Which I would be fine with, if it were just a he-said, she-said and at the end of the day everyone gets to go home. The problem is when they start bringing litigation against press outlets, specifically liberal press outlets (despite conservative press outlets reporting on the same event), specifically a liberal press outlet that has been targeted by the president, specifically when the president has advocated using libel laws to silence the press, and specifically with a fairly arbitrary amount of monetary damages that is very obviously being used to target and intimidate the owner of said press outlet.

So you've got nothing? Which I guess is par for the course with you.

They absolutely did surround him, and they started chanting "MAGA" and "go back to Africa" at a group of black protestors unprovoked. Not to mention that there's video of them going around yelling at and harassing passerbys earlier in the day. This entire thing was a planned right-wing stunt designed to harass legitimate reporters and weaken press protections.

@Xabiss said:

@theone86 said:

@vl4d_l3nin said:

Cool, because deliberately lying about kids isn't.

Shame if anyone loses their job over this. They could always learn to code, I guess.

Only they weren't deliberately lying, they were reporting on facts on the ground.

Facts on the ground.... ROFLMAO. All it would of taken is them watching the entire video one time and it would cleared up everything about the story.

Also remember when a CNN correspondent wrote this?

All I see are facts, that face is truly punchable.

Her thing being triggering the conjobs? Yes, I agree, doing her thing quite well.

Only they weren't deliberately lying, they were reporting on facts on the ground.

I remember in the lead-up to Iraq all anyone was talking about was how bad a guy Hussein was, no one was stopping to talk about whether or not it was a good idea to go to war with him. Same shit, different day.

You're accusing me of just making shit up, and yet you're bringing up constitutional republics in a discussion that has literally nothing to do with them. Oh wait, I get it, the old "we're a constitutional republic, so we don't have to pay attention to what the majority actually wants" card you conjobs so love playing. Here's a hint genius, being a constitutional republic does not mean the democratic process doesn't matter, nor does it mean that public opinion can just be ignored. Thinking that it does exposes how much of an authoritarian you are.

Authoritarians don't believe in studies that measure popular support, now THERE'S a surprise!

It's worse than not telling Congress at all. It's inflaming partisan tensions and setting a precedent for only involving Congress when you know you can get your way.