A poll released on Tuesday by Quinnipiac University suggested that 51% of Republican voters now believed the media to be "the enemy of the people rather than an important part of democracy"

Was listening some older music when I caught theses lyrics .. which fit Trump and his administration propendency to show alternative facts as if they are actually facts


You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world

A poll released on Tuesday by Quinnipiac University suggested that 51% of Republican voters now believed the media to be "the enemy of the people rather than an important part of democracy"


You can't change the world
But you can change the facts
And when you change the facts
You change points of view
If you change points of view
You may change a vote
And when you change a vote
You may change the world




August 16, 2018

300+ newspapers publish the same anti-Trump editorial today

The "suggested" part is from the article. This isn't about suggestion. 51% of Republicans polled said "the media is the enemy of the people." No surprise to me. This is a dangerous time in our country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The "suggested" part is from the article. This isn't about suggestion. 51% of Republicans polled said "the media is the enemy of the people." No surprise to me. This is a dangerous time in our country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device




This is, when any President attempts to squash the Press, a problem.

It was a problem when Obama did it (cough AP, cough) and it has been a problem with near every president since the inception of the country (this is not new).

I do not support Trumps actions on the press, nor do I support the Press's actions WRT balanced and fact based news.

Too bad the Newsies claim themselves the victim - they have almost as much blame to take, almost.

https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us08142018_demos_unvt25.pdf/

This RDD telephone survey was conducted from August 9 – 13, 2018 throughout the nation.
Responses are reported for 1,175 self-identified registered voters with a margin of
sampling error of +/- 3.4 percentage points, including the design effect. Margins of
sampling error for subgroups are available upon request.
Surveys are conducted in English or Spanish dependent on respondent preference with live
interviewers calling landlines and cell phones.
All data was collected and tabulated by the Quinnipiac University Poll.

PARTY IDENTIFICATION QUESTION WORDING - Generally speaking, do you consider yourself a
Republican, a Democrat, an Independent, or what?

REGISTERED VOTERS
PARTY IDENTIFICATION

Republican 28%
Democrat 32
Independent 32
Other/DK/NA 8


So 167 people claimed it....well I guess that makes it so :rolleyes:

Thanks for explaining how polling works.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thanks for explaining how polling works.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No Problem. Glad I could help you.

I figured some might not have the concept down.

No Problem. Glad I could help you.

I figured some might not have the concept down.

stop it!...he's already triggered from the other thread

stop it!...he's already triggered from the other thread

well, I didn't want him to worry to much about those 167 friggin Nostradamuses predicting End of Days and all.

It was a problem when Obama did it (cough AP, cough) and it has been a problem with near every president since the inception of the country (this is not new).

Subpoenas related to terrorism vs repeated public statements by the commander in chief that the press is the enemy of the people. Obama Justice department also recognized the importance of the media and clarified the procedure for obtaining information with sensitivity to the press. Tough to draw a parallel.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

In tweets alone Trump has called various parts of the media Fake news 285 times. That doesn't count all the times in his rallies.
The only thing he tweets close to as much about is Fox news 250 times and Russia 247.
Of course we do have to remember how great he is, since he is very capable of announcing it in tweets and if he says it then it is surely true.
"Nobody but Donald Trump will save Israel"
"Nobody knows jobs like I do!"
"Nobody understands politicians like I do"
"Nobody beats me on National Security"
"Nobody would fight harder for free speech than me"
"Nobody can beat me on the economy (and jobs)"
"Nobody will protect our Nation like Donald J. Trump"
"Nobody more against ObamaCare than me"
"Nobody has more respect for women than Donald Trump!"
"No-one has done more for people with disabilities than me"
Illegal immigration "Our Southern border is unsecure. I am the only one that can fix it"
Illegal immigration "Such a big problem for our country-I will solve"
Infrastructure "The only one to fix the infrastructure of our country is me"
Infrastructure "I am the only one that knows how to build cities"
Infrastructure "all falling apart. I can fix for 20% of pols, & better"
ISIS "ISIS is still running around wild. I can fix it fast"
ISIS "5000 ISIS fighters have infiltrated Europe. Also, many in U.S. I TOLD YOU SO! I alone can fix this problem!"
Jobs "I will create jobs like no one else"
Jobs "I am the only presidential candidate who will bring jobs back to the U.S.and protect car industry!"
Jobs "I will bring our jobs back to the U.S., and keep our companies from leaving. Nobody else can do it."
Making America great "I am the only one who can Make America Great Again"
Making America great "If I run, and if I win, our country will be great again."
Moving jobs to Mexico "I am the only one who can fix this. Very sad."
Obamacare "We will immediately repeal and replace ObamaCare - and nobody can do that like me"
Slow GDP "I TOLD YOU SO! Only I can fix"
Social Security "I am going to save Social Security without any cuts. I know where to get the money from. Nobody else does."
Tax laws "I know our complex tax laws better than anyone who has ever run for president and am the only one who can fix them."
Terrorism "At least 67 dead,400 injured. I alone can solve"
Terrorism "TIME FOR A CHANGE, I WILL SOLVE - AND FAST!"
Tough calls "Govt. collapsing in Iraq...Sadly, I called this one and please remember, I alone called it.
Veterans Affairs "I will fix VA quickly."
Why are people upset w/ me over Pres Obama’s birth certificate? I got him to release it, or whatever it was, when nobody else could!"

The man is absolutey the "King of the Narcisists" no doubt about it.

i just refuse to:

A) let him rent space in my head
B) run around like Chicken Little declaring that the sky is falling after every tweet
C) act like a baby and throw a 4 year tantrum.

C) act like a baby and throw a 4 year tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

C) act like a baby and throw a 4 year tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Obama was Pres. for 2 terms to it was 8 years.

C) act like a baby and throw a 4 year tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fixed it :hihi:

August 16, 2018

300+ newspapers publish the same anti-Trump editorial today

They wrote their own editorials
Not a canned messag like Sinclair
Here’s the one from my local paper

When President Trump tweets in a late night rage that American journalists are the “enemy of the American people,” that they are “sick and dangerous,” what does he mean, and what is his intent?

Does he truly think journalists are trying to overthrow the government? Does he think that by pointing out the thousands of lies, untruths and misstatements he has made since he has taken office (now averaging over seven per day), that correcting the record undermines American democracy? Does he really think that journalists who report how his administration has tried to gut the provisions enacted under Obamacare are “dangerous” to their fellow countrymen? Does anyone believe that exposing his connections to Russia, and their proven nefarious involvement in the 2016 presidential election, is damaging to American democracy?

No, he’s not that delusional. He knows when journalists expose those truths, his power as president is threatened, and that if he has committed crimes against the country, further investigation and reporting could cause his downfall.

From Trump’s perspective it makes sense to attack American journalists and the press in general. The first rule of any dictator is to discredit outside information and control the message, and to control what the public deems to be “the truth.”

Hence, Trump’s campaign to declare factual news as “fake” and fake news — from “Fox and Friends” and other Trump-friendly outlets — as fact, is true to form.

The idea is not new, even in the United States. American presidents always try to shape the message the media reports to favor their agenda. But Trump has taken that tactic in a dangerous direction. Dangerous to the nation’s democracy because his intent is to undermine the very notion of reliable and trustworthy news from an independent press, and dangerous to journalists themselves because he is inciting his supporters to take out their anger against those journalists.

On the campaign trail he incited supporters to beat up opposing hecklers, to lock up his opponents, to revile the “fake news” reports of journalists reporting the facts and to consider those reporters as “unpatriotic,” as anti-American. He has singled out reporters by name, labeled our nation’s most trusted newspapers — like The New York Times and Washington Post — as particularly bad, and has slandered CNN and its reporters time after time as they have taken the president and his team to task. But Trump takes it another giant step further by equating his opponents (be that Hillary Clinton, fired FBI Director James Comey, special prosecutor Robert Mueller or the press) not just as foes to be defeated, but as evil to be rooted out so he can deliver his political promises, aka, salvation. It’s an appeal that is most effective for those “true believers,” why his support is likened to cult worship, and why that approach is so dangerous to journalists.

While those tactics have not stopped the press from doing its job, they are having an effect on the perceived freedom and democracy we have long cherished.

“The President’s hostility towards the press is trickling down to states and communities, where officials are refusing interviews, denigrating the press, and obstructing access to information,” said Courtney Radsch, advocacy director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, which ranked President Trump as the number one world leader who has most “undermined global press freedoms.”

“It’s staggering to see the extent to which some world leaders are so fearful of their critics and the truth,” Radsch said. “At a time when the number of journalists in prison globally is at a record high, the failure of President Donald Trump and other leaders to stand up for press freedom risks weakening democracy and human rights.”

For perspective, in 2018 the U.S. ranked 45th in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index, down from 20th in 2010, and now behind most developed, democratic countries.

**********

In Vermont, we’re fortunate that community and state leaders have not followed Trump’s lead. For the most part, Vermonters have embraced truth and transparency as the forces that strengthen our democracy. Nevertheless, we join newspapers around the country this week — in an effort launched by the Boston Globe — to highlight Trump’s alarming tactic to target journalists as the enemy of the people, just as he targets truth as the enemy to his cause.

At this newspaper, we appreciate the public’s support and dedicate our mission to supporting our communities, state and nation by reporting on the news as factually as possible, and consistently pushing for transparency and openness in government.

Democracy is best strengthened when “the people” have full access to factual information and are free to determine the truth, not when a few leaders in power make it their political goal to convince supporters that lies are facts, untruths are true — and reporters who tell the truth are the evil to defeat.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

please stop and seek help.....:spin:

Subpoenas related to terrorism vs repeated public statements by the commander in chief that the press is the enemy of the people. Obama Justice department also recognized the importance of the media and clarified the procedure for obtaining information with sensitivity to the press. Tough to draw a parallel.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, I guess you are right. All those times O called out Fox News was fair because they are Terrorists ; )

BTW -FOX also makes my point on bias - there is too much bias, not enough truth.

Now where is that Full-Semiautomatic Cake Baker :nailem:

This is, when any President attempts to squash the Press, a problem.

It was a problem when Obama did it (cough AP, cough) and it has been a problem with near every president since the inception of the country (this is not new).
While the AP case had issues I don't think there was any motivation to squash the press, it was just overly aggressive investigation.

Aside from a few quips against FOXNews I don't remember Obama doing anything to undermine a free press.

While the AP case had issues I don't think there was any motivation to squash the press, it was just overly aggressive investigation.

Aside from a few quips against FOXNews I don't remember Obama doing anything to undermine a free press.

Don’t you know he was just hatin’ on them?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fox hated Obama as much as they love Trump
Fox and birtherism
What did Fox say when Obama suggested meeting with Kim Jong-un, that ought to make you wonder?
How come Fox doesn't want Trumps college transcript?
Maybe Fox and Trump have nothing to worry about but they sure don't act that way

Trump’s spends his morning watching news and tweating, probably why we are over 4000 lies or mistruthes at this point, we need all the media in order to possibly fact check the shear volume of crap.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Donald J. Trump
✔
@realDonaldTrump
There is nothing that I would want more for our Country than true FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. The fact is that the Press is FREE to write and say anything it wants, but much of what it says is FAKE NEWS, pushing a political agenda or just plain trying to hurt people. HONESTY WINS!

10:10 AM - Aug 16, 2018


OMG !!!! to funny he said Honesty wins ...

BTW -FOX also makes my point on bias - there is too much bias, not enough truth.



the left created FOX just as they created Trump..:bl:

Obama was Pres. for 2 terms to it was 8 years.

Paul, do me a favor and point out one criticism I had on this board during those 8 years. Let's compare. Otherwise please shut the pie hole for the rest of this term.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Paul, do me a favor and point out one criticism I had on this board during those 8 years. Let's compare. Otherwise please shut the pie hole for the rest of this term.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your logic implies that obama’s Performance was on an equal trajectory as Trumps. I never complained that much about obama because there wasn’t much to complain about. :rtfm:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Paul, do me a favor and point out one criticism I had on this board during those 8 years. Let's compare. Otherwise please shut the pie hole for the rest of this term.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Did I say you? Go back to lurking because you're reading comprehension sucks. Clearly an indictment of our education system.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

BTW -FOX also makes my point on bias - there is too much bias, not enough truth.


:

Seem Trump has you convinced ..

Bias doesn't change truth ...that the lie of the Fake media mantra seems only conservatives think this way

https://www.bbc.com/ideas/videos/the-not-so-brief-history-of-fake-news/p06dn741

Your logic implies that obama’s Performance was on an equal trajectory as Trumps. I never complained that much about obama because there wasn’t much to complain about. :rtfm:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There was plenty to complain about, just like there is with this guy.

Seem Trump has you convinced ..

Bias doesn't change truth ...that the lie of the Fake media mantra seems only conservatives think this way

https://www.bbc.com/ideas/videos/the-not-so-brief-history-of-fake-news/p06dn741


No Wayne. People that are objective enough to go beyond the superficial level of events understand that there is usually more to the story.

Sometimes Fox is more honest than CNN or MSBNC, sometimes they are not. Their generic reporting is often better than CNNs. Their opinion stuff tends to be CNN level bias but going the other way. If you are unable to see the Spin from both sides than you are unable to be objective. And because you are new here, the News Bias has been a topic here for well over a decade.

I have a challenge for you Wayne. I want you to tell me in your own words, your personal opinion (without links to external sources) how Bias does not change the truth. How can bias be applied but not change the underlying truth?

Trump has moved far beyond the war on the media and has now updated his enemy list with our former security personnel who don't agree with him.

Did I say you? Go back to lurking because you're reading comprehension sucks. Clearly an indictment of our education system.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does this mean you will shut up or will you keep on whining?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does this mean you will shut up or will you keep on whining?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Go back to lurking you snowflake. You don't add anything to the forum. You only complain about how people post - like an old lady.

Can’t wait for Trump 2020 !!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

20 years for corruption

20 years for treason.




:hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Go back to lurking you snowflake. You don't add anything to the forum. You only complain about how people post - like an old lady.

Isn't that what you are doing here fruitcake ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump has moved far beyond the war on the media and has now updated his enemy list with our former security personnel who don't agree with him.
Former security personnel is a bit of an understatement. These are some of our security leaders with invaluable knowledge about the threats we face. That he's targeting them to obstruct the investigation and try to silence critics is really, really bad.

Isn't that what you are doing here fruitcake ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, I'm just responding to you snowflake.

I didn't lurk like you did - and now you can't control your temper anymore so you post. But you have nothing intelligent to say so you just comment on other people's posts.

No, I'm just responding to you snowflake.

I didn't lurk like you did - and now you can't control your temper anymore so you post. But you have nothing intelligent to say so you just comment on other people's posts.

I enjoy it, try not to take it personally tinsle toes. If you are disillusioned enough to think your banter is making a difference then it may be time for self evaluation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I enjoy it, try not to take it personally tinsle toes. If you are disillusioned enough to think your banter is making a difference then it may be time for self evaluation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you didn't take it personally you wouldn't have lost your temper. My banter certaintly adds more than your constant commenting on people's posts w/o discussing the subject of the threads.

To be fair, you both (PS/SD) look pretty bitchy right now.... :happy::happy:

Sometimes Fox is more honest than CNN or MSBNC, sometimes they are not. Their generic reporting is often better than CNNs. Their opinion stuff tends to be CNN level bias but going the other way. If you are unable to see the Spin from both sides than you are unable to be objective. And because you are new here, the News Bias has been a topic here for well over a decade.
I think people mix selective reporting and quality of reporting. Sure CNN and MSNBC select to emphasize stories that appeal to a left leaning viewer profile, but with a few exceptions their opinions typically don't get caught up in conspiracies or push information that's obviously or most likely not accurate.

Fox's news division is decent on quality though certainly still selective to a right leaning audience. But their opinion side is so entrenched in pushing conspiracies there's really nothing else in the mainstream media like it. Sean Hannity is not the inverse mirror of Rachel Maddow...

https://youtu.be/yYBrFBWCzbU
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I have a challenge for you Wayne. I want you to tell me in your own words, your personal opinion (without links to external sources) how Bias does not change the truth. How can bias be applied but not change the underlying truth?





How can you challenge me on how Bias does not change the truth. ? your the one who thinks it changes Truth its your case to prove ..



BIAS CANT CHANGE WHAT COLOR THE SKY IS OR HOW GRAVITY WORKS ...or the words spoken or written by Trump. ITS THAT SIMPLE

Bias presents alternative facts or attacks facts presented based solely on appearance, social back ground or party affiliation.... but to say only Main stream media does it , is a bias statement its self .. so what is non main stream media whats the new standard for the opposite of main stream ?

and most op eds are Bias reguardless of the source .. they are not News ?

https://youtu.be/yYBrFBWCzbU
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

John, is what you are saying about truth and bias like this from Psychology Today?
People want to believe others despite evidence to the contrary. This is a normal reaction because, in general, people tend to believe others. This phenomenon, referred to as Truth Bias, allows society and commerce to run efficiently. Absent Truth Bias, people would spend an inordinate amount of time checking information provided by others. Truth Bias also serves as the social default. Relationships with friends and business colleagues would become strained if their veracity were constantly questioned. Faced with minor discrepancies in a story, people tend to excuse away inconsistencies because they want to believe the person who is telling the story. Truth Bias provides liars with an advantage because people want to believe what they hear, see, or read. The effect of Truth Bias is stronger if the person telling the story is a close friend, a spouse, or our children. Truth Bias diminishes when people become aware of the possibility of deception. The best defense against Truth Bias is judicious skepticism.

Sure CNN and MSNBC select to emphasize stories that appeal to a left leaning viewer profile, but with a few exceptions their opinions typically don't get caught up in conspiracies or push information that's obviously or most likely not accurate.



:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao: :rotflmao:

I Sean Hannity is not the inverse mirror of Rachel Maddow...

sure he is, he’s just a lot less masculine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

sure he is, he’s just a lot less masculine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I've watched a fair share of both of them. Maddow is about three times smarter and very well researched. That doesn't mean she's always right but (aside from bridgegate) I've never really seen her push conspiracy theories and flagrant falsehoods which is pretty must the bulk of Hannity's program today.

I've watched a fair share of both of them. Maddow is about three times smarter and very well researched. That doesn't mean she's always right but (aside from bridgegate) I've never really seen her push conspiracy theories and flagrant falsehoods which is pretty must the bulk of Hannity's program today.

you’re talking about the same Maddow who made a complete ass of herself in front of her entire audience (11 bitter Maoists) with trumps tax return, and who predicted a Hilary rout on election night? and who says that people
who are pro life, are opposed to women’s health? yes, a genius.

hannity is a buffoon, so is she. they are the exact mirror image of each other.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

'dirty media'...this is troubling


CNN is being accused of attempting to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury after the far-left cable channel (and six other anti-Trump outlets) requested the jurors’ names and home addresses.


And so, on Thursday, CNN, along with six other far-left media outlets (the Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP) sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.

As Bre Payton at the Federalist points out, “Publicly outing the names and home addresses of jurors is considered ethically questionable, as outlined in this guidance sheet on the topic from the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press.”

'dirty media'...this is troubling


CNN is being accused of attempting to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury after the far-left cable channel (and six other anti-Trump outlets) requested the jurors’ names and home addresses.


And so, on Thursday, CNN, along with six other far-left media outlets (the Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP) sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.

As Bre Payton at the Federalist points out, “Publicly outing the names and home addresses of jurors is considered ethically questionable, as outlined in this guidance sheet on the topic from the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press.”


A complete fabrication posted from the Bastion of Bias the right loves

www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2018/08/18/cnn-accused-intimidating-paul-manafort-jury/

sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2015/08/judge_rejects_bid_to_make_names_of_tsarnaev_jurors _public —

A judge has rejected a motion by The Boston Globe to publicly release the names of jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial.

Another example of these pesky Facts blowing up another lie from the right

A complete fabrication posted from the Bastion of Bias the right loves


Another example of these pesky Facts blowing up another lie from the right



huh?

huh?

Really weird, what is the complete fabrication that he speaks of. The two articles he links don't tell us what the fabrication is.

Really weird, what is the complete fabrication that he speaks of. The two articles he links don't tell us what the fabrication is.

Presenting the suggestion that asking for or going to court for Jury information..




on Thursday, CNN, along with six other far-left media outlets (the Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP) sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.


What many see here, and not without precedent, is yet another attempt by the media, most especially CNN, to bully and intimidate private, everyday citizens into convicting Manafort.

Just funny to see the breitbart miss information posted as some how True


Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that except breitbart readers one example The Communist News Network will use any tactic necessary to deprive Americans of their rights, including the right to a fair trial.


List of jurors in Boston Marathon bombing trial released

Typically the first amendment guarantees the public has a right to know the jurors' key words after the trial

Presenting the suggestion that asking for or going to court for Jury information..




on Thursday, CNN, along with six other far-left media outlets (the Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP) sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.


What many see here, and not without precedent, is yet another attempt by the media, most especially CNN, to bully and intimidate private, everyday citizens into convicting Manafort.

Just funny to see the breitbart miss information posted as some how True


Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that except breitbart readers one example The Communist News Network will use any tactic necessary to deprive Americans of their rights, including the right to a fair trial.


List of jurors in Boston Marathon bombing trial released

Typically the first amendment guarantees the public has a right to know the jurors' key words after the trial

huh??

you’re talking about the same Maddow who made a complete ass of herself in front of her entire audience (11 bitter Maoists) with trumps tax return, and who predicted a Hilary rout on election night? and who says that people
who are pro life, are opposed to women’s health? yes, a genius.
I'm not sue how her tax return story was in any way misleading, yes it was over hyped but the returns did confirm some Trump hypocrisy. It wasn't a nothing story.

A lot of people thought Hillary was going to rout trump.

CNN is being accused of attempting to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury after the far-left cable channel (and six other anti-Trump outlets) requested the jurors’ names and home addresses.
Yes, that's exactly what they're trying to do, initiation into the Deep State don't you know? :huh:

And so, on Thursday, CNN, along with six other far-left media outlets (the Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP) sued for the release of the names and home addresses of all of the Manafort jurors, a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented.
BuzzFeed is liberal but I've never heard anyone -- aside from Trump and Hannity -- claim the others are far left.

As Bre Payton at the Federalist points out, “Publicly outing the names and home addresses of jurors is considered ethically questionable, as outlined in this guidance sheet on the topic from the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press.”
Even the judge said a thirsty press is a good thing. You don't know if they're going to out anyone, it's a matter of public record once the proceedings are finished. The Judge will likely shield them until it's done which would be the right move.

but I've never heard anyone



.

we know that you have remarkably selective hearing...sight...memory

Yes, that's exactly what they're trying to do, initiation into the Deep State don't you know? :huh:


BuzzFeed is liberal but I've never heard anyone -- aside from Trump and Hannity -- claim the others are far left.


Even the judge said a thirsty press is a good thing. You don't know if they're going to out anyone, it's a matter of public record once the proceedings are finished. The Judge will likely shield them until it's done which would be the right move.


Stop trying... didn't you know only the enemy of the people AKA code for anyone not on trumps junk.. Have ever asked for the names of jurors ...

Its disturbing and almost unprecedented. and almost True!!! can you believe the nerve of the press to ask such a question

43 percent of Republicans saying he “should have the authority to close news outlets engaged in bad behavior.”

Funny this ^^^^ isn't seen as disturbing and unprecedented. why is that ???

What many see here, and not without precedent, is yet another attempt by the media, most especially CNN, to bully and intimidate private, everyday citizens into convicting Manafort.
Just funny to see the breitbart miss information posted as some how True

Is it false to say "what many see here" followed by the rest of your sentence? I admit it is a rhetorical trick, but so is saying something is a "complete fabrication" when that is not demonstrably true. Many may well see a bullying tactic, and the precedents that Breitbart lists may well be seen by many as bullying as well.

Bullying is one of those current trigger words--you know, like racist, sexist, and various phobes, and lots of other stuff. They are quite effective in riling folks up against other folks.

Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that except breitbart readers one example The Communist News Network will use any tactic necessary to deprive Americans of their rights, including the right to a fair trial.

Typically the first amendment guarantees the public has a right to know the jurors' key words after the trial

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on that particular privacy issue (apparently, re Roe v Wade, privacy is an important right). Various state courts are leaning to giving jurors that right.

And if the First Amendment gives the public a right to know the jurors, there is no specification as to when that right kicks in. One could assume if the public has that right, it would have it before or during as well as after the trial.

There seems to be a lot in dispute and undecided about the issue. And about even if you have the right to publish names and addresses, is it ethical to do so. And maybe even about "What many see here".

BOSTON — A judge has rejected a motion by The Boston Globe to publicly release the names of jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial.

Judge George O'Toole Jr.'s ruling Monday came more than three months after a federal jury convicted Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (joh-HAHR' tsahr-NEYE'-ehv) in the deadly 2013 attack and voted in favor of the death penalty.


I'm pretty sure the Manafort jury is still deliberating

ben shapiro played a clip today, of a new york times employee who was on msnbc, and she said that while
trump isn’t rounding people up and slaughtering them, “he’d like to”. so who declared war on who, exactly? wdmso, you tell me, who started this war between trump and the media?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

here, a columnist for the new york times was on msnbc, and she said that Trump would like to round up people and slaughter them.

go ahead spence, tell me i’m taking it out of context, that what she really meant to say was, something else, something brilliant and harmonious.

i’m not sure it’s a big stretch to say this deranged, vindictive bitch is the enemy of the people. because if what she said had a speck of truth to it, we’d be justified in taking up arms against Trump. at a minimum , she doesn’t deserve the significant protections we give the press. these people have large audiences and a lot of influence, they have a responsibility to use it wisely. they aren’t coming close to living up to that responsibility. the foundation of journalism needs to be the truth, and if they want to bash trump, there’s plenty of truthful ways to do that. but that’s not good enough for these maniacs.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/nyt-columnist-trump-round-kill/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

here, a columnist for the new york times was on msnbc, and she said that Trump would like to round up people and slaughter them.

go ahead spence, tell me i’m taking it out of context, that what she really meant to say was, something else, something brilliant and harmonious.

i’m not sure it’s a big stretch to say this deranged, vindictive bitch is the enemy of the people. because if what she said had a speck of truth to it, we’d be justified in taking up arms against Trump. at a minimum , she doesn’t deserve the significant protections we give the press. these people have large audiences and a lot of influence, they have a responsibility to use it wisely. they aren’t coming close to living up to that responsibility. the foundation of journalism needs to be the truth, and if they want to bash trump, there’s plenty of truthful ways to do that. but that’s not good enough for these maniacs.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/nyt-columnist-trump-round-kill/
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Now I see where your style of prose comes from.
Kinda the pot calling the kettle black if you look at Crowder and that NYT reporter

Now I see where your style of prose comes from.
Kinda the pot calling the kettle black if you look at Crowder and that NYT reporter

forget about me for a second. is this new york times reporter being grossly irresponsible, or not? how far off is trump when he calls her the enemy of the american people? you can’t answer that by saying that i’m a jerk as well. this thread was started to bash trump because he attacks the press. i’m not saying trump has handled this ( or anything really) with class, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a point.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

BOSTON — A judge has rejected a motion by The Boston Globe to publicly release the names of jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial.

Judge George O'Toole Jr.'s ruling Monday came more than three months after a federal jury convicted Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (joh-HAHR' tsahr-NEYE'-ehv) in the deadly 2013 attack and voted in favor of the death penalty.


I'm pretty sure the Manafort jury is still deliberating


Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that .. the issue at hand is the false claim

the Media is trying to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury or that the request was a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented. when it clearly is not new

Now I see where your style of prose comes from.
Kinda the pot calling the kettle black if you look at Crowder and that NYT reporter

So you're saying that Crowder and the NYT reporter are alike. Style aside, does that also mean that they are both right or that both are wrong. It doesn't make sense that both can be right since their opinions are diametrically opposed. If both are wrong, then Jim is right about the NYT reporter.

Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that .. the issue at hand is the false claim

the Media is trying to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury or that the request was a move that is both disturbing and almost unprecedented. when it clearly is not new

The claim is that "what many see here" is that some of the media is trying to intimidate the jury. Is that a false claim? Can you support that it is a false claim?

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on that particular privacy issue (apparently, re Roe v Wade, privacy is an important right). Various state courts are leaning to giving jurors that right.

And if the First Amendment gives the public a right to know the jurors, there is no specification as to when that right kicks in. One could assume if the public has that right, it would have it before or during as well as after the trial.

There seems to be a lot in dispute and undecided about the issue. And about even if you have the right to publish names and addresses, is it ethical to do so. And maybe even about "What many see here".


This link is not about possible pending court case or the issue of privacy.. and that was not the Idea floated in the story ..

... the issues is very clear a request for the names of those seated is not outrageous or intimidation or disturbing and almost unprecedented. as claimed by the link provided .. thats it


But Truth isnt Truth either a breitbart reader on the interview with chuck todd

"what show were *you* watching? He made Chuck U. Toad look like a moron.

[QUOTE=wdmso;1149168]Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that .. which is why they are asking for names and addresses now?

the Media is trying to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury(yes) or that the request was a move that is both disturbing(yes) and almost unprecedented(yes).

[/QUOTE

MANAFORT TRIAL

Manafort trial Day 14: Jury 'scared' as it heads home without a verdict
Manafort's attorney Kevin Downing said the ongoing deliberations favor his client.


Paul Manafort's trial will stretch into a fourth week, as jurors headed home Friday without reaching a verdict for the second straight day and the judge overseeing the case alluded to "threats" the jury may be receiving.

“I had no idea this case would incite this emotion,” U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III said in an open court hearing, responding to a motion from seven news organizations, including POLITICO, seeking access to sealed materials related to the trial that would have publicly identified the jurors.

Ellis denied the motion, telling the courtroom that jurors were "scared” and “afraid.” As a result, Ellis said, he didn’t “feel right” releasing the names of the 12-person jury.

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN and JOSH GERSTEIN 08/17/2018 10:37 AM EDT Updated 08/17/2018 05:42 PM EDT

here, a columnist for the new york times was on msnbc, and she said that Trump would like to round up people and slaughter them.

go ahead spence, tell me i’m taking it out of context, that what she really meant to say was, something else, something brilliant and harmonious.
I think she was drawing on Trump's wannabe tyrant-ism and the abhorrent treatment refugees and migrants have suffered as Trump is rounded them up en mass and broken families with little concern that they are human beings. Clumsy and full of hyperbole but as evidence the press is the enemy doesn't really hold up...

I think she was drawing on Trump's wannabe tyrant-ism and the abhorrent treatment refugees and migrants have suffered as Trump is rounded them up en mass and broken families with little concern that they are human beings. Clumsy and full of hyperbole but as evidence the press is the enemy doesn't really hold up...

talk about hyperbole....geez

The claim is that "what many see here" is that some of the media is trying to intimidate the jury. Is that a false claim? Can you support that it is a false claim?

Yes its called Normal! to request such information AKA precedent


Can you support how this isn't a false claim or how the request is an attempt to intimidate the jury or how that would even happen

[QUOTE=wdmso;1149168]Names are only released after a trial everyone knows that .. which is why they are asking for names and addresses now?

the Media is trying to intimidate the Paul Manafort jury(yes) or that the request was a move that is both disturbing(yes) and almost unprecedented(yes).

[/QUOTE

MANAFORT TRIAL

Manafort trial Day 14: Jury 'scared' as it heads home without a verdict
Manafort's attorney Kevin Downing said the ongoing deliberations favor his client.


Paul Manafort's trial will stretch into a fourth week, as jurors headed home Friday without reaching a verdict for the second straight day and the judge overseeing the case alluded to "threats" the jury may be receiving.

“I had no idea this case would incite this emotion,” U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III said in an open court hearing, responding to a motion from seven news organizations, including POLITICO, seeking access to sealed materials related to the trial that would have publicly identified the jurors.

Ellis denied the motion, telling the courtroom that jurors were "scared” and “afraid.” As a result, Ellis said, he didn’t “feel right” releasing the names of the 12-person jury.

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN and JOSH GERSTEIN 08/17/2018 10:37 AM EDT Updated 08/17/2018 05:42 PM EDT

when they ask means nothing ... unless you wear a tin foil hat

And do you know who are making theses threats ?? I know i don't

[QUOTE=scottw;1149172]



And do you know who are making theses threats ??



crazy leftists obviously....

So what would you think could happen if the jurors names were released? Do you have any doubt that the press would look into and publish everything about them they could find? Looking for any kind of dirt or bias in their social media profiles? IMO jurors have served an important obligation of citizenship and deserve some sense of privacy in today's "tabloid journalism" conduct in much of the mainstream media.

treatment refugees and migrants have suffered as Trump is rounded them up en mass and broken families with little concern that they are human beings.



this is a good example....

ICE detained a man while he was driving his pregnant wife to the hospital. He was taken when they stopped for gas. :hs:

"My husband needs to be here," Maria del Carmen Venegas said. "He had to wait for his son for so long, and someone just took him away." :huh:

Joel Arrona Lara, 36, was detained at a gas station in San Bernardino, California, while he and his wife were on their way to the hospital for her cesarean section. He reportedly had been living in the U.S. illegally for 12 years. :wavey:

Mr. Arrona-Lara was brought to ICE’s attention due to an outstanding warrant for his arrest in Mexico on homicide charges. :kewl:

this prompted democrats everywhere to call for the abolition of ICE

So what would you think could happen if the jurors names were released? Do you have any doubt that the press would look into and publish everything about them they could find? Looking for any kind of dirt or bias in their social media profiles? IMO jurors have served an important obligation of citizenship and deserve some sense of privacy in today's "tabloid journalism" conduct in much of the mainstream media.

yeah...next thing you know Antifa is camped out on your yard...but that would give CNN, Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, the New York Times, NBC, and the AP something to cover...

this is a good example....

ICE detained a man while he was driving his pregnant wife to the hospital. He was taken when they stopped for gas. :hs:

"My husband needs to be here," Maria del Carmen Venegas said. "He had to wait for his son for so long, and someone just took him away." :huh:

Joel Arrona Lara, 36, was detained at a gas station in San Bernardino, California, while he and his wife were on their way to the hospital for her cesarean section. He reportedly had been living in the U.S. illegally for 12 years. :wavey:

Mr. Arrona-Lara was brought to ICE’s attention due to an outstanding warrant for his arrest in Mexico on homicide charges. :kewl:

this prompted democrats everywhere to call for the abolition of ICE
Here is another example
KISSIMMEE, Fla. — The wife of an Iraq War veteran wiped away tears and held her young daughters as she said goodbye to her family at Orlando International Airport on Friday morning — not knowing the next time they would all be together.

Alejandra Juarez, who entered the United States illegally from Mexico more than 20 years ago, had pleaded publicly for President Donald Trump to stop her deportation. But a letter delivered to the White House this week by members of Congress wasn't enough to keep her with her husband, a naturalized American citizen, and their two American-born daughters.
There is an immigration policy for members of the military and their families called “parole in place” to “recognize the important sacrifices made by U.S. Armed forces members, veterans, enlistees, and their families." The Citizen and Immigration Services website says they provide “discretionary options such as parole in place or deferred action on a case-by-case basis.”

The Juarezes received a call Tuesday from their attorney saying ICE agreed to review her most recent “parole in place” application. But they have rejected her previous three applications, according to Stars and Stripes.

“I love this country. This country has given me great things because we have worked hard. But the America we are living in now is getting full of hate,” Juarez said.

She checked in regularly with immigration authorities during former President Barack Obama’s administration, and says she was always told she is not a criminal and has nothing to worry about.

Now, under Trump’s immigration policy, few exceptions are made for unauthorized immigrants — even in cases when a crime has not been committed.

Here is another example


Alejandra Juarez, who entered the United States illegally from Mexico more than 20 years ago,

She checked in regularly with immigration authorities during former President Barack Obama’s administration, and says she was always told she is not a criminal and has nothing to worry about.



no doubt...

Pete, what makes her more deserving than any other woman on either side of the border who either wants to come her or is already here illegally? Shouldn't they have the opportunity to come here illegally/stay here illegally...marry someone in the service(or not) or have a couple of kids on US soil? Laws for everyone don't work when everyone wants special treatment all of the time

So what would you think could happen if the jurors names were released? Do you have any doubt that the press would look into and publish everything about them they could find? Looking for any kind of dirt or bias in their social media profiles? IMO jurors have served an important obligation of citizenship and deserve some sense of privacy in today's "tabloid journalism" conduct in much of the mainstream media.
Or if they worked for the government would they get a call that the "Big Boss" was upset about their verdict convicting a "good" guy?
Nobody knows yet who threatened the Judge, maybe some fixer?
But I don't think in any case Jurors names need to be released, they suffered enough, the pay is not that good and who wants to spend days in a room with a bunch of lawyers.

Alejandra Juarez, who entered the United States illegally from Mexico more than 20 years ago,

She checked in regularly with immigration authorities during former President Barack Obama’s administration, and says she was always told she is not a criminal and has nothing to worry about.



no doubt...

Pete, what makes her more deserving than any other woman on either side of the border who either wants to come her or is already here illegally? Shouldn't they have the opportunity to come here illegally/stay here illegally...marry someone in the service(or not) or have a couple of kids on US soil? Laws for everyone don't work when everyone wants special treatment all of the time

You cited a case where ICE picked someone up who was wanted on homicide charges as a Good example, perhaps of people who should not be treated as human beings.
In this case it is the wife of someone who unlike Baby Donnie Bonespurs served his chosen country, has committed no crime other than immigrating illegally, has been a productive member of our society.

So what would you think could happen if the jurors names were released? Do you have any doubt that the press would look into and publish everything about them they could find? Looking for any kind of dirt or bias in their social media profiles? IMO jurors have served an important obligation of citizenship and deserve some sense of privacy in today's "tabloid journalism" conduct in much of the mainstream media.
The media is always hungry for the story and who can tell it better. The make up of the jury is a huge part of this story...doesn't mean there's anything nefarious behind it...it's how the press works.

They're not sequestered so releasing names now wouldn't be prudent. In some cases like the marathon bomber I'd wager they felt there was a long-term threat so they've kept it sealed. This case is likely somewhere in the middle, but if and when the guilty convictions start to drop I think it's safe to say these jurors will be getting death threats from Trump's base.

You cited a case where ICE picked someone up who was wanted on homicide charges as a Good example,

perhaps of people who should not be treated as human beings.these were Spence's stupid words..


In this case it is the wife of someone who unlike Baby Donnie Bonespurs served his chosen country, has committed no crime other than immigrating illegally, has been a productive member of our society.

so?....that makes her better than any of the thousands-millions of women either currently here illegally or wanting to come here illegally?

but if and when the guilty convictions start to drop I think it's safe to say these jurors will be getting death threats from Trump's base.

more stupid...nobody cares about Manafort beyond those that hope he somehow brings Trump down

Pete, what makes her more deserving than any other woman on either side of the border who either wants to come her or is already here illegally? Shouldn't they have the opportunity to come here illegally/stay here illegally...marry someone in the service(or not) or have a couple of kids on US soil? Laws for everyone don't work when everyone wants special treatment all of the time
How about for the well being of their children who are Americans? How about respect for the service of her husband?

Immigration law has never been followed to the extreme because it's impractical and at times immoral.

How about because not deporting her makes the country stronger?

I think we all agree to protect the jurors names for as long as possible. Otherwise the pool of potential jurors in future high profile cases will suffer.

How about because not deporting her makes the country stronger?



good grief....

so?....that makes her better than any of the thousands-millions of women either currently here illegally or wanting to come here illegally?
At least as good as Trumps inlaws

I think we all agree to protect the jurors names for as long as possible. Otherwise the pool of potential jurors in future high profile cases will suffer.
I think as long as is practical. The baseline is that it's public info, where is goes from there is case by case.

I think as long as is practical. The baseline is that it's public info, where is goes from there is case by case.
Yep.

At least as good as Trumps inlaws

were they here illegally?


so would you like this to apply to all members of the military?...if they sneak someone across the border and marry them or marry someone who is here illegally they are exempt from our immigration laws?

most of the military members that i know go out of their way to follow our laws

I think as long as is practical. The baseline is that it's public info, where is goes from there is case by case.

Captain Obvious again........the names and addresses and other info was requested by the far left media during jury deliberation, a jury that was feeling threatened already....that was the rub...not whether or not that info should ever be released

more stupid...nobody cares about Manafort beyond those that hope he somehow brings Trump down


Whats really funny is you believe what you wrote :rotflmao:

I think she was drawing on Trump's wannabe tyrant-ism and the abhorrent treatment refugees and migrants have suffered as Trump is rounded them up en mass and broken families with little concern that they are human beings. Clumsy and full of hyperbole but as evidence the press is the enemy doesn't really hold up...

didn’t obama also break up families and put kids in cages?

what you think, is becoming less and less connected with reality.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

didn’t obama also break up families and put kids in cages?

what you think, is becoming less and less connected with reality.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim, we've covered this about 5 times now...

didn’t obama also break up families and put kids in cages?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yeah but Trump eats them for breakfast

Whats really funny is you believe what you wrote :rotflmao:

I love that you were amused :kewl:

[QUOTE=scottw;1149172]

when they ask means nothing ... unless you wear a tin foil hat


In the memorandum that the media who petitioned for names and addresses of jurors, requesting when the information should be released, they wrote:

"Therefore, the Media Coalition respectfully requests that the Court issue an order directing the clerk to make publicly available the names and addresses of the jurors and alternates who heard this case, at the latest immediately upon return of the jury of its verdict.

So, the media would have liked to get the info before the verdict, but no later than immediately after the verdict.

So, the media would have liked to get the info before the verdict, but no later than immediately after the verdict.
It doesn't say that, they're just planning ahead for when the trial is over.

It doesn't say that, they're just planning ahead for when the trial is over.

sounds like far left media collusion to me...that's a VERY odd way of wording "just planning ahead"
"

[QUOTE=wdmso;1149180]



"Therefore, the Media Coalition respectfully requests that the Court issue an order directing the clerk to make publicly available the names and addresses of the jurors and alternates who heard this case, at the latest immediately upon return of the jury of its verdict.

So, the media would have liked to get the info before the verdict, but no later than immediately after the verdict.

immediately upon,,,,,,,like ....right away

(Quote: Originally Posted by detbuch
The claim is that "what many see here" is that some of the media is trying to intimidate the jury. Is that a false claim? Can you support that it is a false claim?)

Yes its called Normal! to request such information AKA precedent

You didn't answer my question. Breitbart did not directly say that the media request was intimidation. Breitbart claimed that "WHAT MANY SEE HERE" is an attempt at intimidation. Do you contend that many do not see that? That that is a false claim?


Can you support how this isn't a false claim or how the request is an attempt to intimidate the jury or how that would even happen


Apparently, many do see it as intimidation. I certainly can't disprove that. Can you? The Judge has gotten threats and has U.S. Marshal protection. The jury was scared. I don't think it is a stretch to say that many can see, and do, that revealing the juror's names and addresses would be intimidating in light of threats already being made.

And did you read the entire Breitbart article, including the blue links embedded in the article which added to the credence of the Breitbart article?

And the jury is not sequestered, so it could have heard about the request to post their names and addresses. And the media requested the info AT THE LATEST immediately after the verdict. So, possibly, before that.

Apparently, many do see it as intimidation. I certainly can't disprove that. Can you? The Judge has gotten threats and has U.S. Marshal protection. The jury was scared. I don't think it is a stretch to say that many can see, and do, that revealing the juror's names and addresses would be intimidating in light of threats already being made.
Where is a first hand report of the jury being scared?

And the jury is not sequestered, so it could have heard about the request to post their names and addresses. And the media requested the info AT THE LATEST immediately after the verdict. So, possibly, before that.
How is that in any way trying to influence the Jury?

It doesn't say that, they're just planning ahead for when the trial is over.

I don't know from where you get your "interpretation." I know you subscribe to judicial interpretation by whim or personal opinion. Or, perhaps, you're just resorting to some sort of mental channeling?
I go by the memorandum's actual words, a sort of textual originalism,-- the media coalition requested the names and addresses "at the latest immediately upon return of the jury of its verdict."

If it was requesting the info only after the verdict was rendered, it would not require, in a legal memorandum of request, to add the words "at the latest". That clearly is a request to get it before "the latest" if possible.

Where is a first hand report of the jury being scared?


How is that in any way trying to influence the Jury?

it's like the mafia letting them know they're being watched and they know where they live...typical leftist intimidation tactics lately...plenty of examples

Where is a first hand report of the jury being scared?

The judge said so. I don't know how many hands were involved. But he is pretty close to the jury's concerns.

How is that in any way trying to influence the Jury?

The word being used was "intimidation." Not everyone is as self-assured, brave, with nerves of steel as you. My understanding is that the locality in which the trial is being held is anti-Trump. I can see how a juror wouldn't want some hot-head looney in that community to know his name and address if the verdict was not guilty. It might influence a juror to decide that discretion is the better part of valor, and discretely vote for conviction.

The word being used was "intimidation." Not everyone is as self-assured, brave, with nerves of steel as you. My understanding is that the locality in which the trial is being held is anti-Trump. I can see how a juror wouldn't want some hot-head looney in that community to know his name and address if the verdict was not guilty. It might influence a juror to decide that discretion is the better part of valor, and discretely vote for conviction.
The judge didn't say anything about juror intimidation, he said he had personally received threats. I'm all for keeping them private for now but I would fear more from Trump supporters than I would from the media.

I'm not sue how her tax return story was in any way misleading, yes it was over hyped but the returns did confirm some Trump hypocrisy. It wasn't a nothing story.

A lot of people thought Hillary was going to rout trump.

uh, she claimed she had a big scoop. i can only guess, that she didn’t even glance at the tax return until she revealed that he paid a boatload in taxes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The judge didn't say anything about juror intimidation, .

from the POLITICO article....for the second time

" the judge overseeing the case alluded to "threats" the jury may be receiving.

“I had no idea this case would incite this emotion,” U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III said in an open court hearing, responding to a motion from seven news organizations, including POLITICO, seeking access to sealed materials related to the trial that would have publicly identified the jurors.

Ellis denied the motion, telling the courtroom that jurors were "scared” and “afraid.” As a result, Ellis said, he didn’t “feel right” releasing the names of the 12-person jury.

from the POLITICO article....for the second time

" the judge overseeing the case alluded to "threats" the jury may be receiving.

“I had no idea this case would incite this emotion,” U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III said in an open court hearing, responding to a motion from seven news organizations, including POLITICO, seeking access to sealed materials related to the trial that would have publicly identified the jurors.

Ellis denied the motion, telling the courtroom that jurors were "scared” and “afraid.” As a result, Ellis said, he didn’t “feel right” releasing the names of the 12-person jury.
Name one specific juror threat.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim, we've covered this about 5 times now...

and what you said, is that obama did the same thing, but not quite as often. how big of a difference is that. the photo of kids in a cage that got everyone foaming at the mouth, was taken during the obama years. why let facts getnin the way if a good commie temper tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Name one specific juror threat.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ask the judge dummy

I'm all for keeping them private for now but I would fear more from Trump supporters than I would from the media.

Yes, the media is the problem...:rolleyes:

You should repeat what you are about to post in front of the mirror and see if your own eyes roll before you submit reply
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and what you said, is that obama did the same thing, but not quite as often. how big of a difference is that. the photo of kids in a cage that got everyone foaming at the mouth, was taken during the obama years. why let facts getnin the way if a good commie temper tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This administrations policy was to Separate as a deterrent and that is pretty abhorrent to most Americans
Sessions said, “If people don’t want to be separated from their children, they should not bring them with them. We’ve got to get this message out.”
Commie no longer works for Trumplicans unless you’re just self identifying
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and what you said, is that obama did the same thing, but not quite as often. how big of a difference is that. the photo of kids in a cage that got everyone foaming at the mouth, was taken during the obama years. why let facts getnin the way if a good commie temper tantrum.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I never said Obama did the same thing, their policies are quite different. Do some homework Jim.

I never said Obama did the same thing, their policies are quite different. Do some homework Jim.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/29/trump-slams-dems-after-viral-photo-children-in-cages-from-obamas-term-backfires.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/29/trump-slams-dems-after-viral-photo-children-in-cages-from-obamas-term-backfires.html
Well aware of the Obama era photo, it does nothing to refute the reality that the policy and scope of the two administrations isn't vastly different on this issue.