Submit your comments on this article | |
-Lurid Crime Tales- | |
Dem Lawmaker Introduces Bill to Make Intimidating or Attacking | |
2018-02-06 | |
Define "threatening or intimidating." Count the number of journalists who've announced they’re "frightened" by something that turned out to be perfectly innocuous in the past ten years. Revise the definition accordingly. The bill makes it a federal crime "to intentionally cause bodily injury to a journalist affecting interstate or foreign commerce in the course of reporting or in a manner designed to intimidate him or her from newsgathering for a media organization," and "represents a clear statement that assaults against people engaged in reporting is unacceptable, and helps ensure law enforcement is able to punish those who interfere with newsgathering." Existing laws against intimidation are of course entirely inadequate. "President Donald Trump’s campaign and administration have created a toxic atmosphere," Swalwell claimed. "It’s not just about labeling reports of his constant falsehoods as #FakeNews ‐ it’s his casting of media personalities and outlets as anti-American targets, and encouraging people to engage in violence." Presidentially-incited riots have been pretty sparse lately. Swalwell cited Trump referring to "fake news" reporting by mainstream media outlets as "a stain on America," and some mainstream media outlets as "the enemy of the American People." He also referenced Trump’s tweet of a video of himself body-slamming a person with the CNN logo superimposed on the person’s head. As soon as I saw that one, by golly, I had a hard time #Resisting the urge to go out and riot. "Not all attacks on journalists this year have been committed by Trump supporters," Swalwell admitted, "but the fact remains that rhetoric emanating from the world’s most powerful office is stoking an environment in which these attacks proliferate. We must send a loud, clear message that such violence won’t be tolerated." The First Amendment's been doing that for better than two hundred years, hasn't it? Swalwell’s act is co-sponsored by a host of Swalwell’s Democratic colleagues, including Reps. Steve Cohen (TN), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Maxine Waters (CA), and Gwen Moore (WI). | |
Posted by:Besoeker |
#12 So I take it hanging them from lamppost along the Washington Mall would be frowned upon... Pity... |
Posted by: CrazyFool 2018-02-06 23:47 |
#11 This Dem should be more concerned about protecting us from the MSM since MSM = Dems. |
Posted by: JohnQC 2018-02-06 23:01 |
#10 CNN's Jim Acosta |
Posted by: Frank G 2018-02-06 21:03 |
#9 The Party seeks to protect Pravda. In other news, the Sun rose in the East this morning. |
Posted by: charger 2018-02-06 17:09 |
#8 Ignore who? (Heh) |
Posted by: Alaska Paul 2018-02-06 10:55 |
#7 I think it's best to ignore them. |
Posted by: Abu Uluque 2018-02-06 10:50 |
#6 Now define "Journalist". I assume that there will be an official gov't list of such which will forbid the inclusion of anyone to the right of Mao. Anyone think that a conservative from the likes of PJM would warrant protection? Me neither. |
Posted by: AlanC 2018-02-06 09:32 |
#5 Mr. Stalwell embodies the insane that is the "Progressive" Democrat Party. |
Posted by: Vast Right Wing Conspiracy 2018-02-06 09:30 |
#4 Since the MSM talking heads and word merchants don't qualify as journalists, are they still a protected species? |
Posted by: JohnQC 2018-02-06 09:05 |
#3 Lite |
Posted by: Frank G 2018-02-06 08:45 |
#2 Swalwell is a smarmy Schiff-Lute punk. Tucker Carlson repeatedly has him on to demolish him |
Posted by: Frank G 2018-02-06 07:21 |
#1 More truth on the internet than in the Legacy Infotainment Enterprises. So, who qualifies? Given the 1st Amendment protection was as much as describing the technology for the free flow of information than an institution (that was yet to exist). If we can qualify blogger just think of the employment possibilities in government for lawyers gunning for the SJW types for threatening or attacking! |
Posted by: Procopius2k 2018-02-06 07:18 |