OK, guys, we may have a real problem, for real.

problem is, even if they did, and filed a lawsuit. The MSM would not cover it, nobody would even know.
 
aravoth said:
I know him to be very honest, all the same I'm trying to actually get some kind of validity to it. But I thought you should see what we may be/ or are up against.
Click to expand...

I don't envy her. If she's not part of the solution, then she's part of the problem. This could be her shot at a Pulitzer Prize .
 
They would just laugh. And if a "nobody" comes forward, they will just say they were a disgruntled employee, end of story.

We need a Deepthroat, someone at a high level and with documentation. If God can censor Giuliani, maybe he can inspire someone with name recognition to come forward...
 
Original_Intent said:
They would just laugh. And if a "nobody" comes forward, they will just say they were a disgruntled employee, end of story.

We need a Deepthroat, someone at a high level and with documentation. If God can censor Giuliani, maybe he can inspire someone with name recognition to come forward...
Click to expand...

I agree. Anonymity is fine, as long as we get documentation.
 
aravoth said:
problem is, even if they did, and filed a lawsuit. The MSM would not cover it, nobody would even know.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. They are a public company right? Lawsuits are public record, press releases are released and shareholders and the rest of the public will know.
 
We're clearly going to have to depend on the internet a lot more, and radio.

I don't think there's anything that can be done in this instance. She could come forward and speak out but she would be ignored and probably fired... it's also kind of well known that the media picks its candidates and focuses on them.

Perhaps some of us should put out youtube videos that criticize the MSM and point out all the inaccurate journalism that's happened over the years. Show people that our media has betrayed us and they can't be trusted anymore. Call for a boycott.

I'd also like to see Ron Paul putting out more youtube videos where he's talking to us. He doesn't have to wait until "youtube spotlight" to do this. Push for online debates as well. Make him dominate the online world.
 
Did you notice that the debate questions to Ron Paul were all questions he had been asked before in the previous debate? Basically they completely shut him out of the debate but for the illusion he had input. He was sterilized on stage. Pathetic. Boycott CNN and Fox. Support those that support Ron Paul, the truth and the Constitution. Keith Olberman, for example.
 
cujothekitten said:
I'd also like to see Ron Paul putting out more youtube videos where he's talking to us. He doesn't have to wait until "youtube spotlight" to do this. Push for online debates as well. Make him dominate the online world.
Click to expand...


I have built a VOD (video on demand) platform for just this. I offered it to the RP headquaters with no reply yet. I agree he should publish on youtube, but a website with higher quality video and the ability to submit questions while watching for the next published video would go a lot further. An online townhall or fireside chat format direct to the people. Once a week.

It is built if they are game.
 
Maybe she would agree to one of those identity protected interviews – voice distorted, etc.
 
aravoth said:
If it's valid I'll make a vid. Then I'll start calling local newspapers, then I'll burn the CNN HQ to the god damn ground. Or something like that anyway.
Click to expand...

Do not implicate yourself with statements like burning to the ground that can come back too haunt you becareful with what you say
 
aravoth said:
problem is, even if they did, and filed a lawsuit. The MSM would not cover it, nobody would even know.
Click to expand...

There's nothing to file a lawsuit over, it's an invitational debate. However, what we want is to expose them and generate lots of BAD PRESS for CNN. THAT would be awesome ...

that's how you put the pressure on the journalist corporations.
 
I meant that if all the pople who signed the statement that RP was purposely iced, if they got fired because of coming forth, they might have a lawsuit.

I know it is tough to risk your job to speak the truth, but sometimes... it is worth it.
 
Remember that there's a big "gray" area here.

The MSM has plenty of room for plausible "denialbility", if you will. And, it is part of their journalistic freedom, albeit at the expense of journalistic impartiality and integrity.

See, the program producers/planners and "journalists" have a prior discussion about who and what they will focus on, it's clear that they decided to focus on the official top 3.

We can't claim anything like a conspiracy, because it's just the system. The sucky system.
 
Mattsa said:
I'm afraid the USA has been taken over by a fascist dictatorship
Click to expand...
Let's keep some perspective. This was a private debate broadcast by a private company. Only governments have fascist dicators. CNN is not a government. We're fighting for the right of private individuals and businesses to conduct their affairs WITHOUT government interference. Sometimes that means those private organizations will do stuff we disagree with. Freedom means that people are sometimes going to do things that will piss you off.
 
beermotor said:
There's nothing to file a lawsuit over, it's an invitational debate. However, what we want is to expose them and generate lots of BAD PRESS for CNN. THAT would be awesome ...

that's how you put the pressure on the journalist corporations.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Remember, they are businesses and competitors. So tell CNN's competitors!

I haven't heard anybody talk about this ...

In 1975 the Federal Communications Commission created a loophole regarding the equal time provision. It ruled debates were "bona fide news events." That meant if debates were sponsored by some organization other than the networks, coverage of such a "news event" was exempt from the equal time requirements.

So the media gets away with the equal time provision through this loophole.

The League of Women Voters quickly volunteered to sponsor, or "initiate" the debates. (What happened to them? At least, I thought, they were honest and non-partisan.)

The job of sponsoring debates was taken over by the "Commission on Presidential Debates" (CPD) in 1988. This new commission is a SCAM headed and controled by only Democrats and Republicans. "Fringe" candidates and 3rd Party Candidates can now be hung out to dry.

Here's a link to more on this scam.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Commission_on_Presidential_Debates

WHO is behind CPD taking control? Why did the League of Women Voters reliquish control?

I dont have time but maybe somebody here can dig into this more and post what the hell is really going on.

CPD's website http://www.debates.org/ is WAY out of date.

WHY??? There could be a hidden big story here.

Our head government servants and corporate media are in such an entangled web of lies and deceit it's unbelievable! Disgusting!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jmdrake
I've finally been affected by not having a "Real ID"
Replies
9
Views
2K
Dr.3D
Dr.3D
PAF
The Real Aggressor
Replies
0
Views
596
PAF
PAF
osan
Capitalism is a TOOL.
Replies
0
Views
189
osan
osan
PAF
Attended a Meetup
Replies
1
Views
2K
fisharmor
fisharmor
PAF
The Problem With Voting for Candidates With Biblical Values
Replies
8
Views
2K
CCTelander
C
Back
Top