President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

It will limit their ability to effectively recruit, but they won't just go away forever, much as that would be preferable.

 

That doesn't answer my question.

 

New York Times reporter reports what she saw:



Gets criticized for it.

Changed her description.




This is the thought police in action.

 

Because your question was based on the false premise that banning their political speech is designed to make them disappear.

It is simply another tool for limiting their effectiveness in pursuing their genocidal goals.

 

If you're going to do that, you've got to be perfect. No errors. The people exposed here are -- in most cases -- not public figures and therefore have an easier time proving damages than public figures do.
How long before the person behind this effort gets sued?
I'm not an expert in libel law, but ....

 

That wasn't my premise. You said you could address things head-on and limit speech you feel is hateful at the same time. My point is that you can't address things head-on if you disallow the objectionable speech in the first place.

 

Agreed. I'm not remotely a fan of the internet crowdsourced ID efforts. That's just playing with fire.

 

The guy really was at the protest. He just wasn't photographed with Trump.

The only guy damaged by association here is Trump.

 

There was an example in the news this week that proves you incorrect in this statement.

An American tourist gave the Nazi salute in Germany — so a stranger beat him up, police say

 

What would the lawsuit be? It's more defamatory to be in a photo with Trump than with a group of Nazis?

 

And Trump has no case because 1) He's a public figure and 2) It doesn't paint him in a false light, because while this specific picture was fake, the light it casts them in is that he associates with the alt-right. And Bannon still exists.

 

How is that?