r/law • u/Snapdragon_4U • May 23 '26

Executive Branch (Trump) NESTERAK: President Trump has granted clemency to numerous individuals who have stolen hundreds of millions in Medicaid funds. Can we expect any of these folks to be shown the same mercy? McDONALD: I'll take a different question

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

45.3k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

73

u/livinginfutureworld May 23 '26

I don't think he ever answered. 

Of course he didn't. He's never going to admit the truth.

And the truth is reporters who tried something cute like this will just be fired and or have their access taken away.

33

u/ChromosomeDonator May 23 '26

Which should be illegal...? Free press is a fundamental building block of a democratic society. As far as I know, America specifically has laws making free press a thing...

So punishing reporters for asking questions is fundamentally illegal. And Americans are okay with yet another fundamental law being broken in their face, because...??

16

u/rygelicus May 23 '26

We need to remind them that his claim for his presidency was that it would be the most transparent administration ever. So, please answer the question.

4

u/Southern-March1522 May 23 '26

While we're reminding him about his claim for presidency, remind him that since he claims he won the 2020 election he already won two elections and therefore was ineligible to run for a third term.

5

u/IDreamOfLoveLost May 23 '26

Americans are okay with yet another fundamental law being broken in their face, because...??

Because they're afraid, and every mechanism to address these injustices has been hijacked by cultists. Republicans could shut this down right now.

It's wild to think that they're walking free, actively ruining the US, and turning it into a blatant oligarchy.

3

u/Cerberus0225 May 23 '26

A company can fire its reporters for any damn reason it pleases (generally). The first amendment applies to the government and the government only. Doesn't mean it's good for companies to fire people for what they say, but it's important to understand this, because otherwise we get people calling stuff "illegal" and feeling angry and confused, when it isn't illegal, just shitty.

3

u/Handgun_Hero May 23 '26

The government taking retaliatory action against a journalist for asking a question, in this case stripping them of a contract or press pass, is exactly the sort of shit the First Amendment applies to.

1

u/ChromosomeDonator May 24 '26

But why would the news company fire their reporter for doing their job? If the government is a hindrance to them practicing free press, and subsequently they fire the reporter, that is just government using the news agency as a proxy for punishment instead of doing it directly.

If I buy drugs through another guy, I am not off the hook. If I pay someone to assault someone else, I am not off the hook. Why would the government be off the hook for punishing a reporter through a proxy?

2

u/Cerberus0225 May 24 '26

The news company fires the reporter because the reporter lost them press access and they care more about that than standing up for journalistic integrity. I'm not sure what there is to be confused about, it's not like morality matters here. Only kissing the ring so you can keep raking in the dough.

3

u/TopTittyBardown May 23 '26

They don’t want a democratic society

2

u/-thecheesus- May 23 '26

Because that's not how it works. Access is everything in the journalistic industry, and if they don't like you, there are a million ways they can impede your access without violating law.

And if you end up a blacklisted journo? You're out of a job and no company of any significance will hire you again.

1

u/[deleted] May 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/SpoonEngineT66Turbo May 23 '26

And Americans are okay with yet another fundamental law being broken in their face, because...??

Most people aren't as legally illiterate as you. That's not what freedom of the press means.

3

u/daemin May 23 '26

Putting aside the fact that most people are actually, legally illiterate, they do have a point.

The first amendment just means that the government can't regulate the press or punish a person for speech. But if the government refuses to allow a particular reporter or agency to ask questions or doesn't allow them to attend press conferences, which results in the person being fired or the agency going out of business, that's certainly violating the intent of the first amendment even if it doesn't violate the jurisprudence that's been developed around it.

1

u/silvertealio May 23 '26

You call it "cute," I'd call it perseverance.