Interesting

Their rights are guarenteed under the constitution

They newest member of the KKK set himself on fire.

Shirrako guy again

The Freedom of the Press is not about them.

The Freedom of the Press MADE them.

For them to then act like the Freedom of the Press belongs to them is corporatist and wrong.

absolutely NOT what the framers intended.

Yes, it still says freedom of the press but I believe it has been expanded to encompas other aspects of news

Or at least its generally accepted

News organizations didn't start calling themselves The press until the 20th century.

Let me show you something in the first amendment.

Yep?

```Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.```

See those semicolons?

They separate the first amendment into three sections.

The first outlines two related things.

The Government will neither recognize the authority of the church

Why dosn't Trump put that clause back that says it's illegal for the news to propegandize the public. Would seem like a no brainer

nor restrict the individual from worship.

Show that to Anti facist

That would, in fact, be a violation of the first amendment.

Show them, not put it in their mouth and choke them

Anyway, in a similar fashion, [Congress shall make no law] abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

Obama took it out, he wanted to undo Obama therefore he should put it back in 😃

Hate speech doesn't exist?

Noooooooooo

No, there is no such thing as hate speech.

Do you know the difference between Libel and Slander?

But honesty is a hate speech

One is printed one spoken

One's committed in speech, one's committed in print.

Lie is a love speech

We all love lie, don't we?
Let's make the world full of lies

Freedom of the press is not a privilege granted to CNN.

It's the right of anyone to publish anything.

If we allow a judge to redefine it based on what we know as 'The Press' today

and not what the press meant centuries ago

We lose a pillar of the first amendment.

Wow, you are coded well sir

Never actually considered that?