Acceptable registrations in the queue through March 16 at 11:00a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

Fake News thread

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
bmw
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Fake News thread

Post by bmw » Tue Oct 30, 2018 11:37 am

Time for a new long-running thread - the "fake news" thread. When you find fake news, post it here.

I'll start with this one:

Image

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics ... index.html

And here is a perfect example of why CNN's ratings are in the tank and why I say that virtually no journalistic standards exist there.

Let's break down this headline grammatically. The word "and" allows it to be read as follows:

Trump claims he can defy Constitution.
Trump claims he can end birthright citizenship.

While the latter is correct, the first part is patently false. Trump did NOT claim that he can defy the Constitution. The author of the article may believe that Trump taking such an action would be unconstitutional, but to attribute your own legal opinion to the actual spoken words of another person when that person made no such statement is...

....wait for it....

FAKE NEWS.

NPR does a much better job of explaining the legal complexities of such an action:

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/30/66204390 ... tive-order



Deleted User 8570

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Deleted User 8570 » Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:51 pm

bmw wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 11:37 am
Time for a new long-running thread - the "fake news" thread. When you find fake news, post it here.

I'll start with this one:

Image

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics ... index.html

And here is a perfect example of why CNN's ratings are in the tank and why I say that virtually no journalistic standards exist there.

Let's break down this headline grammatically. The word "and" allows it to be read as follows:

Trump claims he can defy Constitution.
Trump claims he can end birthright citizenship.

While the latter is correct, the first part is patently false. Trump did NOT claim that he can defy the Constitution. The author of the article may believe that Trump taking such an action would be unconstitutional, but to attribute your own legal opinion to the actual spoken words of another person when that person made no such statement is...

....wait for it....

FAKE NEWS.

NPR does a much better job of explaining the legal complexities of such an action:

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/30/66204390 ... tive-order
He implies it strongly... there is no way they’ll let him void part of the constitution with an executive order... if they did then where exactly would that end? Free press stripped from the first amendment? Voting rights for women voided... the possibilities are limitless and the thought is rather frightening actually... I don’t know how they figure they can do this...



Matt
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Where Ben Zonia couldn't cut it

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Matt » Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm

Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.


What's more pathetic: harassing an old man who is paying to do a radio show or supporting a grifter like Trump?

Matt
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Where Ben Zonia couldn't cut it

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Matt » Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm

Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.


What's more pathetic: harassing an old man who is paying to do a radio show or supporting a grifter like Trump?

bmw
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Fake News thread

Post by bmw » Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:03 pm

Oh I'm not suggesting he won't have a difficult time in Court. I'm just pointing out that it is factually false to claim that Trump is out there saying "hey, I'm going to knowingly and intentionally void part of the Constitution." Trump claims that his counsel has advised him that such an executive order would be legal. An accurate headline would be along the lines of "Trump claims he can legally end birthright citizenship by executive order."

There does appear to be at least some uncertainty in the 14th Amendment as it does not outright grant citizenship to people born here. The full language is "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Keyword here is AND followed by the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." This means that simply being born or naturalized in the US isn't enough - you must also be subject to the US's jurisdiction. There are indeed people who meet the first part but not the second part, such as children of foreign diplomats. The legal question becomes whether those born here to parents who are here illegally are subject to the jurisdiction of the US. Apparently Supreme Court precedent suggests that they are. If Trump issues his executive order, he will undoubtedly be sued and it will end up at the SCOTUS, and the Court may re-visit that very question.

Trump apparently believes that being born here to illegal parents does not (or at least should not) subject you to the jurisdiction of the United States.



Deleted User 8570

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Deleted User 8570 » Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:21 pm

Matt wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm
Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.
She is a conservative just not a Trumper... you CAN be one or the other...



Matt
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Where Ben Zonia couldn't cut it

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Matt » Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:24 am

NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:21 pm
Matt wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm
Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.
She is a conservative just not a Trumper... you CAN be one or the other...
Wrong: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4098 ... re-someone


What's more pathetic: harassing an old man who is paying to do a radio show or supporting a grifter like Trump?

User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 10100
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Fake News thread

Post by TC Talks » Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:49 am

So you decided this based on the "American Principles Project"?

The "American Bathroom Grafitti Institute" calls you a cum guzzling moron. How do you live with the shame?


“The more you can increase fear of drugs, crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.”
― Noam Chomsky

Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.

User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Bryce » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:11 am

NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:51 pm


He implies it strongly... there is no way they’ll let him void part of the constitution with an executive order...
Just which part of the constitution would he be voiding by ending the practice of bestowing citizenship on children born here after their parents entered the country illegally?

First, tell me exactly when the birthright citizenship practice first started. Was it an act of Congress? Did the Supreme Court make a ruling? No. It started by policy of the Executive Branch back in the early 60's. If the Executive Branch can enact a policy, the Executive Branch can certainly undo it.

Second, the 14th Amendment, which was written and passed to confer citizenship, and all the rights and duties that come with it, to freed slaves to counter the piss poor Dred Scott ruling, clearly states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
People that enter the country illegally, and their offspring, are still subject to the jurisdiction of the country they were born and owe no allegiance to the United States.

The People who wrote and passed the 14th had NO intention to extend birthright to people here illegally.


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

Deleted User 8570

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Deleted User 8570 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:48 am

Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:11 am
NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:51 pm


He implies it strongly... there is no way they’ll let him void part of the constitution with an executive order...
Just which part of the constitution would he be voiding by ending the practice of bestowing citizenship on children born here after their parents entered the country illegally?

First, tell me exactly when the birthright citizenship practice first started. Was it an act of Congress? Did the Supreme Court make a ruling? No. It started by policy of the Executive Branch back in the early 60's. If the Executive Branch can enact a policy, the Executive Branch can certainly undo it.

Second, the 14th Amendment, which was written and passed to confer citizenship, and all the rights and duties that come with it, to freed slaves to counter the piss poor Dred Scott ruling, clearly states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
People that enter the country illegally, and their offspring, are still subject to the jurisdiction of the country they were born and owe no allegiance to the United States.

The People who wrote and passed the 14th had NO intention to extend birthright to people here illegally.
Birthright citizenship started in 1868 and was affirmed by the Supreme Court In 1898... nice try. Anyhow the courts and congress do this sort of clarifying and not an executive order. If such precedent were set up then the next Democrat could “clarify” well regulated militia. Just think about this for a second... just like with the unlimited subpoena powers the GOP gave themselves in the house causing endless investigations of Trump if the Democrats get the House, be careful what you wish for...



Deleted User 8570

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Deleted User 8570 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:51 am

Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:24 am
NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:21 pm
Matt wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm
Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.
She is a conservative just not a Trumper... you CAN be one or the other...
Wrong: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4098 ... re-someone
Says a bunch of far right folks about a moderate... what about George Will? You gonna argue he’s a socialist or something? Give me a break...



User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7141
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Bryce » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:07 am

NS8401 wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:48 am
Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:11 am
NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 1:51 pm


He implies it strongly... there is no way they’ll let him void part of the constitution with an executive order...
Just which part of the constitution would he be voiding by ending the practice of bestowing citizenship on children born here after their parents entered the country illegally?

First, tell me exactly when the birthright citizenship practice first started. Was it an act of Congress? Did the Supreme Court make a ruling? No. It started by policy of the Executive Branch back in the early 60's. If the Executive Branch can enact a policy, the Executive Branch can certainly undo it.

Second, the 14th Amendment, which was written and passed to confer citizenship, and all the rights and duties that come with it, to freed slaves to counter the piss poor Dred Scott ruling, clearly states, "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
People that enter the country illegally, and their offspring, are still subject to the jurisdiction of the country they were born and owe no allegiance to the United States.

The People who wrote and passed the 14th had NO intention to extend birthright to people here illegally.
Birthright citizenship started in 1868 and was affirmed by the Supreme Court In 1898... nice try. Anyhow the courts and congress do this sort of clarifying and not an executive order. If such precedent were set up then the next Democrat could “clarify” well regulated militia. Just think about this for a second... just like with the unlimited subpoena powers the GOP gave themselves in the house causing endless investigations of Trump if the Democrats get the House, be careful what you wish for...
Birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens did NOT start in 1868 and there is no such SCOTUS ruling.


New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.

Matt
Posts: 9845
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Where Ben Zonia couldn't cut it

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Matt » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:18 am

TC Talks wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:49 am
So you decided this based on the "American Principles Project"?

The "American Bathroom Grafitti Institute" calls you a cum guzzling moron. How do you live with the shame?
Anyone need more proof that liberalism is a mental illness? Keep reading TCT...
NS8401 wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 10:51 am
Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 31, 2018 5:24 am
NS8401 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 8:21 pm
Matt wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 3:00 pm
Amazon is discontinuing the daily WaPo headline push, which is probably good for my sanity. I've never seen more poorly written headlines than the clickbait nonsense they come up with. Also, it's very dishonest for them to label Jennifer Rubin as a conservative.
She is a conservative just not a Trumper... you CAN be one or the other...
Wrong: https://thehill.com/homenews/media/4098 ... re-someone
Says a bunch of far right folks about a moderate... what about George Will? You gonna argue he’s a socialist or something? Give me a break...
It's not that she's anti-Trump that bothers me, it's that she's so rabidly anti-Trump that she abandons any facade of intellectual honesty by changing prior opinions based on Trump. It's embarrassing.


What's more pathetic: harassing an old man who is paying to do a radio show or supporting a grifter like Trump?

Deleted User 12047

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Deleted User 12047 » Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:34 pm

Someone who wishes that posting it makes it true lied when they wrote:Birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens did NOT start in 1868 and there is no such SCOTUS ruling.
Sorry, Sparky, but yes it did and yes there was.


United States v. Wong Kim Ark

In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who

is born in the United States
of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
whose parents have a legal permanent domicile and legal residence in the United States
whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power
to which they are subject becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.

I'll grant you that the SCOTUS ruling refers to "legal residence" so you may be able to apply the exemption to those who've entered the country illegally.
But then the argument comes over the words "under the jurisdiction of" the US. If the parents are not considered "under the jurisdiction of" the US, that means they cannot be prosecuted for being here illegally. It's a Catch 22 the size of a certain someone's ego.



Mega Hertz
Posts: 4265
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:09 pm
Location: Brighton

Re: Fake News thread

Post by Mega Hertz » Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:28 pm

I never thought I'd see the day where we'd be discussing amendments and the COTUS. Whatever happened to "THAT'S THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THAT'S THE WAY IT STAYS!!!"?


"Internet is no more like radio than intravenous feeding is like fine dining."
-TurkeyTop

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic