• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sarah Sanders Tweet Backfires

Thought it telling that 45 asking for Sessions to root out the Op-Ed was just "opining" according to Sanders and not an abuse of power or using the DOJ as his personal henchmen.
 
joko104 said:
Isn't a criminal offense to call the opinion desk of a newspaper to criticize the newspaper? Freedom of speech only applies to the press, not to anyone else. Don't people know that?
Click to expand...

What an idiotic post.
 
Kreton said:
NY Times is the most widely subscribed newspaper in the United States. Far more ethics, integrity, and actual journalism than any white power newsletter Trump and his mindless drones are subbing to in place of it. The real reason Trump doesn't read the Times and so many of his sheep are actually cancelling is that they use too many big words. Has nothing to do with the OP ED because they didn't read it and wouldn't understand it if they did. All they know is it was not a love letter to Trump and anything short of cherishing Trump hurts the little urine soaked snow flakes little feelings.
Click to expand...






applause!
 
I honestly believe that nobody in this WH can even spell "ethics", let alone have a competent understanding of what it actually means. It's completely disheartening, to say the least.
 
The NYT might not have the authority of the White House behind it, but it also has 3 million followers. Tomorrow's editorial: "Call Sanders' office at 555-555-5555."
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Some people should not have twitter. Sarah Sanders wanted people to troll the NYT into giving up their source.

1. This probably violates ethics rules
2. People called the NYT to either subscribe to them or to thank them.

:lamo
Click to expand...

Richard Painter the guy calling for Sanders to be fired is a very special case.

He has been a never Trumper from day 1. Have you every watched this guy on MSNBC? What a doosey.

He was running for the US senate in Minnesota as a democrat.

Here is a sample of a campaign ad.

Richard Painter - Dumpster Fire Ad

 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
1. Wrong. She is misusing her position.

2. Wrong. It is against journalistic standards to reveal sources.
Click to expand...

What a hoot... journalistic standards and the New York Times are like oil and water when in concerns president Trump. That is the best joke I heard today. :lamo
 
trixare4kids said:
He didn't but the source NeverTrumperGOP referenced in the O/P sure did.
Do try and keep up....
"The White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders’s tweet stating that anyone seeking the identity of the senior administration official who penned an op-ed in The New York Times undermining President Donald Trump should contact the newspaper’s opinion desk violates the First Amendment and federal ethics laws, according to two former White House ethics chiefs."



Funny you should be talking about other's standard attacks... lolz
Now don't you feel foolish?
Click to expand...

No I do not feel foolish.

He did not claim anything violated the 1st. He said she may have violated ethics rules. Lie all you like, but that's in the early pages of the thread.

The fact that someone quoted in the article said something he did not repeat does not mean that HE was saying it because duh.



Stop lying.
 
HumblePi said:
Let me see if I can, in some way, make it easier to understand.

If I'm working as an assembler on a moving belt of parts to assemble and the man next to me says 'do not put the green part on top or the red or you'll get in trouble', I might ignore that because this guy is new to the company and his threat means nothing, it doesn't effect my job assembling widgets. But if the line boss comes behind me and says, "do NOT put that green part on top of the red or I'm going to fire you!" It's the power, the authority that is the motivation behind the assemblers decision to do exactly as the line boss said.

Sarah Sanders is in a position of power, she speaks for the President of the United States. So when people in high rank within the administration criticizes, insults, badgers or encourages others in the world to assault a private corporation, it's wrong. Same thing when Kellyanne Conway went on Fox News plugging Ivanaka's (China) clothing line saying "Go buy Ivanka's stuff, Ivanka Trump has a "wonderful line I own some of it. I fully, I'm gonna just going to give a free commercial here. Go buy it today everybody. You can find it online." Nearly everyone was critical of Kellyanne, even Jason Chaffetz who is strongly conservative and a commentator on Fox.

It's a simple matter of ethics. Using the office of the presidency in order to disparage and effect a negative impact on a private company or individuals is a signal that our government is out of control and not bound by any rules, laws or precedents.
Click to expand...

Does that apply to Senators, or just White House members?
 
bubbabgone said:
how is it interfering with freedom of the press if anyone could do what she suggested without her suggesting it?

That second link was peculiar (actually expected) in its wording.
It made it sound like the NYT made out like a bandit but the body of the piece didn't back that up ...
It is unknown exactly how many of the calls were in support of the paper and its decision versus how many were against. In an email to Newsweek on Friday, head of communications for the Times, Eileen Murphy, said they had a "significant uptick in phone calls [Thursday]. As you would expect, there was a range of points of view, some positive about the Times, some not," she added.
Murphy said they did not have the ability to break down the general makeup of the calls.​

Looks more like misleading fake headline stuff, dunnit?
Click to expand...

If it was fake Trump wouldn't be bullying his staff to find out who the source is and Paul Ryan wouldn't be demanding the entire WH staff take a lie detector test.
 
Moot said:
If it was fake Trump wouldn't be bullying his staff to find out who the source is and Paul Ryan wouldn't be demanding the entire WH staff take a lie detector test.
Click to expand...

Rand Paul. Just as asinine, just a different guy.
 
I worked in journalism for almost 20 years. It amazes me how many people want to talk about what journalism ethics are when they have never set foot in a newsroom. Where did you dickheads get your journalism degree from, and what paper/station did you work for?

I don't tell these guys when it's time to rinse out the dumpster.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Some people should not have twitter. Sarah Sanders wanted people to troll the NYT into giving up their source.

1. This probably violates ethics rules
2. People called the NYT to either subscribe to them or to thank them.

:lamo
Click to expand...

What shocks me about the NYT thing is that everyone, including the Trump administration, is operating under the assumption that it's true. Granted it does sound plausible - we must ask why it sounds plausible. Because the MSM has been beating the "everyone hates Trump" drum for a long time. This is just another beating of that drum.
 
Moot said:
If it was fake Trump wouldn't be bullying his staff to find out who the source is and Paul Ryan wouldn't be demanding the entire WH staff take a lie detector test.
Click to expand...

The Obama administration forced some of its members to undergo lie detector tests and seized phone and email records between reporters and intelligence community members.

The Obama administration’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, announced in June 2012 that members of the CIA, FBI, National Security Agency and 13 other intelligence agencies would be subjected to more stringent polygraph tests. In response to a series of intelligence leaks at the time, Clapper said the question of whether a person had disclosed classified information to members of the media would be added to a lie detector test, The Hill reported.

Under the Obama administration, sources began talking to reporters through a middle-man so that they could pass polygraphs when asked if they talked with reporters, wrote former Washington Post executive editor Leonard Downie Jr. in a 2013 report for the Committee to Protect Journalists.

The Justice Department, headed by Eric Holder at the time, subpoenaed and seized the phone records for 20 AP phone lines used by more than 100 reporters. The department also subpoenaed and seized calls and emails between The Times reporters and government officials, a Fox News reporter and a State Department contractor, and two reporters and a former CIA officer, The Post reported.

https://www.newsweek.com/obama-administration-made-staff-take-lie-detector-tests-1112265​

Sounds serious, dunnit?
 
Nap said:
Does that apply to Senators, or just White House members?
Click to expand...

https://www.justice.gov/jmd/misuse-position-and-government-resources

"An employee may not use his public office for his own private gain or for that of persons or organizations with which he is associated personally. An employee's position or title should not be used to coerce; to endorse any product, service or enterprise; or to give the appearance of governmental sanction. An employee may use his official title and stationery only in response to a request for a reference or recommendation for someone he has dealt with in Federal employment or someone he is recommending for Federal employment."

The shorter answer is everyone in government service.
 
Moot said:
If it was fake Trump wouldn't be bullying his staff to find out who the source is and Paul Ryan wouldn't be demanding the entire WH staff take a lie detector test.
Click to expand...

I said the headline of the article and the text of the link was misleading and fake.
But you not correctly reading what was written was real.
 
trixare4kids said:
On your
1)
Or probably not. It does not look like to me that Sarah was trying to stop anyone's first amendment rights as charged by Painter.
She gave the number to others so that they could ask for the name of the gutless loser who penned the OP-ED. How can that be construed as an ethics violation?

On your
2) Of course, the NY Times isn't going to tell us all the people who called in to cancel their subscriptions either. Wonder why that would be? lolz
Click to expand...

Because all the Trumpettes had subscriptions?

Some people don't wait for Trump to tell them what to do.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Richard Painter the guy calling for Sanders to be fired is a very special case.

He has been a never Trumper from day 1. Have you every watched this guy on MSNBC? What a doosey.

He was running for the US senate in Minnesota as a democrat.

Here is a sample of a campaign ad.

Richard Painter - Dumpster Fire Ad

Click to expand...


Oh noes! Somebody opposes the God-Emperor! Crush all dissent!
 
Mr Person said:
No I do not feel foolish.

He did not claim anything violated the 1st. He said she may have violated ethics rules. Lie all you like, but that's in the early pages of the thread.

The fact that someone quoted in the article said something he did not repeat does not mean that HE was saying it because duh.



Stop lying.
Click to expand...

You were wrong and that is all there is to it. You might actually try to read the O/P and read his links.
Ironic that you should accuse me of lying...
 
Kreton said:
Well if facts don't change your opinion then I can't help you. Buy into lies and falsehoods if that is your thing I suppose.
Click to expand...

Where have I bought into lies and falsehoods? What facts have you presented that should change what I wrote below and why? Be sure and review the two links NeverTrumper provided in his original post to counter what I wrote because you see, I actually read them instead of passing them by like Mr Person did...Argue against my post instead of attempting to use ad hominem fallacy.

trixare4kids said:
On your
1)
Or probably not. It does not look like to me that Sarah was trying to stop anyone's first amendment rights as charged by Painter.
She gave the number to others so that they could ask for the name of the gutless loser who penned the OP-ED. How can that be construed as an ethics violation?

On your
2) Of course, the NY Times isn't going to tell us all the people who called in to cancel their subscriptions either. Wonder why that would be? lolz
Click to expand...
 
ecofarm said:
The NYT might not have the authority of the White House behind it, but it also has 3 million followers. Tomorrow's editorial: "Call Sanders' office at 555-555-5555."
Click to expand...

An entire listing of every WH office that the NYT has on record could appear tomorrow on the internet, anonymously, and the WH would have to deal with the consequences of telling people to call and harass the NYT over a source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom