Trump's War on the First Amendment

[Some Schmo]

Uh, yeah. That's my deal.

Do you even know what integrity is?

Apparently not....so maybe you can explain how your posts are an example of integrity, and mine are not?

I guess that is a no, for the bet I offered.

I would, but your problem has already been explained in this thread, and you choose to ignore it. You're ignoring the circumstances behind Kimmel's short termination when you repeatedly ask the same questions regarding "consequences." You aren't asking your questions in good faith. You're purposely ignoring a big part of the picture as though it doesn't exist because it screws the bad conclusion you've drawn.

I'm not going to explain it to you. You're a big boy. You should have been able to figure out integrity by now, but you haven't. You lack integrity (at least in your posting on this board) perhaps because you don't know what it is or it's not important enough to you.

And that makes me think, well there's someone not worth attempting a real conversation with. Time waster.

[Gadianton]

The glee about (Kimmel's) his suspension by some free speech super fans was hypocritical. And the pressure from the FCC was outrageous and unacceptable. Government controls of ideas and speech are anti-American they're anti-democratic, and they're dangerous...I think most people agree the FCC guy behaving like Don Corleone, not a good idea. Probably not a good idea for Donald Trump to be publicly saying the complete opposite to what his administration says, which is they are not interfering in Jimmy Kimmel and his free speech, when he clearly thinks they should be.

gg Whiskey. I can pour you a participation award if you want.

[Whiskey]

The glee about (Kimmel's) his suspension by some free speech super fans was hypocritical. And the pressure from the FCC was outrageous and unacceptable. Government controls of ideas and speech are anti-American they're anti-democratic, and they're dangerous...I think most people agree the FCC guy behaving like Don Corleone, not a good idea. Probably not a good idea for Donald Trump to be publicly saying the complete opposite to what his administration says, which is they are not interfering in Jimmy Kimmel and his free speech, when he clearly thinks they should be.

gg Whiskey. I can pour you a participation award if you want.

Nah, demote me from this league. One year in the minors.

I am not moving off of my conclusion based on Piers' conclusion. I thought we all agreed that Trump was a POS. Not sure this moves the needle at all. They hypocrisy accusation needs a bit more support, given Kimmel's and others' glee in seeing Roseanne and god knows who else get suspended. Still looks like a FAFO situation to me. Will this get me a further demotion?

[Kishkumen]

I am sure we all remember the FCC's involvement in the cancellation of Roseanne Barr's show.

Right?

Right?

And remember how people across the political spectrum came to Roseanne Barr's defense because the government was meddling in Barr's show and suppressing speech it did not like?

Who was president at the time?

Hmmmm . . .

Can't quite place the person.

Must have been Obama who was president in 2018 when Roseann Barr's show was canceled. And it was surely his FCC chairman who appeared in public offering treats to any good broadcasting corporation that would rid us all of the Roseanne scourge.

Yeah, it was that guy Ajit Pai who worked as FCC Chairman for . . .

Oh, no! No! This can't be right! It was Trump who was president at the time!

Well, that's weird.

[Markk]

Apparently not....so maybe you can explain how your posts are an example of integrity, and mine are not?

I guess that is a no, for the bet I offered.

I would, but your problem has already been explained in this thread, and you choose to ignore it. You're ignoring the circumstances behind Kimmel's short termination when you repeatedly ask the same questions regarding "consequences." You aren't asking your questions in good faith. You're purposely ignoring a big part of the picture as though it doesn't exist because it screws the bad conclusion you've drawn.

I'm not going to explain it to you. You're a big boy. You should have been able to figure out integrity by now, but you haven't. You lack integrity (at least in your posting on this board) perhaps because you don't know what it is or it's not important enough to you.

And that makes me think, well there's someone not worth attempting a real conversation with. Time waster.

LOl, come on schmo, it is not like you will get fined or thrown in jail if you enter into a actual conversation here. My assertion is simple and without ignoring anything, read the OP.

Jimmy Kimmel is the lastest casualty. Trump's FCC threatened ABC, owned by Disney, that it would pull ABC's broadcasting license unless Kimmel's show was taken off the air.

These people are trampling on the First Amendment.

It is just false, and both ABC/Disney, and even Kimmel himself admitted it was Disney's choice to suspend him. There is nothing cryptic here, he was wrong and too weak to admit it.

[Kishkumen]

It is just false, and both ABC/Disney, and even Kimmel himself admitted it was Disney's choice to suspend him. There is nothing cryptic here, he was wrong and too weak to admit it.

You have really poor reading comprehension. Everyone with some savvy about the white collar world knows that corporate entities put out BS statements all the time, and the employee that is making nice back is expected to return the gesture. But, you probably don't work in the kind of job that would have ever required that sort of transaction, so maybe you can't be blamed. It's just that, to everyone who knows what is going on--and that is just about anyone who has had any measure of success in the professional classes or the corporate world--you look like a rube right now.

[Markk]

It is just false, and both ABC/Disney, and even Kimmel himself admitted it was Disney's choice to suspend him. There is nothing cryptic here, he was wrong and too weak to admit it.

You have really poor reading comprehension. Everyone with some savvy about the white collar world knows that corporate entities put out BS statements all the time, and the employee that is making nice back is expected to return the gesture. But, you probably don't work in the kind of job that would have ever required that sort of transaction, so maybe you can't be blamed. It's just that, to everyone who knows what is going on--and that is just about anyone who has had any measure of success in the professional classes or the corporate world, you look like a rube right now.

Lol. you are just guessing at best, and in reality desperately reaching for a way out of your very ignorant OP. Now you throw out more ignorant guesses that I somehow do not know, understand, and work in the corporate world, or understand how corporations work.

Do you fill out and submit monthly reports showing profit percentages, either in the red and black, and sit down with the CFO and/or VP to discuss how to improve profits? You have no idea, once again what you are even talking about, and again stuck your foot in your mouth. I am a senior manager in a corporation, what position do you hold on the corporate ladder for the corporation you work for, and what interaction do you have with the managers in that corporation?

But anyways....

I read your OP, and link....and there is plenty of bandwidth here for you to prove what you are now claiming. Show me the evidence that contradicts the statements by ABC/Disney, that it was their decision, and that Kimmel was actually lying and toeing corporate policy in his Jimmy Kimmel Live return implication that it was Disney's decision. Where those fake tears by Jimmy, or was his monolog sincere?

[Whiskey]

It is just false, and both ABC/Disney, and even Kimmel himself admitted it was Disney's choice to suspend him. There is nothing cryptic here, he was wrong and too weak to admit it.

You have really poor reading comprehension. Everyone with some savvy about the white collar world knows that corporate entities put out BS statements all the time, and the employee that is making nice back is expected to return the gesture. But, you probably don't work in the kind of job that would have ever required that sort of transaction, so maybe you can't be blamed. It's just that, to everyone who knows what is going on--and that is just about anyone who has had any measure of success in the professional classes or the corporate world--you look like a rube right now.

Kish man. What is your incentive to lie to Markk - about Markk? Are you trying to completely crap out every last runny squirt of credibility you may have had remaining?

Really, walk me through this. You wake up and decide you are going to say unverified nonsense to someone and they know it is not true. Why do that? What outcome were you hoping for?

[Kishkumen]

Do you fill out and submit monthly reports showing profit percentages, either in the red and black, and sit down with the CFO and/or VP to discuss how to improve profits? You have no idea, once again what you are even talking about, and again stuck your foot in your mouth. I am a senior manager in a corporation, what position do you hold on the corporate ladder for the corporation you work for, and what interaction do you have with the managers in that corporation?

But anyways....

Yeah, irrelevant. Try again.

[Kishkumen]

Kish man. What is your incentive to lie to Markk - about Markk? Are you trying to completely crap out every last runny squirt of credibility you may have had remaining?

Really, walk me through this. You wake up and decide you are going to say unverified nonsense to someone and they know it is not true. Why do that? What outcome were you hoping for?

Empty verbiage. Distractions. Lie about Markk? What the eff are you even talking about?

Here's one for you: you never had a runny squirt of credibility, and you are not improving in that area with every additional empty, nasty trolling post you put up.