshits will stop trusting BS spewed about Trump from them, correct?

Just kidding, we both know they won't. And even the fact this author has been called out in the past for making shit up? Pshh, something something Trump something something.

Triggered.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Triggered.

What triggered you? Find out Snoke loses another forum fight? Who'd he lose to this time?

Originally posted by snowdragon ]You clearly didn't read everything in the article.

You are expressing that Trump is stifling freedom of speech by exercising his individual rights to pursue legal action.

Obama used his executive powers to stifle communications among other things in the article.

Which one of those has a larger impact on freedom of speech, executive actions as president or individual legal action taken as a citizen.............

No deflection, your lack of comprehension is noted.
I seem to have read the article more thoroughly you did.. Not once did Obama, "stifle communication." What Obama did was take action against those who would release classified info that could possibly undermine the security of the country.

I'm pretty sure that's something presidents are supposed to do, though maybe Trump disagrees given his active support for things like wiki leaks.

Your false equivalency remains laughable.
Originally posted by Emperor DMB ]
I take it you didn't actually read Snowdragon's article?
Originally posted by Emperordmb
Yeah I'm not disagreeing it's shitty, I'm just not sounding the alarm bells as I would if it were an actual policy change.
No, you actually agreed with Lazy Bones' false equivalency and mischaracterization of the events described by his article, and took no issue with him deflecting to Obama as an excuse for Trump's actions. Hence the emoji.

Originally posted by Surtur
What triggered you? Find out Snoke loses another forum fight? Who'd he lose to this time? Your real life is sad. I'm glad you shared enough to me so I definitely know you're a loser.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Your real life is sad. I'm glad you shared enough to me so I definitely know you're a loser.

If you need to believe this because pretend victories online are important to you...you go ahead. I am granting permission to you. What you do with the permission is your choice.

Originally posted by Surtur
If you need to believe this because pretend victories online are important to you...you go ahead. I am granting permission to you. What you do with the permission is your choice. This is a real victory co signed by yourself. You always play the victim and run away like a *****.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This is a real victory co signed by yourself. You always play the victim and run away like a *****.

If you need the pretend victory I will allow you it.

Originally posted by Surtur
If you need the pretend victory I will allow you it. You do nothing all day because you're a waste of space.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You do nothing all day because you're a waste of space.

Again: I will allow it, just ask nicely.

Can't you two take this personal squabble to PM's?
(My response to Snowdragon and DMB was on the previous page.)

Originally posted by Surtur
Again: I will allow it, just ask nicely. You are your brothers cuck.

Interesting, as this topic could have been easily taken to the Trump thread, but alright bro, I won't reply to the sad little tyke, for you. This favor is for you.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I take it you didn't actually read Snowdragon's article?

No, you actually agreed with Lazy Bones' false equivalency and mischaracterization of the events described by his article, and took no issue with him deflecting to Obama as an excuse for Trump's actions. Hence the emoji.
I don't care about anything Obama did, what I care about is whether or not Trump is pursuing action via suing within the current parameters of policy or trying to change policy. I could give less of a shit about what Obama did or deflections to Obama, what this really comes down to for me is that even though I think it's shitty, I'm not sounding the alarm over the President pursuing this issue if he's not crafting policy to do so.

Why don't you stop trying to smear me with attempting to deflect on Obama when I have repeatedly characterized my opinion in the context of what Trump is doing?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I don't care about anything Obama did, what I care about is whether or not Trump is pursuing action via suing within the current parameters of policy or trying to change policy. I could give less of a shit about what Obama did or deflections to Obama, what this really comes down to for me is that even though I think it's shitty, I'm not sounding the alarm over the President pursuing this issue if he's not crafting policy to do so.

That was not the distinction being discussed in the post you gave an emoji to. So none of this is really relevant to my critique.
I didn't realize pointing out the content of posts you imply agreement with was considered "smearing."

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
That was not the distinction being discussed in the post you gave an emoji to. So none of this is really relevant to my critique.
I didn't realize pointing out the content of posts you imply agreement with was considered "smearing."
He was making the distinction in regards to the extent and form of action Trump was taking, ie. suing rather than using presidential policy to do so.

The specific point about Trump suing rather than changing or enacting policy was made in the post I gave a thumbs up to which is essentially my point, though the Obama comparison was also there, which I don't really have any interest agreeing or disagreeing with.

Why don't you get some clarification on some of these things first before flying off the handle as you always do, desperate for a quick chance to give yourself the high ground and assume the worst about your opponent. It's annoying, and not the first time you've made incorrect presumptions about your opponent's stances.

You did clarify your position after initially misrepresenting it, so I don't really see any point to dragging this on longer.

This was rather unnecessary though:

I'm not obligated to seek clarifications when you misrepresent your own intent. If you want to show me clarification, the onus is on yourself, not me.

You have shown me the intent of your post, so we have no further issue, aside from your paranoia about others trying to claim high ground on an online forum.