Trump demands NY Times reveal identity of anonymous official

[Cletus]

I can't begin to tell you how dangerous that kind of thinking is to a free society, Common.

Try. Many people have said that, but you would be the very first to actually explain why.

[Adelaide]

Anonymous sources have had a long and important role in journalism. Anonymous sources aren't the problem when a publisher properly vets them and uses a system to confirm information (usually two additional sources).

The problem right now is that the media is overusing anonymous sources and is often publishing stories that are basically gossip and worthy of gossip magazines, not established newspapers.

Trump's war with the media is not healthy. Neither has an obligation to respect the other, but the media needs to stick to facts that have support and the President needs to stop threatening the First Amendment.

[Hoosier8]

It's the job of the President to make decisions, set an agenda and run the country. If he is unable to do that job then he should be removed. I agree with what some are saying on t.v., no one should be hiding things from the President.

With regard to Trump talking about the NY Times turning in the anonymous author and then suggesting this is treason is a bit over the top. In fact, I wonder whether this would be protected under the whistle blower protection act.

Whistleblowers go through official channels. This is not the same.

[Hoosier8]

Anonymous sources have had a long and important role in journalism. Anonymous sources aren't the problem when a publisher properly vets them and uses a system to confirm information (usually two additional sources).

The problem right now is that the media is overusing anonymous sources and is often publishing stories that are basically gossip and worthy of gossip magazines, not established newspapers.

Trump's war with the media is not healthy. Neither has an obligation to respect the other, but the media needs to stick to facts that have support and the President needs to stop threatening the First Amendment.

Was Obama’s war with the media healthy? Of course the media he was at war with was the media the left wing media wants shut down so it was OK.

[Standing Wolf]

Try. Many people have said that, but you would be the very first to actually explain why.

Without the use of anonymous (but internally well-vetted and confirmed) sources, the Press would be powerless to so its job - the job of informing the American people about events and situations that affect them, sometimes seriously.

Be honest; if a news source had reported in 2013, based on an anonymous source, that the President of the United States was acting like a petulant child and that his aides and staff were afraid to tell him about certain things and that they thought he was an idiot, would you - or any of the Trump supporters here - be talking about jailing, hanging or shooting the source? I certainly wouldn't be, and I think you've known me long enough to know that's true.

If Trump continues to make noise about somehow using the power of the government to force the Times to reveal its source - displaying, for about the 423rd time since taking office, that he honestly doesn't know the first thing about the Constitution or how it's supposed to work - he will only succeed in confirming the opinion of an increasing number of Americans that he cannot be trusted, doesn't know what he's doing, and that he should be hitting the road back to Mar-A-Lago sooner rather than later.

[Cletus]

Anonymous sources have had a long and important role in journalism. Anonymous sources aren't the problem when a publisher properly vets them and uses a system to confirm information (usually two additional sources).

The problem right now is that the media is overusing anonymous sources and is often publishing stories that are basically gossip and worthy of gossip magazines, not established newspapers.

Trump's war with the media is not healthy. Neither has an obligation to respect the other, but the media needs to stick to facts that have support and the President needs to stop threatening the First Amendment.

This President has never threatened the First Amendment.

I disagree about anonymous sources. You place too much trust in "journalists". You have to remember, their job is to sell newspapers or generate ratings. There is nothing altruistic about the press.

There is a saying that was popularized by President Reagan... "Trust but verify". Anonymous sources make verification difficult, if not impossible.

[Cletus]

Without the use of anonymous (but internally well-vetted and confirmed) sources, the Press would be powerless to so its job - the job of informing the American people about events and situations that affect them, sometimes seriously.

Why?

Be honest; if a news source had reported in 2013, based on an anonymous source, that the President of the United States was acting like a petulant child and that his aides and staff were afraid to tell him about certain things and that they thought he was an idiot, would you - or any of the Trump supporters here - be talking about jailing, hanging or shooting the source? I certainly wouldn't be, and I think you've known me long enough to know that's true.

I know you well enough to know you would at the very least, be skeptical about it. If an anonymous source does not meet the standard of evidence in a court, it should not meet the standard in the press. People mistakenly think the 1st Amendment gives "the press" some special status in this society. It doesn't. It protects them from being shut down by the government for saying things the government doesn't like. It keeps them from being forced to publish only what the government approves. That is really all it does. This nonsense about anonymous sources being protected by the First Amendment is something Hugo Black pulled out of his ass in 1960. Prior to that, there was no special protection for "anonymous sources".

Trump is not threatening the First Amendment in any way. People only believe that because the PRESS is telling them that. They are protecting their own interests and unfortunately, people don't know enough about the Constitution or are too scared or lazy to call them on it.

If Trump continues to make noise about somehow using the power of the government to force the Times to reveal its source - displaying, for about the 423rd time since taking office, that he honestly doesn't know the first thing about the Constitution or how it's supposed to work - he will only succeed in confirming the opinion of an increasing number of Americans that he cannot be trusted, doesn't know what he's doing, and that he should be hitting the road back to Mar-A-Lago sooner rather than later.[/QUOTE]

[Common]

I can't begin to tell you how dangerous that kind of thinking is to a free society, Common. If that misguided attitude were to infect the justice system of this country, you might just as well use the First Amendment for toilet paper.

Whats far more dangerous to this country, Is when anyone with an agenda can call a national news paper and tell them anything they want true or not then they and the paper hides behind its an anonymous source.

This source is denigrating the president of the USA and admits hes working to Stop the president from doing the peoples business and its reported by the NYTS and they hid behind its anonymous source I find it incredible that you dont understand the precedence it sets.


Do you realize that ANYONE with an agenda can go to NYTS or any other liberal out let and just tell them a crock of $#@! with impunity.

This went much to far put the reporter and the editor in prison until they prove their story and give up the anonymous source who works in the administration and admits they are working against the president

[Common]

Without the use of anonymous (but internally well-vetted and confirmed) sources, the Press would be powerless to so its job - the job of informing the American people about events and situations that affect them, sometimes seriously.

Be honest; if a news source had reported in 2013, based on an anonymous source, that the President of the United States was acting like a petulant child and that his aides and staff were afraid to tell him about certain things and that they thought he was an idiot, would you - or any of the Trump supporters here - be talking about jailing, hanging or shooting the source? I certainly wouldn't be, and I think you've known me long enough to know that's true.

If Trump continues to make noise about somehow using the power of the government to force the Times to reveal its source - displaying, for about the 423rd time since taking office, that he honestly doesn't know the first thing about the Constitution or how it's supposed to work - he will only succeed in confirming the opinion of an increasing number of Americans that he cannot be trusted, doesn't know what he's doing, and that he should be hitting the road back to Mar-A-Lago sooner rather than later.

How does anyone know its well vetted and confirmed??

The good thing is this person just like Snowden, Wikileaks and Manny will be exposed sooner than later

[Standing Wolf]

Whats far more dangerous to this country, Is when anyone with an agenda can call a national news paper and tell them anything they want true or not then they and the paper hides behind its an anonymous source.

This source is denigrating the president of the USA and admits hes working to Stop the president from doing the peoples business and its reported by the NYTS and they hid behind its anonymous source I find it incredible that you dont understand the precedence it sets.


Do you realize that ANYONE with an agenda can go to NYTS or any other liberal out let and just tell them a crock of $#@! with impunity.

This went much to far put the reporter and the editor in prison until they prove their story and give up the anonymous source who works in the administration and admits they are working against the president

If Trump feels that he has been characterized unfairly, he can bring a suit for libel against the newspaper. There is no justification for compelling anyone to reveal the identity of the source; he or she has committed no crime, and it is not a violation of any law dealing with national security to report that a public official is ignorant, unbalanced and not liked or trusted by his subordinates. Trump obviously believes that some law has been broken - going so far as to tweet "TREASON?" - but then Trump lives in a fantasy world where everyone on the planet works for him and he can do whatever he likes with or to any of us.