Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 2 p.m. No.16946045   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6060 >>6186 >>6213 >>6354 >>6544 >>6655 >>6668 >>6735 >>6766

(Delusional)–CNN Chief’s Republican Apology Tour

GOP officials say they're skeptical of Chris Licht's pledge to tamp down on-air partisanship

Eliana Johnson • August 1, 2022 2:00 pm

 

CNN's new CEO, Chris Licht, has been attending to an audience neglected by the network for the past several years: Republican lawmakers.

 

The network boss camped out in mid-July in a room on the first floor of the Senate side of the Capitol, S-120, where he asked GOP lawmakers to come talk with him privately. That arrangement avoided alerting the reporters who stalk the halls of the Capitol, sources said, and accommodated Republican lawmakers who preferred not to be seen hobnobbing with him.

 

Licht's message, according to one of the lawmakers who sat down with him as well as to several sources briefed on the exchanges: "We want to win back your trust."

 

The CNN chief spent between 45 minutes and an hour cajoling GOP lawmakers who no longer appear on the network to come back on the air — and assuring them he'd praise producers for inviting them and communicate his displeasure if he doesn't believe they are treated fairly

 

"I think he does genuinely want that to happen," one Republican lawmaker told the Washington Free Beacon. "Put aside ideology, I think he thinks CNN sucks."

 

Licht met last week with the leaders of both parties, Axios reported, but his overtures to Republican lawmakers were more extensive than previously known. A CNN spokesman, Matt Dornic, declined to comment on the private meetings but said that "Chris has made it clear that his top priority is to make CNN a place for fair and respectful dialogue, analysis and debate. He believes our audiences deserve to hear from elected officials on both sides of the aisle and will continue to engage a variety of voices."

 

The charm offensive underscores Licht's effort to reverse the course set by his predecessor, Jeff Zucker, who was pushed out of CNN in February ostensibly over a consensual sexual relationship with a colleague. Zucker helped transform CNN into ground zero for the strident resistance to former president Donald Trump and Republicans more broadly, with personalities like Jim Acosta and Brian Stelter adopting nakedly partisan stances that would once have seemed strange in a newsroom—though it is now par for the course.

 

Since joining the network in April, Licht has made clear he is trying to do something different. Just weeks into his tenure, he announced the abrupt cancellation of CNN's much-vaunted digital media project, CNN+, just a month after its splashy launch.

 

But Licht has made few personnel changes. While he elevated Virginia Moseley to the network's top editorial spot, Puck‘s Dylan Byers has observed that "what's actually notable" about the changes he's made thus far "is that the leadership team is comprised of exactly the same people who were working under Zucker. One might disparagingly call it a rearranging of deck chairs on the Titanic."

 

Licht's pitch was a tough sell, sources said, given the hostility CNN anchors have expressed toward top Republicans. Among others, The Lead host Jake Tapper has floated the idea of banning from his show any Republican lawmaker who questioned the 2020 election results, asking in May 2021, "How am I supposed to believe anything they say?" a stance his CNN colleague Chris Wallace has dismissed as "moral posturing."

 

OutFront host Erin Burnett, meanwhile, skewered House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) for removing Rep. Liz Cheney (R., Wyo.) from her leadership position: "He says he is for a big tent party that embraces free thought and debate," Burnett said in May 2021. "Wow. He has—in polite terms—gall." And Sunday show host Fareed Zakaria has argued that GOP senator Tom Cotton (Ark.) wants the United States to "imitate the Chinese Communist Party."

 

Pressed about how he would change course without making major personnel changes, Licht appears to be relying on the force of his authority and personality, sources said. "He kept saying, ‘I'm in charge, I'm in charge, they answer to me,'" the GOP lawmaker said. "‘They don't answer to the workforce, they don't answer to the viewers, they answer to me.'"

 

(kek they didn’t even listen to him when he told them to stop using “The Big Lie” and accusing Trump of lies about the election…he’s dreaming)

 

Licht also said that he is not focused on the ratings, at least in the near term, emphasizing that the bulk of CNN's revenue comes from cable-subscription fees rather than from advertising, and that his boss, Warner Brothers Discovery chief David Zaslav, is committed to dragging the network back to the center.

 

https://freebeacon.com/media/chris-lichts-republican-apology-tour/

 

https://twitter.com/elianayjohnson/status/1554169040616161283?s=20&t=LYBB8OLRgbfYydfgJ8e0nw

Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 2:50 p.m. No.16946214   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6278 >>6612

He's right you know. It would be like shooting down Senator Feinstein, if she wasn't already ded

 

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1554113724960710661?s=20&t=d94wQj2HptsEKDOiHnhNxw

Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 3:56 p.m. No.16946426   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Trump’s Lawsuit Against BigTech – Is it Viable?

 

Anything Trump does the media will call a joke. This lawsuit they all claim Trump will lose. But their bias blinds them to two important points one of which he makes which is that they are acting under the color of law which means that the First Amendment would apply to a private person or entity. Big Tech is claiming they can do as they like because the constitution only applies to the government – not them. This may be true ordinarily, but not if someone is acting with the sanction of the government. In other words, you hire someone to kill somebody and then claim you did not kill anyone. The assassin did so under your orders so you are still liable for the murder.

 

This is a very loose example of what would be acting under the color of law. The central claim in Mr. Trump’s class-action lawsuit states that the defendants should betreated as state actors(under color of law) and are bound by the First Amendment when they engage in selective political censorship. This is a valid claim. Their censorship constitutes state action because the government granted them immunity from legal liability. They have clearly engaged in selective censorship nullifying free speech. That is not a frivolous claim, but I question if Trump’s lawyers have really done a good job on this issue.

 

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

 

Secondly, Trump has sued Facebook and Twitter for violating his First Amendment rights. If you actually look at Section 230, it does NOT authorize censorship of political speech or canceling someone because they were against vaccines or Fauci. We typically hear that Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act of 1996 preempts any such state laws and shields Big Tech 100% from any lawsuits. However, that line of thought is what Big Tech wants people to believe, and it benefited Democrats so they pretended they were correct.

 

However, read the statute and you will see that this is one massive misapplication of Section 230. This section only shields Big Tech from civil liability suits regarding the censorship of sexually obscene or excessively violent material. They have embarked on a political agenda that is the same method of the Communist revolutions to silence all opposition. In the vast majority of cases, political speech and cultural commentary are not sexually obscene or excessively violent.

 

Trump has challenged Section 230 as unconstitutional. I would argue that it is unconstitutional as applied and the censorship is in violation of 230(b)

 

(b)Policy It is the policy of the United States—

(1)to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services and other interactive media;

 

(2)to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation;

 

(3)to encourage the development of technologies which maximize user control over what information is received by individuals, families, and schools who use the Internet and other interactive computer services;

 

(4)to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of blocking and filtering technologies that empower parents to restrict their children’s access to objectionable or inappropriate online material; and

 

(5)to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by means of computer.

 

The “intent” of Congress was NOT to allow censorship of free speech. Therefore, how Big Tech is using Section 230 is unconstitutional as applied to their practices. Most people do not know that back in 2019, BEFORE Covid,a settlement was reachedin a lawsuit brought against YouTube by the state of New York and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which required YouTube to pay $170 million for violating the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (COPPA). The settlement not only resulted in the fine but a bunch of new rules that content creators must comply with.

 

I do not see Section 230 as unconstitutional on its face, only as applied by Big Tech.

 

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/trumps-lawsuit-against-bigtech-is-it-viable/

 

Interesting perspective! I think POTUS has been researching with lawyers for years on how to protect our Free Speech Right, take down the media and every possible avenue of taking down the DS.

Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 4:01 p.m. No.16946451   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6460

Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸@JackPosobiec

 

PLOT TWIST

 

6:52 PM · Aug 1, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

 

 

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1554238659548815365?s=20&t=h3gqEwJQaEtta9Ub2KCeig

Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 4:05 p.m. No.16946476   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6495

This is total BS, Congress and Senate sending $60+ billions to Ukraine and they won't fund our Veteran's health! Traitors and hypocrites.

 

https://twitter.com/guyciarrocchi/status/1554231964529565696?s=20&t=GViavz63oglr-jyJvw0rWw

Anonymous ID: d6f8a0 Aug. 1, 2022, 4:22 p.m. No.16946549   🗄️.is 🔗kun

Casting Crowns - Only Jesus(Official Music Video)

 

I don't listen to a lot of Christian videos, but this is quite amazing!