Trump never denied it happened. Therefore, it did.
You can search his Twitter archive here.
That’s a meaningless and foolish definition. Of course I don’t “respect the right of others to be wrong.” What kind of right is that, even, and what would it look like?
Other people may say dumb shit and do dumb shit. If they’re not hurting other people with the dumb shit they do or say, more power to 'em. But if they are hurting other people, I see no reason to put up with their nonsense.
It wasn’t just “some point”, he was the anchor for 24 years.
Even if you’re right (and you’ve provided no such cite that he’s a “nutjob”), so what? That says nothing about Lesley Stahl. If you want to make a point with evidence, then put some effort into it – show with cites why we shouldn’t trust Stahl’s statement.
There is a fundamental philosophical difference between the point of view that a government can compel custom content vs. discrimination from a business that makes a standard burger with or without a sky screamer’s booger.
We should TOTALLY relitigate that case, and whether choosing from a menu of cake options is like or different from choosing from a menu of dinner options. That sounds productive and useful.
A-ha! So you ADMIT that everything the Trump Administration does is inherently not credible!
CBS hired, and employed for 24 years, an obvious nutjob. Why should we trust Ms. Stahl? Or the network in general?
I didn’t bring up the cake or the so-called hypocrisy. I just responded to the false equivalence.
Oh fer fucks sake. Does it really have to get that nitpicky? So she used her official twitter account instead of her personal one. So fucking what? Would the media have treated it any differently? Is the government out any money? Did she get more money because it was from the government account? Would her tweet from her personal account have carried any less or more weight?
What is wrong with informing the entire nation if you think that you were done wrong? Again, it would have been covered across the nation had she posted it from a personal account.
I don’t know why Daddy said what he did. He has a right to say whatever the fuck he wants to say, whether it helps this business or closes it down.
Does freedom of speech only apply to liberals?
Haven’t you heard? The sky is falling!
Cite? Not that it’s relevant to anything about this discussion. But if you’re making a claim, it’s reasonable to ask for a cite.
You’ve provided utterly no evidence that Stahl is not trustworthy.
I’m stealing this.
Do you consider a President who sees common cause with white supremacists to be normal?
Let me rephrase: do you consider a President in the 21st century who sees common cause with white supremacists to be normal?
This, and the owners may have been concerned that other restaurant patrons would recognize her and make a scene. (Haven’t read the entire thread.) Harvey Weinstein was recently asked to leave a restaurant after he was recognized (by two MEN, no less) and O.J. Simpson is persona non grata anywhere he goes for the same reason.
How about the fact that such usage violates Federal Ethics rules (not like anyone in the trump Administration has any ethics, but still)? That’s so fucking what.
Does this mean you’re on the “Descending into an authoritarian dictatorship” bandwagon now too? Or are you of the opinion that, maybe just a little smidgeon of the rhetoric around here might be a tad overwrought, perhaps even a teensy-weensy bit hyperbolic?
Look, if you’re going to throw around “chicken little” references, you are literally saying that Trump and a good number of his associates are unsullied by any whiff of intolerance, racism, homophobia, or white nationalism.
You can’t possibly believe this.
I don’t think Mr. Walter Shaub has that quite right. Here’s the rule that he’s claiming she violated:
Can you articulate the “benefit” SHS was trying to coerce or induce another person to provide when she tweeted:
I’m having trouble making it out. Could you spell it out for me?
Sure: by attempting to name & shame someone who inconvenienced her in her private life, she was trying to do two things:
- Gain the benefit of revenge; and
- Trying to intimidate other private citizens from crossing her in her private life.