The Right Side of the News

I have a question.Do you think that Twitter should not be allowed to ban abusive posters at all ? Or do you think that Alex Jones should be exempt ?Please explain why you think that way.

quote:

---

He basically told Trump he shouldn't have called the "caravan" an invasion, preferring nicey nice euphemisms for people who have threatened to overrun our borders, and that he was "demonizing" these "migrants." Leftist spin on a Left-organized assault on Trump, the US, etc. He put a question mark after it but it was no question. There were two parts to this question so he really had all ready asked two when he wanted to continue the assault by insinuating that Trump must fear indictmens from further probes into Russion collusion now that the House has the numbers to do it. Trump even answered that after telling the quy to sit down and yield the mike. He fears nothing, the whole thing is a hoax and has been from the beginning.

---

I was going to investigate your accusations about Acosta, but since you’ve admitted here that they were baseless and Trump was in the wrong (by any reasonable standard) there is no need.Acosta was being banned for being too good at his job.Edited by PaulK, : Fix typo

On the contrary, you made it obvious that Acosta was making legitimate points.

quote:

---

Those are not legitimate journalistic points.

---

Why not ?

quote:

---

They are Leftist accusations and of course a Leftist would like them because Leftists don't live in the world where people are allowed to have different points of view: whatever political correctness says is truth, and they'll even bang down a person's door for disagreeing with them,

---

In other words you want him banned from press conferences because he has a point of view that you want suppressed.

quote:

---

yes what they did to Tucker Carlson yesterday. This is the new fascism. They are the new brownshirts. And Acosta is just a verbal brownshirt.

---

I have no idea what you are talking about.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

The issue is Senate confirmation. Whitaker doesn’t have that, while Sessions did and his successor will need it, too. So it is questionable whether Trump can go outside the ordinary rules of succession to appoint an acting AG.

Rosenstein WAS confirmed by the Senate for the Deputy AG position. Which would normally include taking over while a replacement was recruited.

quote:

---

All this legal parsing is just time-consuming obstructionism.

---

Given the current sensitivity of the office I think that scrutiny is both necessary and inevitable.

quote:

---

Why isn't firing just subsumed under "otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office.

---

I’m not sure what your point is, especially as that would put Rosenstein in charge.Correction. I see you are objecting to the law which allows the appointment of a replacement in some conditions but not if Sessions was fired. I guess it’s to make things more difficult for a President who tries to get out of trouble by firing officials as Nixon did. Which seems a valid reason.

quote:

---

If Obama had done exactly the same thing nobody would have been making such a fuss

---

Come off it. If Obama has been under investigation, sacked the Attorney General (after previously complaining that the AG should be protecting him, which is not the AG’s job) and bypassed the usual procedures to install a dubious character as acting AG you can bet there would be questions. Even from Democrats.

quote:

---

This is all political and it is underhanded.

---

I think that could be fairly applied to Trump’s actions, but certainly not to raising valid Constituional questions. If the President can appoint whoever he wants as acting AG whenever he wants doesn’t that mean that he can effectively bypass the Confirmation hearings? Edited by PaulK, : Added correction

He’s been criticised for it by Tobias Ellwood (Minister for Defence) and Sir Nicholas Soames MP (a grandson of Winston Churchill). Both Tories. BBCWith the appointment of Whitaker on top of that, US veterans have a right to feel upset with Trump. New Miami Times - the scam targeted veterans in particular (although they weren’t choosy, they’d take money from anyone).

quote:

---

Gosh, imagine that, it's the conservative's fault again although the whole thing of slinging around the term "fascist" is coming from the Left. That's what "Antifa" supposedly means, "Antifascist," so it is necessary to point out that THEY are the fascists, not the Right

---

For the same reason you found it necessary to point out that it was the Democrats who were trying to stop Black people from voting. Even when everyone knows that’s currently a Republican tactic.We all know that Trump is pushing nationalism, populism, xenophobia and a good dose of conspiracy theory to boot. That’s a lot more fascist than the demonstration outside Tucker Carlson’s house which seems to have been no more than a nuisance, unpleasant as it might have been.And just a a reminder the people changing the Jews will not replace us in Charlottesville were from Unite the Right, not Antifa.

quote:

---

Yeah I forgot all the Democrat racism is far enough in the past for you all to deny it

---

If by deny it you mean deny that it is happening now you would be right but silly. If you mean deny it altogether then you are still making things up.But the fact is that you still responded to a true accusation with a false one.

quote:

---

But the rest of your accusations are just the usual unsubstantiated namecalling.

---

Odd that you seem ignorant of such well-known facts.

quote:

---

Nationalism and populism are not fascism,

---

They are, however, features of Fascism, which was my point.

quote:

---

...they are as he said based on a love of America and opposed to those who would trash every good virtuous thing that built this country

---

In other words extreme nationalism.

quote:

---

No, not racism, no not fascism, no not xenophobia.

---

Trump is certainly willing to pander to racists, as we have seen. The xenophobia he promotes is obvious from his comments on Mexican illegal immigrants to the Muslim ban to the whole business with the refugee caravan.

quote:

---

What a devilish brew of lies to misrepresent a movement by good solid virtuous peaceable fairminded Americans against leftist efforts to destroy the nation.

---

And those are the lies you will use to persecute all who oppose your tyranny.

You can condemn both, but one has obvious hallmarks of facism while the other does not.

quote:

---

PaulK said you accused Democrats of efforts to prevent blacks from voting in the recent election. Is that true? If so, why would you say something as ridiculous as that?

---

For the reason I said. I had pointed out that Republicans were engaging in voter suppression, especially in Black areas (which is a widely-known fact). Faith insisted that the Democrats were doing it.

Indeed. The Right were desperate to find criticisms of Obama and were reduced to pettiness. Trump just serves it up on a plate.Don’t blame us. It’s the Right who chose Trump as their candidate and elected him. It may not be fair that you’re lumbered with him, but that’s not our fault.

Have you noticed that the Right - and often you personally - are guilty of pretty much every accusation you throw at others ? You’d have to be blind to miss it.And, Tucker Carlson seems pretty racist to me, if these reports are accurate: wikipedia

I have to wonder why the number of followers is at all relevant. Trump does what he does, says what he says and inevitably it gets reported.Perhaps Faith means followers like Cesar Sayoc. It’s about the only way it makes sense.