Hahahhaa. Typical answer i expected.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

So, your evidence that the FCC chair made a threat is there is none, because the FCC chair is smart?

There are no pieces to the puzzle that demonstrate a threat of any sort on the part of the FCC toward ABC or its affiliates.

Prove me wrong.

"it is still an abuse of power, the federal government flexing its muscle for the sake of the president's authoritarian tendencies. "

HOW is it an abuse off power?  Go read what the FCC's duties are and get back to me.

stop being obstinate, I know you are not dumb. You know very well threats can be made without wording it in a way that is a clear threat.

It is an abuse of power because the power is being levied in a way that it never was and is being done for the interest of the president. Ted Cruz can see it, why can't you?

In 1934, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was established
to “regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television,
wire, satellite, and cable. The FCC’s jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the
District of Columbia, and U.S. possessions.”

In the early days of radio, the FCC’s major weapon for deterring indecency
was to revoke broadcast licenses. This meant that radio stations and their a
dvertisers had to create their own censorship standards to ensure they didn’t
ruffle the FCC’s feathers and get their station pulled from the airwaves.

That was then, and this is now. Today, the FCC levies fines against broadcasters
who air indecent content over the air. In fact, the FCC first started using fines
as a deterrent in 1975 when they fined radio broadcaster Pacifica Foundation
for airing comedian George Carlin’s “Seven words you can’t say on
television” routine.

But the FCC doesn’t just dole out fines for airing offensive content. They have
a whole set of rules that affect everyone from TV broadcasters to phone companies,
and they’re willing to fine anyone who steps out of line.

Check out these 7 super-sized FCC fines.

1. Univision is fined $24 million for lack of children’s shows
2. Qwest gets slapped with $9 million fine for thwarting competition
3. Univision pays another $1 million for accepting payment to play recording artists
4. Without a Trace’s teen orgy scene prompts $3.6 million fine for CBS
5. Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction earns CBS a $550,000 fine
6. Bubba the Love Sponge’s shows draw $755,000 fine against Clear Channel
7. FCC fines lead Howard Stern to satellite radio—In 1995, Infinity Broadcasting paid $1.7 million for various violations by Stern. Nearly 10 years later, the broadcast company was paying hundreds of thousands more for other indecency fines from Howard Stern’s broadcasts. All of these fines led to Stern’s departure from Clear Channel, causing him to join uncensored satellite radio.

Howard Stern iand George Carlin are direct proof that the FCC has gone after broadcasters for the things comedians said on their stations.

What a coincidence, yours is also a typical answer I expected. (Substanceless)

“Three people, two bullets,” Jones wrote in a text to
House Delegate Carrie Coyner (R) about Gilbert.

“Gilbert, hitler, and pol pot,” Jones wrote. “Gilbert gets
two bullets to the head.”

“Spoiler: put Gilbert in the crew with the two worst
people you know and he receives both bullets every
time,” Jones told Coyner.

Coyner, in response, told Jones, who at the time did
not hold an elected office, to stop.

The Democrats as a party are evil and will do anything for power.  The people who support them may be moral and good in their own lives, but when they keep these people in power in spite of evidence against them, they are no better than the evil politicians themselves.

THIS JUST IN - THER IS NO ANTIFA

Our enemy is composed of bots

https://x.com/tomselliott/status/1976770817544376686?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1976770817544376686%7Ctwgr%5Ec8846709eae5c35e0ffd0835c0dfd7b680a9d953%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fwatch-msm-puppets-receive-new-talking-point-directive-amid-info-war

No threat = no abuse of power.

How is the FCC holding ABC's feet to the fire about LIES and DEMONIZING ACCUSATIONS made by Jimmy Kimmel being done in the interest off the President? 

Who said the FCC has never done this before?

I disagree.
And that's where you chose to leave it.  You were so convincing, I'm sure everyone reading that comment is considering changing their stance to join yours.


Authoritarians tend to not like being criticized. He sued CBS, now he is in a position to wield power through law, not just a lawsuit. This is a clear message to be careful about what you say about that side. It's not like he went after a news source either, he went after a comedian. Here is way to test whether this really is about some interest of Trump to have accurate news: If Trump starts going after right leaning broadcast news for lies as he does the left then we can see it is fair and about the truth.

Aside from that, it's a huge irony that Trump cares about truth telling when he tells more lies than hairs on his head.
Name a contemporary president who did like being criticized.


He's not the only person about whom Kimmel lied and made accusations regarding Charlie Kirk's assassination.  if the post office lowered stamp prices tomorrow by 25 cents, you'd swear it was done to benefit Trump, even though everyone who mails a letter is also benefitting.

Note that none of those were political.
Kimmel is the one who chose to lie about a political topic.  don't blame the FCC for that.  If he'd lied about COVID vaccine data or transgender reassignment surgery success rates, they would still be lies that can harm the public.

In your world, if I run a red light and get stopped, the cop should not issue me a ticket if I argue that the only reason he stopped me was political -- like the bumper and window stickers I have on the vehicle, or the political apparel I have on.

To you, the broadcaster is somehow insulated from consequences because the lies had to do with a political party and MAGA.  That's insane.

And that's where you chose to leave it.  You were so convincing, I'm sure everyone reading that comment is considering changing their stance to join yours.

Name a contemporary president who did like being criticized.

Kimmel is the one who chose to lie about a political topic.  don't blame the FCC for that.  If he'd lied about COVID vaccine data or transgender reassignment surgery success rates, they would still be lies that can harm the public.
In your world, if I run a red light and get stopped, the cop should not issue me a ticket if I argue that the only reason he stopped me was political -- like the bumper and window stickers I have on the vehicle, or the political apparel I have on.
To you, the broadcaster is somehow insulated from consequences because the lies had to do with a political party and MAGA.  That's insane.

I made my case, you remain unconvinced or unable to admit you were convinced. I see no point in more effort to try and change your mind.


What other president is taking steps to silence the criticism of them?


If the cop only ever stopped speeders with bumper stickers criticizing the mayor would you be ok with that? If you were speeding you were speeding right?

I made my case, you remain unconvinced or unable to admit you were convinced. I see no point in more effort to try and change your mind.


What other president is taking steps to silence the criticism of them?
Obama’s legacy: The trashing of free speech

Quote

Also that year the Committee to Protect Journalists released a report titled “The Obama Administration and the Press,” which began with this paragraph: 
“U.S. President Barack Obama came into office pledging open government, but he has fallen short of his promise. Journalists and transparency advocates say the White House curbs routine disclosure of information and deploys its own media to evade scrutiny by the press. Aggressive prosecution of leakers of classified information and broad electronic surveillance programs deter government sources from speaking to journalists.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/287426-obamas-legacy-the-trashing-of-free-speech/
[/color]


If the cop only ever stopped speeders with bumper stickers criticizing the mayor would you be ok with that? If you were speeding you were speeding right?
Swooooosh!
That was my point, but you seem to think it's only political if Trump's FCC chair enforces the rules.

Do you have any evidence the Trump FCC only targets liberals?  You know, the same way the Obama IRS almost only approved liberal applications for 401 status while sitting on Conservative organizations' applications so they were hamstrung in their fundraising just ahead of a national election?

biden white house colluded with social media to take down anti-vaxx posts...

Do you have any evidence the Trump FCC only targets liberals?  You know, the same way the Obama IRS almost only approved liberal applications for 401 status while sitting on Conservative organizations' applications so they were hamstrung in their fundraising just ahead of a national election?[/color][/b]

So why is it wrong when Obama engaged in this behavior but not when Trump does it?