CNN (Certainly Not News)

[Rightguide]

It's about time now that CNN is on tape and video taking instructions form Zucker to "destroy" people and to harass them until they are "dead."


Trump campaign to sue CNN over pro-impeachment bias, demands ‘substantial payment’
by Paul Bedard
October 18, 2019 11:59 AM

While media is typically protected by the First Amendment, Harder said the bias he cited at CNN was a violation of the Lanham Act “by constituting misrepresentations to the public, to your advertisers, and to others” to distribute “truly fair and balanced” news.

“Accordingly, my clients intend to file legal action against you, to seek compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, reimbursement of legal costs, and all other available legal and equitable remedies, to the maximum extent permitted by law,” said the letter.

What’s more, he suggested that even if the campaign and CNN come to an agreement, he would seek money as part of that deal.

“Please contact the undersigned to discuss an appropriate resolution of this matter, which would include a substantial payment of damages, as well as all other appropriate measures that are necessary to fully address the magnitude of the situation,” wrote Harder in the letter sent by overnight mail and email on Wednesday.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-impeachment-bias-demands-substantial-payment

 

[SpeareChucker]

The political bias at CNN is hardly breaking news...

 

[phrodeau]

Another White House letter for the trash bin.

 

[Rightguide]

The political bias at CNN is hardly breaking news...

No but it "may" be actionable:

“Recently released video footage of individuals alleged to be your employees indicates that your reporting relating to President Trump is contrary to your own mission and the aforementioned Code of Ethics. Your own employees appear to state that CNN is focused on trying to ‘take down President Trump,’ driven by a ‘personal vendetta’ that Mr. Zucker purportedly has against him, rather than reporting the news in an objective manner,"

 

[heathergives]

https://static.thefederalistpapers.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CNN-koolaid-meme.jpg

 

[phrodeau]

Rightguide posted fake news about Hillary Clinton less that two hours ago. So which is more fake?

 

[suurfer]

In all honesty, to me all news on both sides seem equally biased.

But it's become caricatural now with US elections looming.
You open any newspaper (not just American!!) and all you see are pro or anti-Trump memes.

But for me, the final drop was the way they misrepresented facts about Turkey and "the kurds" (aka YPG).

 

[icanhelp1]

It's about time now that CNN is on tape and video taking instructions form Zucker to "destroy" people and to harass them until they are "dead."


Trump campaign to sue CNN over pro-impeachment bias, demands ‘substantial payment’
by Paul Bedard
October 18, 2019 11:59 AM

While media is typically protected by the First Amendment, Harder said the bias he cited at CNN was a violation of the Lanham Act “by constituting misrepresentations to the public, to your advertisers, and to others” to distribute “truly fair and balanced” news.

“Accordingly, my clients intend to file legal action against you, to seek compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, reimbursement of legal costs, and all other available legal and equitable remedies, to the maximum extent permitted by law,” said the letter.

What’s more, he suggested that even if the campaign and CNN come to an agreement, he would seek money as part of that deal.

“Please contact the undersigned to discuss an appropriate resolution of this matter, which would include a substantial payment of damages, as well as all other appropriate measures that are necessary to fully address the magnitude of the situation,” wrote Harder in the letter sent by overnight mail and email on Wednesday.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-impeachment-bias-demands-substantial-payment

PROJECT VERITAS

 

[phrodeau]

PROJECT VERITAS

PROJECT ORCENTRAL

 

[heathergives]

Rightguide posted fake news about Hillary Clinton less that two hours ago. So which is more fake?

https://i.imgflip.com/1b5orx.jpg

 

[butters]

project veritas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas


a right-wing disinformation outfit, known for its edited-to-mislead propaganda videos, misinformation and lies resulting in court cases/settlements/apologies, whose creator's been banned from raising funds for veritas in florida due to his criminal record for entering a government building under fraudulent pretenses... and is a group whose funding is run by the koch brothers and one of its donors the trump foundation. so, yeah, but no.

 

[beezzz]

project veritas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas


a right-wing disinformation outfit, known for its edited-to-mislead propaganda videos, misinformation and lies resulting in court cases/settlements/apologies, whose creator's been banned from raising funds for veritas in florida due to his criminal record for entering a government building under fraudulent pretenses... and is a group whose funding is run by the koch brothers and one of its donors the trump foundation. so, yeah, but no.

what a fucking dingbat

its all on TAPE

 

[beezzz]

project veritas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas


a right-wing disinformation outfit, known for its edited-to-mislead propaganda videos, misinformation and lies resulting in court cases/settlements/apologies, whose creator's been banned from raising funds for veritas in florida due to his criminal record for entering a government building under fraudulent pretenses... and is a group whose funding is run by the koch brothers and one of its donors the trump foundation. so, yeah, but no.

just to be clear

what this BLOATED PIG is saying

dont believe what CNN people say about CNN

 

[Klinkster]

project veritas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas


a right-wing disinformation outfit, known for its edited-to-mislead propaganda videos, misinformation and lies resulting in court cases/settlements/apologies, whose creator's been banned from raising funds for veritas in florida due to his criminal record for entering a government building under fraudulent pretenses... and is a group whose funding is run by the koch brothers and one of its donors the trump foundation. so, yeah, but no.

Maybe bitters, you should study up on how information is entered into wikipedia.
And maybe, you should watch the videos.

 

[beezzz]

This is clever. It creates national news that CNN probably won’t report. And by not reporting it, the claim is supported.

 

[Rightguide]

project veritas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Veritas


a right-wing disinformation outfit, known for its edited-to-mislead propaganda videos, misinformation and lies resulting in court cases/settlements/apologies, whose creator's been banned from raising funds for veritas in florida due to his criminal record for entering a government building under fraudulent pretenses... and is a group whose funding is run by the koch brothers and one of its donors the trump foundation. so, yeah, but no.

Yeah, they forced Zucker to say those thing, right?

 

[bellisarius]

I doubt that there's little chance of the campaign prevailing in any action that might be taken.

BUT

What it does do is focus attention on CNN and the Project Veritas which is definitely NOT good news for CNN.

 

[OldJourno]

Filing suit and using CNN's own mission statement against it makes a lot of sense.
Don't be surprised if CNN comes up with a new mission statement that it hadn't made public, just like the new whistleblower rules that let people just make up shit.

 

[rae121452]

It's about time now that CNN is on tape and video taking instructions form Zucker to "destroy" people and to harass them until they are "dead."


Trump campaign to sue CNN over pro-impeachment bias, demands ‘substantial payment’
by Paul Bedard
October 18, 2019 11:59 AM

While media is typically protected by the First Amendment, Harder said the bias he cited at CNN was a violation of the Lanham Act “by constituting misrepresentations to the public, to your advertisers, and to others” to distribute “truly fair and balanced” news.

“Accordingly, my clients intend to file legal action against you, to seek compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, reimbursement of legal costs, and all other available legal and equitable remedies, to the maximum extent permitted by law,” said the letter.

What’s more, he suggested that even if the campaign and CNN come to an agreement, he would seek money as part of that deal.

“Please contact the undersigned to discuss an appropriate resolution of this matter, which would include a substantial payment of damages, as well as all other appropriate measures that are necessary to fully address the magnitude of the situation,” wrote Harder in the letter sent by overnight mail and email on Wednesday.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-impeachment-bias-demands-substantial-payment

good lord, i hope this actually plays out. just imagine how many suits will be filed against faux news with their 'fair and balanced reporting' if this ever makes the courts. love it, love it, love it.

 

[someoneyouknow]

No but it "may" be actionable:

“Recently released video footage of individuals alleged to be your employees indicates that your reporting relating to President Trump is contrary to your own mission and the aforementioned Code of Ethics. Your own employees appear to state that CNN is focused on trying to ‘take down President Trump,’ driven by a ‘personal vendetta’ that Mr. Zucker purportedly has against him, rather than reporting the news in an objective manner,"

Yeah, because fuck the first Amendment.

If you really want to go down this rabbit hole then this also applies to the Fox tabloid for their blatant bias, including what is left of their "news" department having the exact same grumbles about partisanship.

But I'm sure there will be some excuse for how Obama went after the tabloid and tried to sue them so the con artist can do the same thing, right?

It's almost as if all your talk about the Constitution is just that. Talk.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I doubt that there's little chance of the campaign prevailing in any action that might be taken.

BUT

What it does do is focus attention on CNN and the Project Veritas which is definitely NOT good news for CNN.

There is ZERO chance of the campaign prevailing in any action that might be taken.

This is merely a deflection away from the Kurds, Ukraine, and Impeachment....and it's not working this time.

 

[jaF0]

driven by a ‘personal vendetta’ that Mr. Zucker purportedly has against him, rather than reporting the news in an objective manner,"

How is that different than Murdoch's personal vendettas in taking down people he disagrees with? And he isn't even a US resident. He shouldn't even be allowed to own a US media outlet.

 

[rae121452]

good lord, i hope this actually plays out. just imagine how many suits will be filed against faux news with their 'fair and balanced reporting' if this ever makes the courts. love it, love it, love it.

"hillary, multiple suits waiting on line one."

"barack, multiple suits waiting on line one."

"mclain heirs, multiple suits waiting on line one."

bye-bye, fox.

 

[bellisarius]

Yeah, because fuck the first Amendment.

If you really want to go down this rabbit hole then this also applies to the Fox tabloid for their blatant bias, including what is left of their "news" department having the exact same grumbles about partisanship.

But I'm sure there will be some excuse for how Obama went after the tabloid and tried to sue them so the con artist can do the same thing, right?

It's almost as if all your talk about the Constitution is just that. Talk.

Yup, we have "freedom of the press."

We also have Freedom of Speech, but not to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater.

We also have the right to peaceably assemble, but only with the proper permits.

Virtually all of our so called "rights" seem to have some sort of strings attached to them

EXCEPT

"Freedom of the Press." They claim that there is NO restrictions on the "right" associated with their behavior. Maybe it's time to test their "right" too. If you want to impose restrictions on all the other "rights" then why should they be immune?

 

[RobDownSouth]

<blather snip>

"Freedom of the Press." They claim that there is NO restrictions on the "right" associated with their behavior. Maybe it's time to test their "right" too. If you want to impose restrictions on all the other "rights" then why should they be immune?

Their "right" was tested in NY Times v. Sullivan way back in 1964.

Try and keep up, Grandpa Boxwine.