Should progressives...

[Standing Wolf]

Do you also remember what hillary and her minions said during the campaign ?

Again, nothing legally actionable in terms of slander or libel come to mind, but I'm willing to be reminded.

CO's original premise, if you'll recall, was about actually prosecuting an individual for the crime of treason, though - not anything having to do with slander or libel suits. That's a rather wild stretch, in my opinion, especially in light of the fact that DJT was a private citizen during the campaign and did not hold or represent any government office. Even now, he has taken no oath and assumed no office.

[Safety]

The slander and libel point was to suggest that we as a society frown on damaging, false comments. I think you're hanging up on that a bit.

When published articles are designed to wrongly defame a president then I think my point is clearer.

And no, I have no evidence of that yet. The point is hypothetical for now but a possibility IMO.

It appears that you were suggesting slander and libel cases be brought to liberals for what they say against Trump, but in this post you then appear to want to walk it back when those same standards are used for conservatives who did the same towards Obama.

Why?

[Standing Wolf]

I voted yes. I think Trump should absolutely try to prosecute progressives for treason, just as he should fulfill his campaign promise and sue his sexual assault accusers. I would LOVE to see this go to court. Please make it happen.

I confess it would be entertaining, in a massive, nationally embarrassing train wreck sort of way.

[Captain Obvious]

It appears that you were suggesting slander and libel cases be brought to liberals for what they say against Trump, but in this post you then appear to want to walk it back when those same standards are used for conservatives who did the same towards Obama.

Why?

I didn't walk anything back. If you want to sue conservatives for slander, go ahead.

I made the point in order to suggest to Chris that our society frowns on using speech or the written word to unjustly defame people, now everyone is stuck on that concept.

[Captain Obvious]

Gridlock is good. We have enough laws.

I'm not suggesting any new laws.

[Standing Wolf]

I'm not suggesting any new laws.

Then you are stuck with the elements of the crime of treason as they currently exist.

[Safety]

I didn't walk anything back. If you want to sue conservatives for slander, go ahead.

I made the point in order to suggest to Chris that our society frowns on using speech or the written word to unjustly defame people, now everyone is stuck on that concept.

A lot of things we've seen in the past eight years should have had society frowning on it occurring, yet it was considered acceptable or better yet 'murican. So, for me, I don't see why all of a sudden there should be anyone calling a foul on it. Wait, let me take that back, I do see why.

[Common]

A lot of things we've seen in the past eight years should have had society frowning on it occurring, yet it was considered acceptable or better yet 'murican. So, for me, I don't see why all of a sudden there should be anyone calling a foul on it. Wait, let me take that back, I do see why.

Be specific name some

[Common]

A lot of things we've seen in the past eight years should have had society frowning on it occurring, yet it was considered acceptable or better yet 'murican. So, for me, I don't see why all of a sudden there should be anyone calling a foul on it. Wait, let me take that back, I do see why.

I knew you had nuttin, I like talking to you its fun

[Bethere]

I can't, offhand, think of anything that Trump has been accused of doing or saying that turned out to be untrue, and that was therefore potentially the basis of a slander or libel suit. Can you?

It is nearly impossible to slander or libel a public figure. This is the reality that let Republicans lie openly about Obama and Clinton for the last 8 years.

The thin-skinned Trump better get with the program. He hasn't seen anything yet.