Anonymous wrote:Given Republicans’ proclivity for projection, I must assume that there is a laptop out there with Don Jr performing in multiple snuff films featuring underage migrants. It’s pretty much the only explanation.

Sad but true.

Given Republicans’ proclivity for projection, I must assume that there is a laptop out there with Don Jr performing in multiple snuff films featuring underage migrants. It’s pretty much the only explanation.

The laptop is a distraction and attempt at whataboutism.

I don't want to hear about a laptop ever again.

Anonymous wrote:

It’s inevitable that the lower court ruling will be overturned and the judge just looks like a moron. I’m sure he studied the 1971 Pentagon Papers case in law school. I thought it was a bad thing for judges to be over ruled? Did he really think the NYT would destroy the material while they appealed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a good point,.......

Great point.

Let's raid the NYT -- they are not above the law.

I know it’s pointless to argue with a moron but at least show me proof that Project Veritas is a publisher. Their stated mission is a troll operation. They are criminal.

Anonymous wrote:He has a good point,.......

Great point.

Let's raid the NYT -- they are not above the law.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partisan judge shows they are not for the first amendment. It will get overturned.

Exactly. Project Veritas is an activist group, not journalism.

An activist smear and propaganda group. Definitely not journalism or any kind of honest purveyor of truth.

I guess the judge has no problem with Project Veritas disseminating a stolen diary but draws the line at a newspaper of historic record publishing emails a coconspirator gave them. We are so screwed in this country.

First, it's pretty messed up that any Judge would be OK with disseminating contents of a stolen diary without the rightful owner's consent. That points to deeply unethical judicial activism.

Second, as for what was disseminated, while it's true that Ashley Biden's diary was stolen, when contents were "leaked" Ashley Biden immediately denounced the supposed entries as being completely bogus fabrication. Wouldn't be the first time that Veritas fabricated bogus content to smear someone.

Anonymous wrote:He has a good point,.......

Is Turley a moron? Anything related to POTUS has a national security risk, hence why the FBI is involved. Especially if it relates to stolen property owned by POTUS’s family.

Whereas NYTimes received leaked info from a Project Veritas turncoat.

Wtf Turley.

He has a good point,.......

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partisan judge shows they are not for the first amendment. It will get overturned.

Exactly. Project Veritas is an activist group, not journalism.

+1

Anonymous wrote:My theory: NYTs was going to post details about who is funding Project Veritas. Given PV status as a nonprofit with anonymous donors, this was going to blow up the big corporate money behind PV.

Let them dig a deeper hole. This whole thing is hilarious.

My theory: NYTs was going to post details about who is funding Project Veritas. Given PV status as a nonprofit with anonymous donors, this was going to blow up the big corporate money behind PV.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Partisan judge shows they are not for the first amendment. It will get overturned.

Exactly. Project Veritas is an activist group, not journalism.

An activist smear and propaganda group. Definitely not journalism or any kind of honest purveyor of truth.

I guess the judge has no problem with Project Veritas disseminating a stolen diary but draws the line at a newspaper of historic record publishing emails a coconspirator gave them. We are so screwed in this country.