• 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!

[W:412] Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover

Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
Indeed the state should not be dictating press action. But neither should the state dictate access to private political campaign organizations. Should any news organization be issued press credentials for a campaign? If an openly partisan news outlet wants a media pass access into a political campaign, should they be given that pass? Should, say, an openly antisemitic news organization be given access to Bloomberg's campaign, for example?
Click to expand...

The President of the US is not a private campaign organization. He's the President of the US and access by the press to him will not be based on them meeting his demands.

He's not a private citizen. He has absolutely no right to deny access to the press.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

lurchadams said:
Hey, Buddy!

Trump had the National Enquirer working for him before throughout is campaign - they had a whole vault full of stories they "caught and killed" on his behalf. They also ran as many negative stories as possible about trump's rivals.

At least Bloomburg is being honest about what he's doing, instead of hiring scumbags like the Enquirer and fixers like Cohen and Stone to do his dirty work behind the scenes!

Report: National Enquirer Shredded Trump Docs Before 2016 Election | Vanity Fair
Click to expand...

Oh, we know that if you can look the other way at Obama's forged Birth Certificate, you can turn a blind eye to a little thing like shredded pre election documents.

Or do you want to discuss the 33,000 subpoenaed emails and the BleachBitten hard drive of Hillary?
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

babalu said:
Oh, we know that if you can look the other way at Obama's forged Birth Certificate, you can turn a blind eye to a little thing like shredded pre election documents.

Or do you want to discuss the 33,000 subpoenaed emails and the BleachBitten hard drive of Hillary?
Click to expand...

That's Poe-etic.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
That's stupid. The free press can do as they please. That's the ****ing point of freedom.

The state denying access based on demands being met is fascism. Plain, obvious fascism.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. The free press doesn’t have a right to unlimited access to private events and that’s what most campaign events are especially those involving fundraising.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Slyfox696 said:
And Bloomberg is running for President. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Bloomberg is a private citizen. Trump is not. You know that, right? You know Trump is now the state, right? Surely you heard about the election.

Well, see, here in the free world, we like our press free. We don't like to limit access to the President based on who he likes and who meets his demands. Because that's ****ing backwards. You understand that, right?
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
Bloomberg News has made it an explicit part of their editorial policy that they will not conduct any form of investigative journalism into any Democratic candidates, period. So even if a Democratic candidate did something that might be considered worthy of investigation, Bloomberg News reporters are not to look into it.

No matter how you cut it, stating that your news organization is going to refrain from investigative journalism on purely partisan grounds is not a good look.
Click to expand...

JasperL said:
I agree with that. Bloomberg starts with the "tradition of not investigating Mike (and his family and foundation)" and then extends it to other Democrats in the primary, but not Trump. It's transparent but that's the only good thing to say about it.

The easiest way to see the problem is to imagine that Fox News issues a policy directive to continue to run 47 negative stories per day against Democrats but has an official policy to NOT investigate Trump or anyone in the GOP. Doesn't matter why, really, just that it's an official policy directive from the top.

In this case at some level, we should all recognize that, of course, Bloomberg media outlets won't 'investigate' their boss and owner but the 'solution' just IMO illustrates the real problem which is a massive conflict of interest with regard to news coverage by Bloomberg media when their boss is seeking the highest office in the land.
Click to expand...

That is their de facto policy and it continues the overall purpose for which Ailes created the network.


There are two very different things going on here:

1. Whether a consumer of news likes a media source, which may turn on whether or not that consumer approves of their being some kind of policy about categories of persons investigated. The free market thus provides pressure on those media sources. That's OK.

2. What the president does to retaliate against a media source, either through an official act of office, his campaign, or other means. The president pressuring media sources is very much NOT OK.



Whether or not someone thinks it's "fair" or reasonable of an organization to selectively investigate only certain categories of person is irrelevant to the problem here, which is where the pressure is coming from.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
Bloomberg News has made it an explicit part of their editorial policy that they will not conduct any form of investigative journalism into any Democratic candidates, period. So even if a Democratic candidate did something that might be considered worthy of investigation, Bloomberg News reporters are not to look into it.

No matter how you cut it, stating that your news organization is going to refrain from investigative journalism on purely partisan grounds is not a good look.
Click to expand...

I read the link. Seems to make sense, sort of, as they are in an ethical bind given his ownership. They did say they would publish others’ investigations. They obviously have a bigger problem if/when he faces Trump in a general election. Maybe he could do like Trump and give management if his businesses to his relatives. Who could complain about that?
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Napoleon said:
Nonsense. The free press doesn’t have a right to unlimited access to private events and that’s what most campaign events are especially those involving fundraising.
Click to expand...

The President's rallies constitute access to the President.

He's not a private citizen. His rallies are not private parties. It's the President of the US. It's not Bob. It's not Joe. It's not Suzy. It's the President and access to him is a matter of rights. Our rights.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Napoleon said:
Nonsense. The free press doesn’t have a right to unlimited access to private events and that’s what most campaign events are especially those involving fundraising.
Click to expand...

Goalpost-shifting. He didn't say anything about "unlimited" access for media generally.

He's talking about differential treatment of media based solely on whether it investigates whomever Trump wants investigated (which, incidentally, also mirrors authoritarianism in that the person Trump wants investigated is always either (a) a political rival, or (b) someone who is investigating him).




This really shouldn't be difficult. The free market is the proper counter to slanted news. Pressure directly from the president, whether it be in terms of denying credentials or something else, is a very bad authoritarian counter to slanted news.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
The President's rallies constitute access to the President.

He's not a private citizen. His rallies are not private parties. It's the President of the US. It's not Bob. It's not Joe. It's not Suzy. It's the President and access to him is a matter of rights. Our rights.
Click to expand...

They don’t have a right to unlimited access to the President either. That’s why we have a Press Secretary.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
A private news outlet will not do as demanded by the state so they're banned?

That doesn't sound good.
Click to expand...

Uh, the Trump campaign isn't the state. They can ban them all they want.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Napoleon said:
They don’t have a right to unlimited access to the President either. That’s why we have a Press Secretary.
Click to expand...

Strawman.

The issue is access to the President being dictated by meeting his demands. One is forced to do the state's bidding or be forced out of business by the state. It's an attack on our free press.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
Strawman.

The issue is access to the President being dictated by meeting his demands.
Click to expand...

And that is a non issue. Nobody has any right to access to the President. They have a right to write articles about the President. That doesn’t extend to direct access to him.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

babalu said:
Debunking the Trump Racist Myth -Larry Elder




The Charlottesville Lie - PragerU

Click to expand...


Sorry, I live in real reality.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
He's the ****ing President of the US and is denying access to press outlets that refuse to meet his demands.

It's ****ing ludicrous fascism.
Click to expand...
Its a NEWS AGENCY denying your reporters the right to investigate Bloomberg or the other Democrat candidates but encouraging the investigation of Trump violates the principles of a FREE PRESS. That's ****ing Fascism.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
The President of the US is not a private campaign organization. He's the President of the US and access by the press to him will not be based on them meeting his demands.

He's not a private citizen. He has absolutely no right to deny access to the press.
Click to expand...

So far as I am aware, political campaigns are private organizations whether run for an incumbent public officer or new candidates, and this was specifically his campaign which did this. While they are naturally desirous of media attention, they are not required to provide it. They were not booted out of the White House press briefing room, or some other public forum.

If you run for public office, or achieve public office, you do not have to countenance absolutely anyone with a notepad and pen having an absolute right to enter your private campaign.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
Bloomberg News has made it an explicit part of their editorial policy that they will not conduct any form of investigative journalism into any Democratic candidates, period. So even if a Democratic candidate did something that might be considered worthy of investigation, Bloomberg News reporters are not to look into it.

No matter how you cut it, stating that your news organization is going to refrain from investigative journalism on purely partisan grounds is not a good look.
Click to expand...

They stated they will treat all Democratic candidates equally. Would you rather they were partisans to Mike like FOX news is partisan to Trump? Why do you want partisanship in a news organization? Do you think FOX news would investigate Trump?
 
Last edited:
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
Bloomberg is a private citizen.
Click to expand...
Who is running for President and has ordered his news organization not to engage in non-biased reporting.

Surely you understand the obvious conflict of interest, right?

Trump is not.
Click to expand...
Presidential campaign rallies are not the property of the federal government. They are paid for by campaign cash, not the federal government.

You know that, right? You know Trump is now the state, right? Surely you heard about the election.
Click to expand...
None of what you are insinuating is true. Does the press get to be in classified briefings because Trump is there? Is there press allowed in the bathroom when Trump is showering or defecating? Is it your opinion the press is entitled to every second of every day of the President's life? That's just silly and you know it.

Presidential campaign rallies are not state events. You know this. Stop acting like you don't.

Well, see, here in the free world, we like our press free.
Click to expand...
Sure we do. We also like our citizens to be honest and non-hysterical. Obviously the majority of hardcore Trump supporters forget that, but there's no reason for the rest of us to.

We don't like to limit access to the President based on who he likes and who meets his demands.
Click to expand...
This isn't access to government business, this is access to privately funded election campaigns.

It is different and you know that.

Because that's ****ing backwards. You understand that, right?
Click to expand...
What I know is that you know what you are saying is ridiculous. It has been pointed out to you, by people who criticize Trump regularly and think he should not be President, that what you are saying is ridiculous.

I highly recommend you step back and consider how silly the things you are posting are. Because they are ridiculous. Being President does not grant the press the right to every moment of Trump's entire day and saying otherwise is just nonsense.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Helix said:
Sorry, I live in real reality.
Click to expand...
Don't flatter yourself. You don't live in reality. Trump really is the President of the US.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Napoleon said:
And that is a non issue. Nobody has any right to access to the President. They have a right to write articles about the President. That doesn’t extend to direct access to him.
Click to expand...

That's idiotic and wrong.

Why do you think the President does not dictate the members of the press corps?

Access to the President is, in fact, our right. And it's not a right that can be denied based on our willingness to do state bidding.

We do have a right to access. It's called a free press. Check the first ****ing amendment.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
So far as I am aware, political campaigns are private organizations whether run for an incumbent public officer or new candidates, and this was specifically his campaign which did this. While they are naturally desirous of media attention, they are not required to provide it. They were not booted out of the White House press briefing room, or some other public forum.

If you run for public office, or achieve public office, you do not have to countenance absolutely anyone with a notepad and pen having an absolute right to enter your private campaign.
Click to expand...

What’s the object of the “campaign?”
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

ecofarm said:
That's idiotic and wrong.

Why do you think the President does not dictate the members of the press corps?

Access to the President is, in fact, our right. And it's not a right that can be denied based on our willingness to do state bidding.
Click to expand...

The White House dictates the members of the press corps. What do you think press credentials are? Access is not a right.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Felis Leo said:
If you run for public office, or achieve public office, you do not have to countenance absolutely anyone with a notepad and pen having an absolute right to enter your private campaign.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

He's the President. No one is asking to be his accountant. We have every right to access his public campaign rallies.

Double check that first amendment. It's about the press not being forced to do the state's bidding in order to have access to the President.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

American said:
Uh, the Trump campaign isn't the state. They can ban them all they want.
Click to expand...

Trump is the President. Press access to his public campaign rallies is our right as citizens. Our press must remain free of state demands for access to the President.
 
Re: Trump campaign boots Bloomberg reporters from rallies, events over decision not to cover 2020 De

Napoleon said:
And that is a non issue. Nobody has any right to access to the President. They have a right to write articles about the President. That doesn’t extend to direct access to him.
Click to expand...

We, the people, have the right to access the President. He does not dictate our access. It is our right. See the First Amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom