White House Chief of Staff says that Trump considering Amending/Abolishing 1st Amendment - Polidicks

[quote]KARL: I want to ask you about two things the President has said on related issues. First of all, there was what he said about opening up the libel laws. Tweeting “the failing New York Times has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change the libel laws?” That would require, as I understand it, a constitutional amendment. Is he really going to pursue that? Is that something he wants to pursue? PRIEBUS: I think it’s something that we’ve looked at. How that gets executed or whether that goes anywhere is a different story. (...) Karl says, accurately, that that kind of clampdown on 1st Amendment rights would require amending the Constitution. Is that what Priebus means, Karl asks? Yes, it is, says Priebus.[/quote] Seen it on the front page of reddit, didn't see it on here. I like to read the discussion on these kinds of things, this is just crazy that it's "something we've looked at". That shouldn't even be something to be considered source: [url]http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/priebus-trump-considering-amending-or-abolishing-1st-amendment[/url] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Blog / Opinion Piece" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

Seal your own coffin, Trump. Do it.

Can this be confirmed as real though is he personally thinking of pulling this shit lmao

go to hell

I don't think I've heard of this source before.

[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;52170937]I don't think I've heard of this source before.[/QUOTE] Yeah. I'm the first person to criticize the orange fuck, but I'm suspicious of this.

This is an opinion piece from a blog

He's thinking about amending the most important law in this country simply because the New York Times doesn't like him. He's so fragile.

I can see the dude at worst maybe joking about this to completely fuck with democrats and CNN but I really don't see it even from him He has no filter but he isn't such a full blown retard that he'd try this

[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;52170937]I don't think I've heard of this source before.[/QUOTE] I haven't either till this article, but they have a video of the actual interview where it's said and quoted it

[QUOTE][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5aFBuPRaTI[/media][/QUOTE] This is basically 'the source', if anyone cares. He just said "It's something we've looked at."

Dumbass, can't take the 1st amendment out without taking the 2nd first.

If he takes away the first amendment he is going to get such an assblasting the likes of which no president has ever seen. Though I'm wondering how his supporters on r_thedonald or /pol/ are going to react to this. Also why the heck would they even need to look at the first amendment? The only reason I can understand why they're thinking of doing it is because poor Trump's feelings are getting hurt over "fake news".

Mattis Save Us!

Trump doesn't have the power to do so.

[QUOTE=Humin;52170961]He's thinking about amending the most important law in this country simply because the New York Times doesn't like him. He's so fragile.[/QUOTE] And if he even partially succeeds, there will be blood. Or at least, there should be blood. Unyielding visceral horror to send a very firm message to all who threaten freedom.

[QUOTE=ironman17;52171061]And if he even partially succeeds, there will be blood. Or at least, there should be blood. Unyielding horror to send a very firm message to all who threaten freedom.[/QUOTE] The left wants to censor people to deplatform "nazis" The right want "free speech zones" Neither side truly wants free speech.

Which is why we need centrists and technocrats to take over. Make both the far left and the far right shit-scared to peddle their agenda for fear of being utterly obliterated by a plane-mounted death ray, while the centrists strive to maintain the Balance between the left and the right. And break the hands of anyone who tries to bribe them. Preferably with a large hammer.

This site's been around for a bit. I don't think they'd make something up but I wouldn't use them because it's editorial and not really a news source.

I'd like to see him try. (Also, I wonder how the GOP would react at a Democrat trying to pull this stunt? :thinking:)

I'll refrain from passive aggressive shitposting until there's a more reputable source [editline]30th April 2017[/editline] unfortunately

So the editorial part being where they took the Priebus quote and went "IS TRUMP GONNA ABOLISH THE 1ST AMENDMENT?" which is not what he said, but he confirmed that they've looked into changing the libel laws twice so yeah that's still terrible. [editline]1st May 2017[/editline] I mean you could get a better "source" but at this point you might as well just post only the video because that's the only place the information is coming from. All you'd be doing is making the thread more legit.

[quote]Karl says, accurately, that that kind of clampdown on 1st Amendment rights would require amending the Constitution. Is that what Priebus means, Karl asks? Yes, it is, says Priebus. Now one might respond to this saying, ‘Okay, technically that’s what he said. But he probably doesn’t actually mean it.’ To which I think the answer is, sure maybe he doesn’t mean it but why would anyone assume that? He said it and repeated it. The changes President Trump wants are blocked by decades of decades of jurisprudence which is little contested, unlike other hot button points of constitutional law. If you want what Trump wants, you have to amend the constitution – and not the constitution in general but the 1st Amendment specifically. Amending the 1st Amendment to allow the head of state to sue people who say things he doesn’t like amounts to abolishing it. None of these are tenuous connections. Each link in the chain of reasoning follows logically from the other. This, needless to say, should set off everyone’s alarm bells. If this isn’t really what Priebus meant, he should be given the chance to categorically disavow it. The plain meaning of the words, on the record, is that abridging or abolishing the 1st Amendment is something the Trump White House is currently considering. Big deal.[/quote] This is actually worth paying attention to, considering the behavior of this administration. Marshall has in fact got a good point. Priebus (along with every last one of those other bastards) is a scumfuck, as if I needed to state the obvious.

Source is pretty shaky but the video seems clear about it assuming what that dude said is true. Being real, I think Trump [I]absolutely would[/I] abolish the first amendment if he could. He's a slimy fucker with real disdain for the press and his whole attitude reeks of just wishing he could. Honestly, I think he'd accept being America's dictator if he could. The only part that I think is debatable is whether he's insane enough to actually [I]try[/I] amending it or abolishing it or whatever.

it should be noted that in order to add/edit the constitution, the bill must pass both the house and congress by 3/4th's vote, in addition to having to pass ratification by 3/4th's of the states (or 3/4th's of state's legistlatures). Trump can't do this on his own.

Why isn't anyone doing something about all this? Not just the politicians, the people too. Doesn't anyone [I]care?[/I]

Yeah, just try and abolish freedom of the press. See what that gets you. Being punted in the 2018 midterms is the least of what they should be worrying about then.

HAHA good luck getting two-third of the votes from both chambers in Congress + 3/4 of the states ratification.

[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;52171177]Why isn't anyone doing something about all this? Not just the politicians, the people too. Doesn't anyone [I]care?[/I][/QUOTE] To be fair, this is an opinion piece off of some blog most people have never heard of. It's likely a good load of bullshit. Like everyone else in the thread has said, Trump and his administration aren't such full-blown fucking retards that they would actually try something like this, let alone somehow actually get away with passing something like it. We'd see full-scale riots in the streets.

This source is so sketch bro. There's no way this is real, I mean if it was, we'd be pledging the allegiance under a Red nation. For people who claim not to be easily brainwashed by non-Trump media, they seem to readily accept being brainwashed by the Trump administration.