Report: DEA Blowing Money On Liars, Thieves... >>

<< Daily Deal: Computer Hacker Professional...

Free Speech

by Mike Masnick

Thu, Oct 6th 2016 10:48am

Filed Under:
defamation, donald trump, first amendment, free speech, threats

Permalink.

Trump Adds To His Anti-First Amendment Legacy In Threatening To Sue Clinton For Campaign Ads

from the have-you-read-the-bill-of-rights dept

Donald Trump keeps insisting that he's a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights, but he appears to have skipped right past the 1st Amendment. We've discussed his stated plans to "open up" libel laws and his regular threats to sue newspapers for reporting on him in ways he dislikes. Trevor Timm, of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, recently tried to count how many times Trump had threatened to sue the media since his campaign began (ignoring all the threats from before the campaign). Turns out it's difficult to count them all:

I had intended to quantify how many journalists or news commentators Trump has threatened to sue over his lifetime, but that quickly turned into a fool’s errand. A simple Google search of “Trump threatens to sue” will return an overwhelming number of stories. In the past decade alone, he’s sued a former Times journalist who wrote a book about him that he later admitted he didn’t even read; he’s threatened to sue former View host Rosie O’Donnell for allegations that have been shown over and over again during this campaign to be correct; he’s sued HBO’s Bill Maher over a joke bet that involved proving he was not, in fact, born an orangutan.

He threatened to sue a journalist at the Village Voice as far back as 1979, and he actually sued a newspaper as early as 1984: the Chicago Tribune, for calling building plans of his “aesthetically lousy.” My personal favorite was his threat to sue The Onion, the popular satirical news site.

He also left out the non-journalists that Trump has similarly threatened with lawsuits -- including some of the competitors for the Republican Presidential nomination:

I did not count the nine news organizations Melania Trump, the Republican candidate’s wife, also threatened to sue, nor the Daily Mail along with a small blogger, both of whom she actually sued in September for publishing stories containing rumors about her past.

Nor did I count when Trump threatened to sue an artist for creating a hilariously unflattering portrait of him, a conservative group called Club For Growth for running campaign ads that Trump did not like, former Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz for running negative ads against him, or former Republican presidential candidate John Kasich and a Super PAC supporting Kasich for the same—all of which would have serious First Amendment implications. Another time, he seemed to threaten Amazon founder Jeff Bezos with tax audits for owning The Washington Post, which has been critical of Trump. I’m not including this in my count either.

You can then read the still quite long list of examples that Timm did eventually count.

But apparently Trump isn't done threatening to sue his election opponents over protected speech either. He's now moved on and is threatening to sue the Clinton campaign over the "nasty" ads they're running against him:

“And then I saw today ... a commercial where — it was really a nasty commercial, totally made up, about me with vets,” Trump said.

“There is nobody that loves the vets more or respects the vets more. They’re spending hundreds of millions of dollars on false commercials, and it’s a disgrace. So what we’ll do, I guess we’ll sue them. Let’s sue them.”

"I guess we'll sue them. Let's sue them." Remember, again, that Trump has happily admitted in the past to filing bogus defamation lawsuits because he knows it will cost a lot to defend against them. It's one thing to be thin-skinned. It's another to continue to trample on the First Amendment while running to be the person in charge of upholding it.

87 Comments | Leave a Comment

Hide Techdirt ads

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments (rss)

“

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

If Clinton's ads are truthful, then I agree they are protected.

But many of Clinton's ads use Trumps OWN WORDS.

Therefore, they cannot possibly be true. :-) And are subject to a lawsuit.

—DannyB
made the First Word by Dark Helmet

”

(Flattened / Threaded)

Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:05am

So basically he is a loose cannon.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:10am

Not a License to Commit Offenses
Remember the First Amendment is not a license to commit slander. If the ads are truthful, then they are protected.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:13am

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses
If Clinton's ads are truthful, then I agree they are protected.

But many of Clinton's ads use Trumps OWN WORDS.

Therefore, they cannot possibly be true. :-) And are subject to a lawsuit.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:15am

Please refrain for doing any articles about the election. It is bad enough that everywhere else feels the need. Don't start here.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
TheResidentSkeptic (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:17am

I wonder...
... if he will sue everyone who votes against him?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:18am

Why do you think Peter thiel likes him...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:19am

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses
There's a much higher standard to meet for celebrities like Trump when suing for slander.

Throw in the fact that it happened during a presidential campaign, and I'd say he stands zero chance of ever winning.

Plus, there's a reason why campaigns never sue each other for lies, 1) the lawsuit would never be settled till after the campaign, and 2) the lawsuit would just bring more attention to the lies.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:20am

I don't understand how someone with the thinnest skin in the world can run for the most criticized position in the world.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:23am

Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?
Trump has happily admitted in the past to filing bogus defamation lawsuits because he knows it will cost a lot to defend against them
Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?

Or here is an approach that I bet would not scale well for Trump. Whenever Trump issues a threat or actual lawsuit for something he doesn't like, if the party can afford to, sue/countersue Trump asking the court for a declaration of non slander.

Trump would have to defend against the swarm of counter suits. And maybe he's not so rich as he pretends to be. The wealth, like almost everything else may simply be a can man's illusion.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
GMacGuffin (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:24am

Re:
Please see: Turkey / Erdogan
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:25am

Can't the newspapers sue for declaratory relief for the legal threats?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:26am

Re: Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses
There's probably another reason.

Discovery.

Unless you're pure as the new fallen snow, you don't know what the other side will learn in discovery. Or, rather, you do know, and therefore want to avoid this.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:27am

Re:
A cannon takes time to reload, a loose machine gun seems more accurate.(A GAU-8 perhaps)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:28am

Re:
This is not an article about the election. But about freedom of speech. A subject TechDirt frequently covers. And this is about freedom of speech during a critical time that will soon pass.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:31am

Re:
Because his fantasy is that the US President has unlimited power to do anything without consequences.

And a life without consequences is what he knows best. So he sees himself as well qualified.

I doubt he has thought this through beyond his coronation* ceremony.

* not a typo
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 11:39am

If he's threatening to sue her for making commercials that are using his own words, I'd suggest she make a commercial using his threat of suing her also using his own words.

While that sentence sounds completely ridiculous, sadly, I think it's entirely possible.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:10pm

Re:
Please refrain for doing any articles about the election. It is bad enough that everywhere else feels the need. Don't start here.

We don't cover politics, but we do cover policy, and that often includes politicians and those running for office. We also regularly cover the First Amendment and free speech issues.

This is firmly within the realm of what we cover and is not, actually, "about the election."
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:11pm

Re: Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?
Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?

Guessing you mean anti-SLAPP laws? They're very state specific and many states have none at all, or very weak ones.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:13pm

Re:
Can't the newspapers sue for declaratory relief for the legal threats?

For reasons that are too long to go into here, but which I discovered for very specific reasons -- courts frequently reject declaratory judgment filings in defamation cases. While they're considered fine in copyright cases, for some reasons, courts take a very different view of them in defamation cases. So it is *very rarely* a good idea to file for a declaratory judgment in a defamation case, and opens up some problematic results....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:13pm

Re: Re:
Then I wont need to come back to your website until next January.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:25pm

Donald Trump keeps insisting that he's a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights, but he appears to have skipped right past the 1st Amendment.

That makes sense if he wishes to form a cadre with a name like umm... orange shirts. That man is a bad loser.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Kalean, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:32pm

Re:
Techdirt has become a strong advocate for First and Fourth Amendment protections, as well as Police Accountability, due to the overwhelming amount these subjects have encroached on their normally covered territory.

They call deserving parties out on First Amendment ignorance frequently, including calling Trump and Hillary out before they were running; I see no reason it should stop because the election is getting closer.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 12:33pm

Re: Re: Re:
I'm sure he's devastated.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:00pm

Re: Re: Re:
What, you're taking off for three months? But you just got back after being gone for fifteen!

At least, judging by your apparent belief that this is the first time Techdirt has covered a story about a frivolous, anti-First Amendment lawsuit threat by Donald Trump.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:01pm

Re: Re:
Techdirt has become a strong advocate for First and Fourth Amendment protections...

Agree, TD has been a pretty decent advocate for constitutional issues of late.

But I still have not quite forgotten he anti-1st Amendment rant TD had about the Redskins and the USPTO bullshit. TD needs to keep up the good work though, as flawed as it may be it still does better than most others.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Vidiot (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:25pm

Re: Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?
Doesn't look like Rule 11 is invoked, either... these are clearly frivolous lawsuits, and as the standard says, due diligence would have revealed the can't possibly be won...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Kalean, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:34pm

Re: Re: Re:
But I still have not quite forgotten he anti-1st Amendment rant TD had about the Redskins and the USPTO bullshit.

I assure you, neither has TechDirt.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:35pm

Re: Re: Re:
January of which year?

Even that might be too soon.

You never know when one of those policy issues may get coverage.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 1:57pm

Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
Actually, it is, because every time you bring up said election (or policy), the majority of the article is always anti-Trump (and thus pro-Clinton). You're not actually fooling anybody, Mike. Perhaps one day, you'll have your lips surgically removed from her asshole.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:17pm

Re: I wonder...
He doesn't have to. He has already said that if he doesn't win it will be because of voter fraud. Anyone trying to argue against that claim may be more in his aim.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:19pm

Re:
Trump is just a copy of Erdogan. I would still go for the original on that one!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:30pm

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
Hm, let's see if that's true.

*plugs clinton site:techdirt.com into DuckDuckGo*

Okay, first match: Clinton Campaign Happily Using Strong End-To-End Encryption To Communicate; Will They Let The Rest Of Us Use It Too?

Lambastes Clinton for holding her own communications to a different standard than everybody else; mocks her "nerd harder" approach to encryption. Trump's name is mentioned once, in a quote from a linked article.

Well, okay, your claim's already disproven, but let's go ahead and look at the second match.

FBI Publishes Clinton Email Investigation Documents; More Bad News On Documents Mishandling, FOIA Compliance

Huh. That really doesn't sound pro-Clinton at all. Trump's name is not mentioned.

Well, that one's not by Masnick; maybe you only meant Masnick writes exclusively pro-Clinton articles? Let's check the next one. Ooh, it's by Masnick!

Hillary Clinton To Silicon Valley: To Silence Terrorists, Nerd Harder, Nerds!

First sentence is, "With the explosive devices in NY and NJ from this past weekend, Hillary Clinton has decided, once again, that it's time to blame Silicon Valley for not doing more to magically stop terrorists from terroristing." Trump's name does not appear in the article.

Let's see...the next two are about Clinton's support for TPP and how she's obviously lying when she claims to have changed her position; the one after that is called Hillary Clinton's Intellectual Property Platform: Too Vague & Confusing, and then there are a bunch about her e-mail scandal.

tl;dr you're a moron.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:39pm

Re:
turkish president erdogan seems to be mentoring trump on how to act.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:40pm

Re: Re:
I hate how i cannot see what is said to a comment until i have posted as that means i usually end up repeating something, sigh.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Kalean, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 2:57pm

Actually...
Near the top of the comments section, just under the first word, there is a "flattened/threaded" option. Threaded shows the comments the way you see them after you post a comment; with responses under the original posts.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 3:33pm

Re: Re: Re:
You won’t be missed.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Kronomex, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 3:36pm

Re:
He should put in a loose cannon then have the fuse lit.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Aaron Walkhouse (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 4:04pm

No…
The GAU-8 is far too accurate. ‌ ‌ ;]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 4:47pm

Re: Re:
Well then you should probably do some fact checking before spitting out a bunch of rubbish. For example, finding the unedited source material that Clinton Campaign Ads use to defame Trump. All of them are edited to skew his original words and they do this constantly at every turn.

I don't even support Trump, nor Hillary, but I can see this campaign against him is nothing less than defamation and you'd have to be far left leaning regressive to believe any of it.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 4:54pm

"You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."
Ah good false dichotomy. Thad already covered the whole 'TD clearly supports Hilary' angle, with a quick search showing multiple articles critical of her, so I'll focus on the bit about how any 'anti-Trump' article is 'pro-Hilary'.

Being critical of A does not mean you're showing support of B, anymore than being critical of B means you're showing support of A. If you believe that any 'anti-Trump' article is 'pro-Hilary', then clearly the multiple articles critical of Hilary are evidence of a pro-Trump stance by TD, right?

This will probably shock you, but it is in fact entirely possible to be critical of A without supporting B because, and here's the crazy part, there are more than two possible options.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 5:14pm

Re:
The thing is though is that they're editing his words completely out of context to paint this completely bogus narrative.

I figure TD would at least fact check all of their sources and citations but apparently they don't since more than a few are completely made up stories while some of them are the result of people attempting to extort him.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 5:38pm

Re: Re:
Not to mention, TD did an article on defaming people by using their own words out of context:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100922/03180811104/is-quoting-someone-out-of-context-def amation.shtml

So TD, since it's Trump, it's okay to defame him? Typical far Leftist logic would say 'yes' and that everything is legal unless you hold a dissenting point of view that conflicts with their interests...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 5:53pm

Re: Re:
If you're going to say 'The ads are taking his statements out of context' it helps if you actually provide that context to support the claim.

'Here is what the ad said/implied, here's the context in which he said it that changes the meaning', that sort of thing.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 5:57pm

Re: "You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."
True. And even if somebody *is* a Clinton supporter, it's still possible to criticize her, just as surely as if somebody's a Trump supporter they can still disagree with him on some things. (I hope to God most people don't agree with Trump on *everything*.)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 5:58pm

Re: Re: Re:
Did you just say taking a quote out of context is defamation?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 6:00pm

Re:
If you don't like it make your own techdirt.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 6:00pm

Re: Re:
The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

That's not out of context; it's the entire tweet.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 6:23pm

Re: Re: Re:
Some would say that is partially true since you can't run a manufacturing plant off of solar or wind (both of which need to be manufactured using fossil fuels) and still remain competitive to others. It really is as if they're trying to turn fossil fuels into a commodity that is exclusive to manufacturing but you can't create manufacturing plants in a country that's attempting to outlaw the use of fossil fuels or is trying to impose a carbon tax so high that it would be pointless.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 6:29pm

Re: Re: Re:
"If you're going to say 'The ads are taking his statements out of context' it helps if you actually provide that context to support the claim."

I don't come to TD to do their jobs for them. Believe me, I'm tempted.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Norahc (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 6:45pm

Let's face it
Let's face it...the only part of the Constitution that either candidate really cares about is the minimum requirements to get elected. Everything else, especially the Bill of Rights needs to be modified in their opinions. The War on Terror, the War on Drugs, the War on Encryption, or even the War Against Butthurt will serve as their justification to further erode what little Rights we have remaining.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 7:48pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not to mention, the US has the absolute worst 'legal minefield' when it comes to anyone attempting to start a manufacturing business here no thanks to endless regulations imposed by multinational corporations and their armies of attorneys ripping out and creating their own laws (at the State level all the way to Federal level) so as to make us all as feeble as possible...

Which is why nobody is outsourcing any jobs to the US when it comes to just about anything and everything...Except for maybe small time niche markets.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 7:50pm

Re: Let's face it
It's not just the candidates that don't care about rights of human beings... the "State" has no care besides limiting it's liability... as is the same for any corporation.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 8:50pm

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
"...the majority of the article is always anti-Trump (and thus pro-Clinton)."

It takes a staggering lack of basic thinking skills to claim an anti-Trump position must be pro-Clinton. But since you're ok with making dumb leaps of logic, can we assume that since you're critical of this article then you must be against the First Amendment and free speech? What's your beef with that?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 8:51pm

Re: Re: Re:
"...I can see this campaign against him is nothing less than defamation..."

You can only see that because you have no idea what defamation is.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
JMT (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 8:54pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
We'd love to see you try to put Trump's statements "in context" and improve them in any way, shape or form.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 9:42pm

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
Actually, it is, because every time you bring up said election (or policy), the majority of the article is always anti-Trump (and thus pro-Clinton).

Uh, no. We've criticized both candidates pretty equally for saying stupid stuff.

You're not actually fooling anybody, Mike. Perhaps one day, you'll have your lips surgically removed from her asshole.

Can you present a single shred of evidence that I support Clinton? I don't recall ever saying anything supportive of her.

You seem to be one of those idiots who thinks that if you don't support Trump 100% you must support Hillary 100%. Go away, you're an idiot.

This site is not about politics. It's about policy and civil liberties and innovation. I criticize people from both parties equally when they say something or do something stupid. I don't give the slightest shit about the horse race tribalism that you seem to have bought into.

Don't like it? Go away. I won't miss you.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:01pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Some would say that is partially true

and those people are idiots.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
wait what

Did you just say "endless regulations imposed by multinational corporations"?

you...you've gotta be trolling, right? You can't possibly be that confused.

Multinational corporations are *in favor* of more regulation? That's, like, Borat-level "the Jews did 9/11" stuff.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:05pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is that an argument or an ad hom?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
techflaws (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:11pm

Re: Re: Re:
Have fun!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
techflaws (profile), Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:15pm

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
So, it's Mike's fault that Trump is a gormless buffoon who can't for the life of him stop himself from bungling up everything?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:27pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Re-read what I said...of course they're in favor of more regulations, why do you think the manufacturing strength of the US is on a death spiral?

Sorry, but building '500 million' solar panels as Hillery has promoted (despite the fact that the manufacturing process consists of releasing mass amounts of the most potent GHG in existence, sulfur hexafluoride aka SF6: http://www.solarindustrymag.com/online/issues/SI1309/FEAT_05_Hazardous_Materials_Used_In_Silicon_PV_ Cell_Production_A_Primer.html) is not going to build any new jobs if the entire manufacturing process relies on fossil fuels that are being taxed to death and/or outlawed on the basis of the hypothesis of catastrophic anthropocentric global warming (CAWG) which has never been validated in any of the IPCC reports nor has been elevated to theory since it has never confirmed as to the exact extent to which humans have an effect on the climate.

FFS, meteorologist can't make a sound prediction past 72 hours without the level of certainty dropping to the toss of a coin. 50/50

And we're basing a global western policy on a hypothesis that could potentially destroy us?

And before you go off and start citing the anti-science claim of 96%, go research what the actual questions were, who participated, how many, and then come back with me with a list of names...oh that's right, they don't list the names.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:36pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
FFS, even the Rockefellers', the family who created the oil industry, is completely invested in these so-called green energies and they initially started out selling snake oil and Exxon mobile is descendants of them...so no, obviously the oil industry has nothing to do with all of the skepticism if they're the ones that are most invested into it:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29310475

So don't even try to say I'm a shill for big oil.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 6th, 2016 @ 10:42pm

Re: Re: Re:
While you're at it, bring Whatever along with you. And when you return next January, don't let him tag along...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 12:14am

Re: Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses
Also, 3) the great many lies told by the litigant candidate would be exposed to a great degree in the process.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 12:57am

Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, that's how it works. You don't get to demand that a website cater to you personally, but you can go and read articles elsewhere that do interest you more.

Plus, there's lots of articles that don't interest me on most sites I visit. You know what I do? I scroll past it to the next one, not complain that I don't like the subject matter.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
MrTroy (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 12:59am

Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
Waitwaitwait... are you saying that TechDirt is pro-Trump? Now I'm confused.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 3:43am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
To which my response is an invocation of Hitchen's Razor: 'What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.'

Or in other words I don't believe you and will assume you're attempting a 'Look, a distraction!' until you provide supporting evidence to back up your claim.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 3:48am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
"I don't come to TD to do their jobs for them"

You're not being asked to. You're being asked to back up your own claim.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
John Mayor, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 4:54am

STICK A SOCK IN IT
You know!... someone could make a fortune selling insoles with Trump's yawning mug on them!
.
Please!... no emails!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:08am

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses
It's not slander or defamation when it is true, in this country anyways ... for now. I'm sure there are those out there that would like to change that, some have even publicly stated their desire to do so.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:11am

Re: Re: "You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."
Have you seen what happens to people at trump rallies when they "disagree" ?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:17am

Re: Re: Re:
"edited to skew his original words ... nothing less than defamation"

A few examples might benefit your argument. Also, does your claim then imply that Breitbart is guilty of defamation regarding their editing of clips from a planned parenthood "interview" ?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:21am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I saw the entire "context" from which several of the ads were obtained. In my opinion, the ad did not twist or spin what was said in any way as it was quite clear what was intended by the speaker.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:31am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
1 or 0, I don't know!

The 11111100000 election for ya!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wendy Cockcroft, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 5:58am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ditto. I'm not a gamer but it's Mike's blog, not mine. I skip those posts and move on to the ones I'm actually interested in. This is a particularly interesting one and if Tim hadn't made DannyB's funny comment First Word, I'd have asked for it.

Good one, Danny.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Wendy Cockcroft, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 6:01am

Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
Does this mean we'll be seeing "Thanks, Masnick" memes all over the internet?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 6:37am

Re: Re: Let's face it
Not sure why you overlooked congress
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 6:45am

Re: Re: Re:
So TD, since it's Trump, it's okay to defame him?

Trump's own mouth, along with his twitter feed are Trump's worst enemies.

He should sue himself.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 8:41am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wow, that sure is a wall of wrong, but I'll start with the low-hanging fruit:

FFS, meteorologist can't make a sound prediction past 72 hours without the level of certainty dropping to the toss of a coin.

You didn't die today; does that mean that if somebody says "you're eventually going to die" they must not know what they're talking about?

Climate is not weather. Don't be stupid. Long-term trends produce more reliable predictions than short-term ones; that's basic fucking statistics.

I can't predict when you're going to die. But I can predict with absolute certainty that it's going to happen within the next 100 years.

Maybe it'll rain tomorrow and maybe it won't. But it's hotter this year than it was last year, or the year before, or the year before, or any other time on record.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 8:43am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm sorry, you were expecting an argument in response to your well-reasoned, impeccably-cited source of what "some would say"?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 8:44am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
FFS, meteorologist can't make a sound prediction past 72 hours without the level of certainty dropping to the toss of a coin. 50/50

Weather and climate are not the same thing. Rather than filling this space with reasons why, I'll just link to a very short article written in layman's terms that answers your question.
http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2009-03/weather-prediction-climate-prediction-wha t%E2%80%99s-diff
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 8:46am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...
I can't tell if you're joking.

Please tell me you're joking?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Thad, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 8:58am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's nice that you've produced a citation, Anon, but it doesn't actually do anything to support your claim.

In what way does "the Rockefellers have investments in clean energy" support your assertion that multinational corporations favor increased regulations?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 9:19am

How do you know a politician is lying? When their lips are moving.

Wouldn't it be nice to hold politicians to a higher standard and actually require their speeches and ads to be truthful and not just the half or less truths that they deliver?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
sorrykb (profile), Oct 7th, 2016 @ 9:19am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think we're saying you're a shill for Big Ignorance.

And you're doing a bang-up job, BTW.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, Oct 7th, 2016 @ 11:15am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

because

you can't run a manufacturing plant off of solar or wind .. and still remain competitive

----------------------------

I think this claim needs additional data, otherwise it is complete bunk.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Report: DEA Blowing Money On Liars, Thieves... >>

<< Daily Deal: Computer Hacker Professional...

Follow Techdirt

Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad | Hide Techdirt ads

Essential Reading

Hot Topics

New To Techdirt?

Explore some core concepts:

read all »

Techdirt Deals

Report this ad | Hide Techdirt ads

Techdirt Insider Chat

Join the Insider Chat

Report this ad | Hide Techdirt ads

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Name
Email	Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
URL
Subject
Comment	this is for spambots, do not use this
Options	Save me a cookie

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Name
Email	Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
URL
Subject
Comment	this is for spambots, do not use this
Options	Save me a cookie

Friday
11:44	Surprise: Intelligence Community Comes Out Against Congressional Plan To Weaken Intelligence Oversight (0)
10:44	FBI Tests The Waters On Another Attempt To Force Apple To Unlock An iPhone (12)
10:39	Daily Deal: eduCBA Tech Training Bundle (0)
09:33	Comcast Dramatically Expands Unnecessary Broadband Caps -- For 'Fairness' (13)
08:41	Details Of Charges Against Backpage Execs For 'Pimping' Look Totally Bogus (23)
06:29	Argentina Not Only Wants To Bring In E-Voting, It Will Make It Illegal To Check The System For Electoral Fraud (22)
03:22	8 Years Later: Saeed Malekpour Is Still In An Iranian Prison Simply For Writing Open Source Software (13)
Thursday
23:55	Digital Homicide Drops Its Lawsuit Against Steam Users, Says It's Shutting Down Completely (27)
15:53	Inspector General's Report Notes Section 215 Requests Down Sharply Since 2013 (7)
14:25	Yahoo Email Scanning May Sink EU Privacy Shield Agreement (18)

Trump Adds To His Anti-First Amendment Legacy In Threatening To Sue Clinton For Campaign Ads

from the have-you-read-the-bill-of-rights dept

Reader Comments (rss)

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

Not a License to Commit Offenses

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

I wonder...

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?

Re:

Re: Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?

Re:

Re: Re:

Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re:

Re: Can SLAPP lawsuits be used?

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: I wonder...

Re:

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re:

Re: Re:

Actually...

Re: Re: Re:

Re:

No…

Re: Re:

"You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."

Re:

Re: Re:

Re: Re:

Re: "You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."

Re: Re: Re:

Re:

Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Let's face it

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Let's face it

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

STICK A SOCK IN IT

Re: Not a License to Commit Offenses

Re: Re: "You like dogs right?" "No." "Oh, then you must like cats." "No." "But... those are the only two options."

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...

Re: Re: Let's face it

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As usual, you're full of shit...