Hillary Clinton Calls For Censorship Of "Fake News," Says "Lives Are At Risk"

Like you did when Hillary told you that 4 Americans were murdered in Benghazi because of an internet video, or that she and Chelsea had to run for their lives from sniper fire, or that Chelsea was jogging around the World Trade Center on 9-11, or that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, etc? She is one of the biggest fake news proliferators.

 

What do you think the diatribe against the new 'crisis' is all about?

 

The central nexus will deem what is "real" what is "fake". You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

 

Wellllllllll . . . it certainly can't be about the bulk of the Left-Allied MSM falsely portraying Trump as a bigot, racist, misogynist over and over and over again sans anything remotely approaching facts, and so that's out. It certainly can't be about the bulk of the MSM crap-canning all aspects of ethics and honor and integrity to knowing promote the political interests of one of the biggest liars and most corrupt politicians in the history of this nation in the form of Hillary Clinton and so it is -- by process of elimination -- the fact that there are a handful of outlets that are not Leftist-allied. She wants to 'remedy' that.

 

As I suspected...to the left simply making a simple minded claim makes it the responsibility of the fellow accused to prove their innocence. I need to prove veracity, not the weenie interested in the censorship. I listened to CNN international today going on and on about the alleged Russian hacking of the election. They began with the assumption the accusation was true, for after all it appeared in their paper, the Washington Post and by the end of the silly segment were nearly down to searching for possible Russian connections to cabinet nominees. Why some might have actually read War and Peace or listened to Prokofiev and we all know where that could lead....

Sorry junior, this is not the Code Napoleon and one accused (of using false stories) has no responsibility at all to disprove the silly claim. You are concerned, prove your allegations.

 

It is sort of a delicious irony, the mistress of the flat lie complaining about lies.

 

Can you provide the quote from the speech where she said she wanted to limit free speech or not?

You made the claim and I'm prepared to believe you...if you can show proof. So show the proof.

 

Trust me, not until the left is insured THEY get to decide that issue...

 

Ok Tom...what do you think she meant when she said "It's a danger that must be addressed and addressed quickly"?

How else do you "address" it? What are your options here?

Ask them to be nice and please stop doing it?

If you charge them with a crime you are violating their right to free speech.

If you block them from distributing it then you are censoring them and violating their right to free speech.

What else can congress do about it? Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.

Your argument is that because she did not say that exact word then that is not what she meant and does not support it, so how else do you "address" it?

I'll wait.

 

If you had bothered to listen to the speech yourself instead of take some two-bit website at face value, you would know that she specifically said, "Bipartisan legislation is making its way through Congress to boost the government’s response to foreign propaganda."

She was referring to the proposed bill entitled Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016.

Here is the House version, sponsored by Republican representative Kinzinger
and the Senate version, sponsored by Republican Senator Portsman.

That bill does NOT call for censorship. If you disagree then quote the part that would implement censorship.

Furthermore, if you think that it does then shouldn't you be talking to the two Republican Congressmen who are pushing it through Congress instead of using it to bash some former Senator who no longer holds any office whatsoever?

 

First of all, I did listen to the speech, I also noticed while looking around that you seem to be in a very small minority who believes she was not referring to censorship.

So what are they going to do that they are not already doing,Tom?

So in other words...they are going to collect data and analyze it, what do you think this will change?

How do you advance "fact-based narratives" in a foreign media that is hostile toward you and does not have a free press?

Do you really need to pass a bill to do this? What is the purpose of the CIA/NSA if they are not already doing this?

Furthermore, how do you think monitoring foreign governments(something we already do) is going to stop or counter someone like wikileaks? What are they going to do when it's not fake?

If you think Hillary was referring to anything else then you are incredibly naive. And seriously, how many "Fake News" stories have you seen in the US main stream media that either the media or the government was not involved in?

And please explain how I am "bashing" Hillary while your at it.

 

I am surprised you are unaware of what all the talk about the alleged 'fake news' is about. I guess for some understanding this is like trying to fire a VA worker. It just will never happen.

 

So you can't be bothered to check the "news" you regurgitate unquestioningly...and it's the fault of the left?

Hardly.

 

So you insist that she said she wanted to limit free speech but can't produce the quote where she says she wants to limit free speech...

- - - Updated - - -

I never voiced support for that bill so I don't know why you're asking me to defend it.

If you're so confident that Clinton called for censorship then provide the quote where she did so. Simple.

 

Information Liberation is a right wing rag and is not credible along with Hillary being nothing and out of politics

 

Then why did you post it?

You seem to think anyone claiming that because they did not say a specific word, they have no responsibility for what they said, that's b*llsh*t and you know it, you just want to argue.

There is no way to stop it in a country with freedom of speech without censorship, this should not have to be explained to you or anyone else.

I know what she said, I'm not as gullible as you are, I also know that all this Fake News crap and proposal of these bills is nothing more than an attempt to distract from the corruption of this adminstration displayed on wikileaks.

Facebook has already been caught censoring posts so I don't why a democrat crying because they did not do it enough to save her in the election would surprise you.

It's called common sense.

Simple

 

I also noticed while looking around that you seem to be in a very small minority who believes she was not referring to censorship.

The very same people who FALL for the fake news that oh by the way...often originates in Russia

- - - Updated - - -

I may have missed it but did you respond to the question as to whether you believed the nonsensical Comet Pizza story?

 

Thankfully this believer of fake news didn't kill anyone.

" A gunman who burst into a Washington D.C. pizza joint on Sunday to “self-investigate” fake news stories that a child sex trafficking ring involving Hillary Clinton was operating there turned himself in when he discovered he’d been scammed, authorities said.
Edgar Maddison Welch, 28 of Salisbury, N.C., “surrendered peacefully when he found no evidence that underage children were being harbored in the restaurant,” court records say.
The surrender came Sunday after Welch fired a rifle inside Comet Ping Pong during his “investigation” of a baseless conspiracy theory known as “Pizzagate.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/pizzagate-clinton-conspiracy-theory-led-dc-shooting-article-1.2899371

 

the best way to combat it is with fact checking sites that validate it... only real way to combat it

course there will always be some that believe something more when told it's false... like the pizza guy

.

 

What are you even TALKING about?

 

Your fault lies in 'checking the news' bit, which apparently to the left means finding it in an approved leftist source or discovering it came from the mouth of a noted leftist. True or false, correct or imaginary are all determine by that test...Well son, I do not grant the left the authority to decide what is real and what is fake.

If you doubt a story or an idea presented, then YOU find the actual evidence that discredits it.

I know this may come as a shock, but if I note the sun rises in the east every morning, then it does not matter of the Times or anyone disagrees. The sun could care less and so could I.

 

`
`
*Laughs* The reporters of fake news are themselves, posting fake news. However ambiguous her wording was, she never said; "censorship." Her quote;

`
`

Source​

 

You sort of use her literal babbling as cover for her actual desires. We've seen that before...

https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/Murder-of-Thomas-Becket

"Will no one rid me of this troublesome Priest"

Did Henry order his knights to murder Becket? No...did he want it done?...

Yes

History is not on the side of folk who hide their desires behind weasel words.

 

The country voted against the censorship of political correctness but to the left that simply means changing the label to 'fake news' and let the censorship continue..

 

For every single example of some nut attacking a place or people we find some bizarre idea that only makes sense in his head. All atrocities involve news in one way or another....the 'false' part is where the left makes connections so as to justify censorship...

I think 90% of stuff put out by the climate cult is false news, most of what is reported by CNN is simply actual events spun in such a way to make political points (false news), etc...does that mean I get to appoint my very own board of censors? Didn't you folk learn anything from the election. Your control of the censorship body could slip and then YOUR message might get stopped as 'fake' news?

- - - Updated - - -

One cannot fact check sites because one sides 'fact' is the others 'fake' and I certainly won't grant government the power to censor me without a political fight.