Skip to content

Donald Trump says he will use libel laws to sue newspapers as President

February 26, 2016

  It has been several days since I last posted anything negative about Donald Trump but that is about to change with this post. Earlier today Donald Trump said that if he is elected President he is going to use libel laws to sue the media “like you never got sued before” if they write stories he deems to be “horrible and negative.”

  Here is more:

“And one of the things I’m going to do, and this is only going to make it tougher for me — and I’ve never said this before, but one of the things I’m going to do if I win, and I hope I do, and we’re certainly getting there, I’m going to open up the libel laws so when they write horrible and negative and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” he continued. “We’re going to open up those libel laws, so that when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace, or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they’re totally protected. You see? With me they’re not protected, because I’m not like other people, but I’m not taking money. I’m not taking their money. So we can put up those libel laws and we’ll have people sue you like you never got sued before.”

  I am sure this comment will be met with high praise by many of us who are fed up with the media bias for they will love this tough talk but before we get to that I would like to remind people that while we do not like the media bias there is nothing to prevent the media from being biased. I am not just writing this because I do not like Donald Trump, I have written in the past that nothing can be done about the media bias because it is protected in the First Amendment  in the Constitution and is in fact nothing new. Here is one example of what I have written in the past:

The fact that there are media outlets that are conservative and media outlets that are liberal is nothing new; in fact liberals had a stranglehold on most of the media until the repeal of the “Fairness Doctrine” and the birth of Fox News, but there have always been conservative newspapers and liberal newspapers. This goes all the way back to the 1700’s when people like Benjamin Franklin were creating and publishing newspapers while also writing articles for the same newspapers using aliases to promote their own personal political agenda.

  But enough about me, let us get back to Donald Trump’s statement: I think this is one of the most dangerous, idiotic, and outlandish statements he has made to date. He states that he will open up the libel laws so that when a newspaper prints a false story they can be sued. I have no problem with this aspect of his statement because if a newspaper prints a story it knows is false they should be held accountable. However he expands his statement well beyond this by saying that if a newspaper “horrible and negative” stories or a “hit piece” he will sue them. Who decides which stories are “horrible?” And as far as negative stories go, since when is it a crime to write a negative story about the President? 

 Sedition-Feature-Pic The fact is that it has not been a crime since The Sedition Act was allowed to expire in 1800 when Thomas Jefferson did not renew it. I admit Donald Trump is not calling for imprisoning people who speak out against the government but this is the next closest thing. For all of John Adams’ great work in founding this nation he was one of the worse Presidents in United States history, do we really want to go back to an era where it was a crime to say something negative about the President? If so I admit my guilt freely right here and now, come and get me because I will not stop!

  But to me the most frightening part of Donald Trump’s statement is when he said “with me they’re not protected” when talking about the media, perhaps he does not understand that it is the First Amendment to the Constitution which protects the media. Or perhaps he does not care about the First Amendment to the Constitution, or the Constitution as a whole for that matter…

  It is clear to me that Donald Trump is a big government statist who will do whatever it takes to stifle the opposition if he is elected President of the United States.

  To those of you who might say I am being too hard on Donald Trump let me ask you this: what would you be saying if Barack Obama made the same statement?

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

24 Comments leave one →
  1. February 26, 2016 8:49 pm

    Biden, in fact, made the very same statement while referencing gun control and the Second Amendment. While it remains unclear if anything would become reality, viciousness in print could also spill over to blogs. Perhaps, Trump is really seeking for the media to tone it down to something befitting the professional/paid (income) media when journalists ply their trade.

    Liked by 2 people

    • February 26, 2016 9:26 pm

      We have been speculating for awhile that eventually this would spill over into blogs and I happen to believe it will. I don’t see the media toning it down but it is true the media really is not a trade any more.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. petermc3 permalink
    February 26, 2016 8:52 pm

    …can’t argue. Rather than sue these deranged, sick publishers we’ll give them all frontal lobotomies free of charge. Although, who will be able to tell the difference?

    Liked by 2 people

  3. February 26, 2016 9:06 pm

    This made my blood run cold. It’s the sort of thing a dictator would say. He has already made it plain he doesn’t believe in private property rights if someone else has a “better idea” what to do with the parcel. Now freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to dissent are on the line. I just can’t understand why so many refuse to see who this man really is.

    Liked by 1 person

    • February 26, 2016 9:28 pm

      I could not agree more! I have to admit that a Trump Presidency scares the hell out of me because he does not care about the Constitution and I would bet he has no idea what it stands for!


    • February 27, 2016 5:01 am

      Looking at the bright side, I am very happy that you are a staunch suppoter of the Second Amendment, and to make Constitutional Carry & Stand Your Ground (as one singular law) to be made Law-of-the-Land.

      Move over 2A, there’s a new “whipping” amendment in town (1A).

      Liked by 1 person

  4. February 27, 2016 6:32 am

    No we don’t have a free press in the US. That is the major problem.

    “It is worth repeating again and again that the bulk of America’s mainline media is owned and controlled by a mere 6 corporations. This, of course, means that unless you’re already consciously avoiding these mainline media sources, then most of the news and entertainment that makes it onto your screen and into your mind comes from a small pool of corporate sources, all of which play important roles in delivering propaganda, social programming and perpetual crisis narratives to the public.

    The conglomerates are: General Electric, News Corp., Disney, Viacom, Time Warner and CBS.”

    How do we fight these conglomerates?

    (There are many sources of this information I chose this one)

    Liked by 1 person

    • petermc3 permalink
      February 27, 2016 9:23 am

      Not unlike most freedom hating entities the press the constitution as a means to its ends. Give Donald a break. He is merely spouting off against something we have all been fed up with for decades but no self indulging lemmingweasle politician on the right dare speak up against so get a life and shut up, he’s not going to sue anybody the birdcage liners.

      Liked by 1 person

    • February 27, 2016 5:08 pm

      I have heard this before CJ and that is part of the reason why I avoid the MSM altogether.


      • February 27, 2016 7:46 pm

        Well maybe we could put this thing called the Internet to some good use and start up our own news sources. That way the common man/woman could be heard.

        Liked by 1 person

      • February 27, 2016 7:55 pm

        Together hopefully we can make a difference! It would be interesting to start our own news service, it would be tough but that is a great idea.


  5. February 27, 2016 8:29 am

    The oher difficulty with Trump and what he says is he claims he is speaking at a 5th grade level. His whole campaign thrust is about corruption and how the current political system is rigged. We all know the media has been giving Hillary a free pass on the all too obvious lies and mismanagement of every “job” she has ever had.

    A free press should be demanding she be tried as a war criminal for all the innocent people that have been killed due to her fanatical tenure as Secretary of Sate. They won’t even report the server story. They want her as President . What? so she can use nuclear weapons against some country that won’t bend to her command. The LBJ ad against Goldwater should be used against Hillary.

    The example used for a limitation on free speech for an individual is one can not yell fire in a theatre if there is not a fire. Likewise the press should not report something that is not factually accurate or is intended to harm someone. The Supreme Court opined in Citizens United corporations are individuals. Since this is the current interpretation then the media should be held to the same lible standard that individuals have always been held to.

    Liked by 1 person

    • February 27, 2016 5:10 pm

      I don’t have a problem with the press being held accountable if they report something false in an attempt to push an agenda, it is the other things Trump said about this that has me worried.


  6. February 27, 2016 4:25 pm

    I think the media yes needs to be held accountable for stories that it publishes about people. Our newpapers, magazines, TV, and radio talk shows constantly spew out stuff about people that the public doesn’t need to know and frankly has no business knowing. It’s sickening listening to some of these talk show hosts getting up on their soapboxes and denegrating people right on nationwide media. Yes there are things the public gentry needs to know in order to operate in a democratic society like ours. However a lot of the times we need to keep our noses out of other people’s affairs and keep our eyes on our own. But for Donald Trump to go after our First Amendment rights just because he doesn’t like out thinks what someone printed is horrible. That is wrong! Unless it is something that the public doesn’t need to hear, has no business knowing or is harmful, destroys or dishonors the individual. To be honest, I’m worried about Donald Trump becoming president.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. February 27, 2016 7:19 pm

    Yeah, I’ve encountered that some people are under the delusion that Trump is somehow pro-Constitution. It seems like to me a lot of the people who complain about the lack of vetting of Obama are failing to do just that in regards to Trump.

    Liked by 1 person


  1. Does Donald Trump have a problem with the First Amendment? | America's Watchtower
  2. Donald Trump calls for a national ‘stop and frisk’ policy | America's Watchtower
  3. Donald Trump suggests NBC should have its FCC license revoked | America's Watchtower

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: