Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host
In a conversation about transportation on Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs, a few years ago, when I said the Transportation Department was unconstitutional because the federal government has no authority over transportation expressly enumerated in the Constitution, a caller was very concerned by the comment. "What if the States have different standards regarding tires for big rigs, and a State with low standards causes accidents around the country because of trucks who abide by those low standards?"
I responded, "States with higher standards would not allow those trucks on their roads, and due to the accidents, the citizenry would demand that the States with lower standards to raise their standards, and in return they would. The federal government is not supposed to dictate to the States what they can or can't do. The federal government is not the save-all-be-all of this country. That said, when I say that the government has no authority regarding transportation, we are talking legislative, executive, or judicial authority which would directly affect transportation. That doesn't mean that we can't have a transportation department at the federal level that makes reports, takes surveys, and makes non-binding recommendations and suggestions."
The same goes for Fake News.
President Donald J. Trump is accurate that the media is out to get him, and that the press is acting in an ideological manner, rather than reporting the news in an honest manner as one would hope. The Pew Research Center, in a content analysis of the early days of the Trump presidency, found that 62 percent of the coverage was negative and only 5 percent was positive.
In contrast, President Barack Obama's coverage in early 2009 was 42 percent positive and 20 percent negative, the study said.
We all know that the biased liberal media is out to get Donald Trump, and anyone who stands against the news and information industry's support for cultural Marxism, and a government standing against Constitutional principles and philosophies.
NBC reported Trump wanted to increase our nuclear arsenal. Trump replied that their claim was not true, and NBC had no evidence to support their false claim. NBC has decided to stand by their false report, even after being caught in the lie.
NBC also reported on an alleged feud between the President and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, stating that Tillerson was planning to resign, and adding that Tillerson called Trump a "moron." Again, the Trump administration shot down the fake news, and once again, NBC had no evidence to support their false allegation.
If the Trump administration wants to establish a committee that investigates the lack of truth in broadcasting we are seeing in the media, they can legally and constitutionally do so. If they want to expose the buffoonery of the liberal media, it is in the power of the executive branch to do so.
The threat of pulling FCC licenses, however, takes on a whole new dimension. First of all, "networks" like CNN, Fox News or MSNBC do not operate under FCC licensing regulated by the federal government. Individual stations do. So, the idea that Trump can yank CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and MSNBC's licenses because they don't report the news as he demands is a straw-man argument. That said, any federal licensing, fees, or control over the media is actually unconstitutional, and if Trump was a truly constitutional president, he would either recommend that Congress propose an amendment giving the federal government that authority, or shut down all direct federal influence on the media (other than committees giving reports, surveys, or recommendations regarding the industry).
In short, for those of you out there that are saying Trump's threats against the media is unconstitutional and a move towards tyranny, you are being horribly disingenuous. He can't, or at least he can't "legally," shut down networks who are reporting in a manner that could be viewed as adverse to his presidency. If licenses get yanked, the truth is they shouldn't have existed in the first place, and all licenses should be yanked and then the power should be given back to the individual States.
In reality, the news media has been targeted by an administration before.
During the John Adams presidency during the early years of this country, the Alien and Sedition Act by the Federalist Party (a big-government political party created by Alexander Hamilton and his leftist statist cronies who would fit into the Democrat Party of today just fine) fined and jailed those who spoke out against the administration, including opposition newspaper reporters. WheThomas Jefferson became President of the United States in 1801, his Congress worked with him to repeal that law, freeing those in jail, and refunding all of the $200 fines that had been imposed. One reporter, who was never given his money back by his Federalist Party supporting sheriff, blamed Jefferson for not getting his money back, and in retaliation began the false rumor that Jefferson had fathered children with his teenage slave-girls (a false narrative that still exists to this day).
The second sedition law emerged during the Woodrow Wilson administration during the early twentieth century. That Democrat President was intent on silencing all opposition, and was willing to act illegally, to do so. His sedition act targeted those opposing the entrance of the United States into the first World War.
The Democrat Party tried to control what the media says with their Fairness Doctrine later in the twentieth century, a rule phased out in 1987 that had required broadcasters to provide “equal time” for divergent political views on certain issues.
That said, the Republican Party is not innocent on this, either. Allies to President Richard M. Nixon challenged individual licenses of television stations owned by The Washington Post Co. in 1973 during The Post’s ongoing investigation into the Watergate scandal.
Is the natural conclusion of Trump's anger at the Fake News media an eventual federal crackdown on a media protected by the First Amendment?
Words are not actions. We'll see. Truth is, Trump's correct about the media, and he can say as a citizen what he wants about their false reporting. Executive orders, regulations, or federal legislation that targets the media for punishment would not be constitutional, nor very intelligent from a political standpoint. I don't believe that is where this is going, but time will tell, and if legislation is passed, or regulations are established, to try to censor the media by the Republicans or President Trump, then it will be safe to say that they overstepped their bounds. Then, as citizens, we will need to take appropriate actions.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment