Press Freedom Under Attack

[firstfloor]

We already know that Trump thinks that press coverage unfavorable to him is the enemy of the people. Now we find that the US wants to charge Assange with espionage for publishing secret material. Consequently, the freedom of the press is at serious risk.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...eedom-of-press

[One Bad Pig]

Assange is no more a "journalist" than Wikileaks is "the press" - that is to say, he's not one. He is nothing more than a purveyor of stolen information.

The Guardian should perhaps stick to areas where it is informed rather than attempting to interpret the internal affairs of foreign nations.

[firstfloor]

Assange is no more a "journalist" than Wikileaks is "the press" - that is to say, he's not one. He is nothing more than a purveyor of stolen information.

The Guardian should perhaps stick to areas where it is informed rather than attempting to interpret the internal affairs of foreign nations.

With any luck, the goodies will be able to keep Assange away from people like you.

[Cow Poke]

I get confused, is The Guardian the tabloid that had the headline "Woman Gives Birth in Choir - Baby Comes Out Singing Amazing Grace"?

[Raphael]

With any luck, the goodies will be able to keep Assange away from people like you.

With any luck Assange will soon be in a Swedish jail for those rape charges

[Mountain Man]

Democrats hated Assange when he was revealing their dirty secrets during the election. Now they suddenly love him because... Trump.

[rogue06]

Democrats hated Assange when he was revealing their dirty secrets during the election. Now they suddenly love him because... Trump.

If Trump had announced that they wouldn't seek his extradition you can bet your bottom dollar the very same people now complaining that the government wants to prosecute him would be screaming that Trump has given amnesty to a terrorist.

[firstfloor]

Democrats hated Assange when he was revealing their dirty secrets during the election. Now they suddenly love him because... Trump.

[tabibito]

With any luck Assange will soon be in a Swedish jail for those rape charges

"rape" charges.

Two women who decided to have sex with Assange because he was a "personage," one of them bragging about it online afterwards, then decide that Assange used his notoriety as a lure to bed them, which amounts under Swedish law to "rape." If you have notoriety, when in Sweden, don't take a woman up on her offer, because that would be raping her.

[Raphael]

"rape" charges.

Two women who decided to have sex with Assange because he was a "personage," one of them bragging about it online afterwards, then decide that Assange used his notoriety as a lure to bed them, which amounts under Swedish law to "rape." If you have notoriety, when in Sweden, don't take a woman up on her offer, because that would be raping her.

No, the charge was because the woman agreed to only have sex if a condom was used.
Assange is accused of tearing a condom and then initiating unprotected sex with one of the woman while she was still asleep. Under Swedish law that is rape as consent was not given for unprotected sex.

[tabibito]

A different one to the story that was circulating around the time that Asange first came to my attention.
If that was the case, the picture changes dramatically; but it seems that the Swedish police have repeatedly tried to drop the case, and didn't want to pursue it when the allegations first were made - too complex a situation for me to comment further.

[Mountain Man]

I've seen nothing to suggest that Trump has any intent of adopting Obama's policy of actively punishing any reporter and news organization who displeases him. And by "punishing", I mean that Obama did more than simply call them names on Twitter. A lot more, including spying on them, using the IRS to harass them, and even threatening them with jail.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/enterta...304-story.html

It's disingenuous to pretend that Assange is just an average, everyday news reporter.

[rogue06]

I've seen nothing to suggest that Trump has any intent of adopting Obama's policy of actively punishing any reporter and news organization who displeases him. And by "punishing", I mean that Obama did more than simply call them names on Twitter. A lot more, including spying on them, using the IRS to harass them, and even threatening them with jail.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/enterta...304-story.html

It's disingenuous to pretend that Assange is just an average, everyday news reporter.

Trump did kick reporters out of specific events but that hardly compares to trying to ban an entire network from all Administration events.

Anywho... For a little background so a comparison can be made:

Just to put things into perspective...

Source: Trump's war on press no match for Obama's

http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertai...304-story.html

© Copyright Original Source

And from the reliably right-winger The Huffington Post:

Source: Obama�s Escalating War on Freedom of the Press

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/norma...b_3635370.html

© Copyright Original Source

So those of you clucking your tongues at Trump, where were you when Obama was literally threatening reporters with jail time for asking the "wrong" questions?

Source: WHY IT'LL BE HARD FOR TRUMP TO SURPASS OBAMA'S RECORD OF CHILLING PRESS FREEDOM

Many in the mainstream media are reacting with righteous indignation over comments from a senior Trump adviser suggesting the administration views the traditional media as an opponent. But if we're to take these apostles of press freedom seriously, they should first explain why the Trump Administration is worse than the Obama Administration.

After all, the Obama Administration literally tried imprisoning an uncooperative journalist, monitored journalists' every digital move, and "hammered" at least one challenging reporter with IRS audits.

Let's rewind the tape.

The Obama Administration began with lofty promises of being "the most transparent administration in history." Instead it ended up setting a record, by the Associated Press's count, for denying the most Freedom of Information Act requests.

As the administration's popularity began tumbling early into its first year, the Obama White House declared war on Fox News. The White House director of communications, Anita Dunn, warned they would henceforth treat Fox News "like an opponentthe administration sought to deny Fox News' participation in executive branch news-making events -- which only failed after other networks admirably refused to participate if Fox News were excluded.

As you'll see in the montage above, President Obama blamed Fox News and talk radio for virtually every problem his administration encountered, warning in his waning days that these "domestic propagandists" were far more damaging to America than any interference from hostile powers like Russia.

When Fox News's State Department correspondent, James Rosen, reported accurate information about North Korea leaked by a member of the Obama State Department, Eric Holder ordered his movements to be tracked, his phone records seized, and went "judge shoppingthe Washington Post wrotethe Freedom of the Press Foundation reported. After the Supreme Court rejected Risen's appeal of an earlier order mandating he testify about the source of information he reported, Risen faced jail time.

After an outcry, Holder finally backed down.

The Associated Press experienced similar surveillance. For two months, the Department of Justice tracked 20 AP reporters' calls, ostensibly over their reporting into a Libyan terrorist's failed plot. Why was reporting on a failed plot so threatening? The AP said it was because the administration wanted to announce the news itself.

Obama himself was notorious for granting interviews with journalists whom he knew would treat him gently -- like Steve Kroft. When Obama accidentally exposed himself to a mildly challenging interview with a local reporter in Saint Louis, that reporter was later "hammered" with IRS audits.

With the Obama Administration, the message to the media was always clear: Report negatively about us, and we'll use the powers at our disposal to make you suffer consequences.

If those journalists currently complaining about the Trump Administration found no such fault with the Obama Administration, perhaps it's because they were all too willing to toe the line.



Source

© Copyright Original Source

Now imagine if Trump started tracking a bunch of reporters phone calls, not because they were publishing classified information, but merely because they had published a story that Trump wanted to be the first to release. Or sicced the IRS after reporters who asked tough questions. The howls of outrage would be heard far and wide and those would be the lead stories for days on end as scowling left-wing pundits and politicians would be calling for impeachment.



And a couple pieces by the rabidly anti-Trump New York Times:

Source: If Donald Trump Targets Journalists, Thank Obama

labeled one journalist an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal case for simply doing reporting and issued subpoenas to other reporters to try to force them to reveal their sources and testify in criminal cases.



Source

© Copyright Original Source

Source: Only Nixon Harmed a Free Press More

Source

© Copyright Original Source

[*Both stories continues at the above links*]

[Mountain Man]

Trump did kick reporters out of specific events but that hardly compares to trying to ban an entire network from all Administration events.

Trump has occasionally banned a reporter from a press conference while allowing another reporter from the same news organization to attend. This is what he did when CNN's Jim Acosta started to become particularly belligerent and disrespectful during White House press briefings. And considering we haven't heard much from Acosta lately, it seems he got the message.

[Bill the Cat]

The press stopped being free years ago.