Trump has issues with the media. He HATES negative reports. Heck, the man threatened to sue his own biographer. He has deep issues with regards to his image.
Back in the day, a man made a biography about Trump. Trump and his lawyer met the man and his lawyer. The issue at hand was the part where Ivana Trump had claimed Trump had raped her. Trump was angry about that and had words with the author. He then pulled a tape recorder out and said he had it all on tape. Trump’s lawyer quickly pulled the angry Trump out and, apparently, that was the end of the threats from Trump on that biography. That writer was Harry Hurt III.
Robert Slater, who wrote another biography of Trump, was threatened even before he started writing. Trump showed exactly how insecure he was at various times by trying to pick the cover art, and more, on his biography.
Trump has, of course sent drawings of his hands to one news reporter for what Trump felt was an offensive article–sent them every year for decades. Not freaky or anything like that, nope… lol.
“During a rally in Fort Worth, Texas, Trump began his usual tirade against newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, saying they’re “losing money” and are “dishonest.” The Republican presidential candidate then took a different turn, suggesting that when he’s president they’ll “have problems.”
“One of the things I’m going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we’re certainly leading. I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re going to open up those libel laws. So 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,” Trump said.
Under current law, largely determined at the state instead of federal level, public persons, such as politicians, can win a suit against a media organization only if the person can prove that the publication published information with actual malice, knowing it to be wholly incorrect, as well as in cases of reckless disregard. The case that set this precedent — New York Times Co. v. Sullivan — was decided by the Supreme Court in 1964.
“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,” Trump said on Friday. “We’re going to open up libel laws, and we’re going to have people sue you like you’ve never got sued before.” [Politico, 2/26/16]”
If Trump had ever read the Constitution, he would, of course, know that there is something called “Freedom of the Press”. If he had ever examined Supreme Court rulings, he would know slander cannot apply to the media except in extreme circumstances of deliberate lies. The media rarely feels the need to lie about Trump, but it is not about lies; it is about his insecurity issues.
On Fox News with Chris Wallace he said, “Well, in England, I can tell you it’s very much different and very much easier. I think it’s very unfair when The New York Times can write a story that they know is false, that they virtually told me they know it’s false and I say, why don’t you pull the story, and they say, we’re not going to do that, because they can’t basically be sued. And you can’t be sued because can you say anything you want and that’s not fair.
All I want is fairness. So, I would absolutely work to open up the libel laws so that if you write something wrong, I want everybody to write whatever they want to write. But if you write something that’s wrong and at least knowingly wrong but wrong, a person like me and other people can bring lawsuits to have it corrected and to get damage.”
From Mediate we get this gem of a story. “Trump Said Federal Communications Commission Should Fine Fox News Pundit For Anti-Trump Outburst. In September, Fox News contributor Rich Lowry said that then-Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina “cut [Trump’s] balls off with the precision of a surgeon” at the CNN debate. Trump responded by saying, Lowry “should not be allowed on TV and the FCC should fine him!” However, the FCC does not issue fines for content on cable networks.”
Did you read that correctly? He wants a reporter, who was making COMMENTARY, to be banned from being on Television. He also wants fines on the guy–for a comment on how well she had managed to counter Trump, a euphemism!!!!
Trump also tweeted this one day:
“Victory press conference was over.
Why is she allowed to grab me and shout questions? Can I press charges?”
The reporter is the one his campaign manager Corey had grabbed hard enough to cause bruises to her arm. She was trying to ask a question of Trump. Until the incident happened, she was supportive of Trump. She never grabbed him; she wanted to ask a question.
“And then, there are the stringent terms the Trump campaign set back in November for how the five major television networks could cover his rallies, guidelines that still stand (and that I learned about in detail last week). The TV personnel are to enter their designated pens 15 minutes before he speaks and stay there until he is done. Then, they can roam the crowd but they cannot freely approach the “rope line” where Mr. Trump shakes hands and chitchats with his supporters, saying who knows what. The campaign cited safety and the candidate’s desire to connect with his voters without cameras intruding.
Still, I was surprised that network executives agreed to go along with such constrictive terms, which do not apply to Clinton and Sanders rallies. In interviews, executives said it was the price of admission for their cameras, correspondents and crews, but they would keep arguing for fewer restrictions. “This is an ongoing process,” Chris Isham, the CBS News Washington bureau chief, told me. “We’re continuing to push on a number of different fronts.” from the NY Times.
You read that right; the really shill Hillary is less hostile to the media than Trump is. They hide from the media, with no questions allowed unless vetted Hillary Clinton is less hostile to on site media than Trump is. How freaking insecure is the man?
Katy Tur reports, “Trump campaign now requiring media to have bathroom escorts at his rallies when leaving ‘the pen’ #watchthemedia.” Because maybe they might not find the bathroom? Or maybe it is because he thinks his supporters might kill them and sacrifice them to him on an altar? Seriously…
Oh, wait; that might be happening. Well, at least one Secret Service man gives credence to that. A news reporter was trying to film, from two feet out of the pen, a group of protesters being escorted out. Two feet. The Secret Service man grabbed the reporter in a choke hold and threw him to the ground. Seriously. Not a restraint hold, not grabbing the arm and arresting the guy, no revocation of credentials. Instead, he choke-grabbed the reporter and slammed him to the ground.
Oh, I mentioned revoking credentials. The Trump team has revoked more credentials than, I think, anyone since Nixon. Seriously. All of them combined since Nixon. No, really. The list is significant, and the press talks of it pretty openly.
Trump used to like one reporter. That reporter was allowed to make many stories about Trump. But then, one day, that reporter printed a negative story about Trump. In exchange, Trump, at a campaign rally, while talking about the reporter, started moving his arms in a manner that made national headlines. The reporter is handicapped. Oh, now you know of whom I am speaking? At this point, I think everyone on the planet has seen that. If not, then google “Trump mocks handicapped reporter,” and then weep for how low he went.
The DailyBeast writes, “In 2006, Trump threatened to sue Rosie O’Donnell, then a co-host on ‘The View,’ after she said he was bankrupt. Trump retaliated in an interview with The Insider, by labeling O’Donnell “disgusting, both inside and out.” He told People “Rosie will rue the words she said. I’ll most likely sue her for making those false statements—and it’ll be fun. Rosie’s a loser. A real loser.” Trump, bankrupt, yes I think he may have some stories to talk about that one.
Reporter David Cay Johnston reports that, “Trump told me he did not recall many of the events recounted in this article and they “were a long time ago.” He also said that I had “sometimes been fair, sometimes not” in writing about him, adding “if I don’t like what you write, I’ll sue you.””. This paragraph from Politico.
Another tweet from Trump: “I heard, because his show is unwatchable, that @Lawrence has made many false statements last night about me. Maybe I should sue him?” Lawrence works for MSNBC.
In many ways, I think I have made the point. Trump is scared of the media. He wants to control the messaging as much as he can. Anyone who criticizes him is under attack. I use this as one of the reasons that Trump’s Supreme Court message does not work on me. He would select judges who would support his suing over any words he thinks should never have been written. #NeverTrump would mean you owe him thousands to millions of dollars in his view.
It goes to bear that MediaMatters, ick, has a webpage, that almost gave me carpal tunnel from scrolling down it, of the many instances of insecurity… I mean attacks on the press… from Donald Trump. I could write ten chapters on it all, there is just that much in stories there.
I have been very careful to show you that Trump has issues with his name, with his image, and more. This means he will never work with Congress, he will not work with the Establishment, he will not work with anyone. Everyone is beneath him. He has become his own Caesar, he has become Napoleon, he acts like Benito Mussolini.
The Supreme Court, if he were able to do so, would be filled with people who would rubber stamp his edicts. He would use whatever intimidation tactic were needed to get Congress to act as his rubber stamp. When things go wrong, he would blame someone else for it and throw them to the sharks–maybe even literally, if he could get away with it.
A Trump Supreme Court means the end of the 1st Amendment, it probably means an end of the 5th Amendment, and other Constitutional Laws would be weakened whereas Trump felt he needed them weakened for his personal edification to be safe.
*A significant portion of this is from a book I wrote, used with permission from myself*