The Ugly Face of Tyranny: Feinstein Comes For Your Right To Speak Freely Online

52 308

ugly-face-of-tyranny

Senator Diane Feinstein has taken up the fight for truth and liberty, just as she has done for health care and the widespread disarmament of American citizens.

This month Congess has been debating a new media shield law, which according to its authors, aims to protect journalists and bloggers from being forced to testify about their work should their sources or information come into question.

But Diane Feinstein has refused to support the bill, noting that the law would essentially grant this shield privilege to anyone who chooses to share their opinion on the internet (including those pajama sporting bloggers and news aggregators working out of their basements).

But because freedom of speech, as interpreted by Feinstein, is nothing more than a privilege granted to us by her and her ilk in Congress, she has taken steps to ensure that only those journalists sanctioned by the government will be protected by the new shield laws.

The final hurdle for the Judiciary Committee was defining who is a journalist in the digital era.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) insisted on limiting the legal protection to “real reporters” and not, she said, a 17-year-old with his own website.

I can’t support it if everyone who has a blog has a special privilege … or if Edward Snowden were to sit down and write this stuff, he would have a privilege. I’m not going to go there,” she said.

Feinstein introduced an amendment that defines a “covered journalist” as someone who gathers and reports news for “an entity or service that disseminates news and information.”

The definition includes freelancers, part-timers and student journalists, and it permits a judge to go further and extend the protections to any “legitimate news-gathering activities.”

As noted by Dave Hodges at The Common Sense Show, this very report, for example, is being published by an unlicensed and unofficial news-related web site, and therefore, would not meet the stringent guidelines set forth by Feinstein’s new amendment.

In the definition introduced in Feinstein’s amendment, somebody writing for a small town paper with a circulation of 30 would receive First Amendment protections, but quality news people such as Steve Quayle, John Stadtmiller, Jeff Rense, Doug Hagmann, Stan Deyo, Michael Edwards, Alex Jones, George Noory and Matt Drudge would not be considered journalists and therefore, the First Amendment would not apply to this group of aforementioned newsmen.

With the passage of this amendment, our sources would not be privileged and many of our sources would dry up. But Wolf Blitzer and Anderson Cooper can take bribes from the CIA to not cover certain stories, yet Feinstein thinks they deserve protection as authentic journalists.

And for those out there who don’t have a blog or web site where they share news, videos, information and criticisms of government, consider that the Feinstein amendment doesn’t refer to just web sites. It covers all internet venues. It’s not about how the information gets out there, it’s about the individual or organization disseminating it.

So, should you choose to share an opinion in the comments section on this web site or post on your Facebook or Twitter page, you would, just as this author, fall outside of the Constitutional protections of the First Amendment.

Your comments, if critical of government or big business interests, would not be protected by shield laws. You see, you’re not capable of forming an opinion or citing appropriate references for your argument. To do that, you must be licensed by the State or approved by a court.

But the government can’t do that, right?

They’ve already tried and failed on their first attempt, but what if this law would have passed?!

John McCain previously introduced a bill that would fine bloggers up to $300,000 for “offensive statements, photos and videos posted by visitors on comment boards”.

If the bill would have been successful, this legislation would have marked the end for previously unrestrained opinions. Hiding behind the pretense of protecting our children, McCain’s legislation was referred to as the “Stop the Online Exploitation of Our Children Act.” The legislation demands that a Stalinist-type army of informants and spies will browse various websites looking for inappropriate internet material which might pose a threat to children. McCain’s internet army would then pass the information on to the relevant police authorities and subsequent bloggers could be fined $300,000 or have faced jail time.

Anyone who has participated in online comment boards is keenly aware that they are very difficult to moderate. Some articles and news events may receive thousands of comments. Yet, one oversight by the moderator, one day off from the internet, could spell doom for the financial future of a blogger. What citizen can afford to take that chance? Hence, your right to self-expression has been sacrificed. Your first amendment right to self-expression is technically still intact. However, the personal affordability to exercise free speech would have been severely jeopardized

Common Sense Show

While McCain’s bill died a horrible death, and rightly so, Feinstein’s amendment essentially aims to do the same thing, though monetary fines for journalistic transgressions are as of yet undefined.

You see, as is always the case with our Congressional benefactors, the devil is in the details.

Take, for example, health care. For years the establishment pushed for universal, affordable health care for all Americans. The efforts really started back in the 1990′s with the failed Hillary-care movement. But it didn’t really die. In fact, calls for free health care got louder and louder, and in 2008 they came to a head with the election of Barack Obama, who promised just that for Americans. It took nearly 20 years, but they did it, and millions of Americans thought they had won a victory.

But, lo and behold, after legislation to cheapen and improve our health care was passed, we began to see the fine print come to fruition. And all those folks who vehemently supported an affordable care option are now wondering what the hell happened. As was revealed in recent days, costs aren’t going down. Just the opposite, in fact. For many Americans who rallied behind the President those costs are going to double, triple, or quadruple!

Now they are pushing forward with new restrictions on speech. And just as no one thought they’d actually be paying more for health care after the legislation was passed, no one really believes the government would go so far as to eliminate our ability to open discourse.

As with Obamacare, it’s all in the details – the fine print and the complementary regulations to follow.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is government double-speak for, “you’re about to get screwed.”

Guess what Feinstein’s version of the Media Shield Law is going to do.

Disclosure: This report has been published by an unlicensed and unregistered journalist-blogger-commentator. It has not been sanctioned by the United States government. Under new legislation pending in Congress, this report, as well as those who comment and share it online may be determined by a future court to be criminalistic or terroristic in nature and subject to penalties under U.S. Law. 

Hattip to the following outlaw alternatve media outlets: The Common Sense Show,The Organic PrepperThe Daily Sheeple

You might also like
52 Comments
  1. Robert Bouchard Jr. says

    F. U. D. F.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. fiatdollars says

    Pretty soon people are just gonna go ape-shit on these crazies,…pitch forks and torches to the castle type stuff. .. Feinstein is a megalomaniac, a war profiteer and a compulsive liar…I really do believe just about all the electronic voting machines with no paper trail around the country are rigged. How else do these creatures get elected?

  3. Seneca Crane says

    In this YouTube video, we find another communistic liberal democrat attacking Christians while waging ideological warfare against the Bill of Rights: http://youtu.be/1WcM3P-Gmh8?t=28s

  4. TNJim says

    I assume Daily Kos would get an exemption? Oh, wait. They don’t criticize government. They sell their souls for it.

  5. Michael Huck says

    Will someone explain to me how you can pass a law that tells health insurance companies they have to cover pre-existing conditions, cover children up to age 26, etc. etc. and then claim the premiums will be cheaper. Telling automakers how to build cars didn’t make them cheaper.

  6. Carol says

    I trust a 17 year old with his own website more then most journalists now. From the FOX in the hen house to the wolf on the other side……all are corrupt.

  7. Drawer22 says

    The 1st Amendment to our Constitution of the United States of America is supported, upheld and kept intact by the provisions of the 2d Amendment. Legislators take note!

    De Oppresso Liber

  8. samazf says

    Liberals only believe in free speech when they like what is said. Otherwise, you get called every name in the book and they try to shut you down.

  9. Ann Fenner says

    This is my first time hearing of Sen. Feinstein’s fight against the 1st Amendment. Suspension of 1st Amendment Rights would be the first step toward tyranny and dictatorship. In any country that has been taken over by a dictator, military junta, etc., the very first freedom to go is freedom of speech & freedom of the press. I am ashamed of Sen. Feinsten, she should know better. I can only hope that there are cooler, smarter heads in Congress who will vote this down to the ignominious end it deserves. This chilling quote comes to mind, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
    important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
    Joseph Goebbels (Propagandist, Hitler’s Third Reich)

    1. Drawer22 says

      @Ann Fenner – Actually, while close to the truth, that’s not exactly so. The first step is in the disarming of citizens so as to make them subjects of a totalitarian regime. Once the populace is disarmed, all other rights are jeopardized. Once jeopardized, and with a disarmed population, the other rights may be systematically removed from discussion, then removed altogether. It’s why we supporters of firearms (inclusive of ammunition) rights are so castigated by the present, tyrannical, American regime, led by the Emperor with No Clothes.

      De Oppresso Liber

  10. pancho sanza says

    any politician whos served more than 2 terms should be put out to pasture and with no benefits, if you cant make it on what we the people have too then you shouldnt have another chance to f*** america…

  11. Karl Dulaff says

    Imperious old ugly hag who has enjoyed the power of her office so long she thinks she controls us. In private business she would have been kicked to the curb years ago.

  12. RightWingLeftyGolfer says

    This is bad to say but Diane Freakinstein very much reminds me of my mother-in-law and the only word that I can use to describe my mother-in-law is demonic!

  13. marcdepiolenc says

    Gee, they must have changed the First Amendment since I last read it. Last time I checked, it gave special recognition and protection to a right, not a privilege revocable at will by the likes of this Fascist female.

  14. Ted Bissonnette says

    tell this infant she doesn’t like what people say to stay in the closet

    1. DixieAngel_76 says

      One look at that old bag’s face and you have to realize, she’s no infant!

  15. asipr2 says

    What’s the difference between a reporter and a witness?

    1. SSBohio says

      A witness can be compelled to testify. A reporter cannot, usually.

  16. Ken Adams says

    I have the misfortune of living in California & calling Feinstein & Boxer my Senators. It’s incredible these vacuous libtards are returned to office term after term.

    1. KnowBrainer says

      I as well suffer the same misfortune!

      1. SofiesVoice says

        Me too! We are governed by the three Wicket Witches of the West!! Time for them to retire…you’re no longer relevant….if you ever were!! Like I said before, you can’t fix IDIOT but you can unelect it!!!!!

      2. fuddcat says

        And Me Too!! They don’t even make good sense and they are in Obummer’s pants for sure!!

    2. Drawer22 says

      @Ken Adams – I moved.

      De Oppresso Liber

      1. DixieAngel_76 says

        I would love to leave this liberal hell hole as well, but some of us have to stay.

        1. Drawer22 says

          @DixieAngel_76 – You have my most sincere condolences. How does the center of the universe (That’s what the Native Americans in this part of the Great Northwest believed the San Juan Islands were.) sound to you? “Must issue” State, peaceful Islands (“America” is over an hour’s ferry trip away.), no smog, no drive-by shootings, no traffic lights (Well, there IS one inside NAPA Car Parts store!), moderate precipitation, and one knows who the Sheriff is and most of the Deputies by name and reputation. (Oops! I told yet another person! Soon, my Island will either sink or tip over!)

          Cogito, ergo armatus sum.

          1. fuddcat says

            But they are all crazy liberals up there!!!

          2. Drawer22 says

            @fuddcat:disqus – I am not! 🙂

            While this is a mostly Blue State, the rights of the People to keep and bear arms is largely unquestioned ─ to the extent that WA is a “MUST ISSUE” State, when it comes to carrying concealed. (I won’t debate how one can be “permitted” a Constitutional right; besides, here it’s a Concealed Pistol LICENSE.)

            Implicit in your Reply is that liberals are crazy. For the most part, I agree. However, I’ve been able to teach some liberals here what rights are, and they now want to go shooting with me, having already received that CPL! There IS real hope for change!

            Cogito, ergo armatus sum.

    3. DixieAngel_76 says

      That’s the beauty of gerrymandering, voter fraud, an extremely porous border, and a very vacuous brained electorate.

  17. Beach Dawg says

    Friggin hilarious! Obama supports want us to “trust’ them to define the word ‘legitimate’ which to them does NOT mean VAILD or AUTHENTIC, but rather “only those that agree with me’

  18. DeputyDuffy says

    Sorry, Frankenstein.
    Mess with MY Civil Rights and you’re gonna end up getting OWNED!

  19. SSBohio says

    Actually, there’s nothing in the above that deals with freedom of speech at all, much less criminalizes it. It’s about the Federal media shield law, to protect journalists from having to reveal their sources. This claim is so far off-base it’s ridiculous.

    1. William Johnston says

      “”Feinstein introduced an amendment that defines a “covered journalist” as someone who gathers and reports news for “an entity or service that disseminates news and information.””
      It’s right there in her bill. Anyone not fitting her description doesn’t have 1st Amendment “privileges”.

      1. William P. Thompson says

        I’m working on a theme song for “covered journalists”. “We gather to report news and seek Feinstein’s blessing, We disseminate news till you can not believe us our bosses are happy and I am a star, the truth takes a beating but that’s not important for I am a star, I am a star, I am a star, I am a star”

    2. LastNameFirst says

      Excuse me, but after all the BS that Congress has done with the APA, Only a complete moron as yourself would think that this amendment of Mrs. Diane Hitler Feinstein isn’t in fact actually another attempt by her to remove our Constitutional Bill of Rights. She has made so many statements wanting to do exactly that, she should have been removed from office and imprisoned for attempted violation of the Constitution.
      And it doesn’t take a genius to see that she is totally corrupt and pure evil.
      BTW, If she has her way, I wouldn’t be able to say what I just said and get away with it.

  20. 16HellCat says

    I think anyone serving as a senator and in their 80’s should be mentally evaluated. Nazi Feinstein is out of control and it seems to me that she has no idea of what is good for this country. But then again no politician does.

  21. billwhit1357 says

    Does anything good come out of that Illegal and Homosexual Haven called California? Feinstein and Pelosi both are pure Leftist Slimeball Trash who’s brains are so eaten by Botox and Booze neither of them have had a clear thought in decades! They can both kiss my backside!

    1. DeputyDuffy says

      Aptly put sir!

    2. VicR63 says

      Yes, there are still a good sized, but not the majority, group of patriots in California that have heads that explode most every day. And we long for the day we will have actual representation in Washington D.C.

    3. IHateLibs says

      Problem is, They know EXACTLY what theyre doing. Its about TOTAL GUBMENT CONTROL. And THEY ( the LIB/DEM TYRANTS ) cannot do That until WE are Totally Disarmed. Which will NEVER happen as long as there are REAL, Conservative AMERICANS, Still Breathin and ARMED. LOCK n LOAD. They will be Kickin in our Doors next, to do Just That. Disarm US

  22. willie1955 says

    Feinstein does not have a clue about what being an American means she’s so far left she is almost as bad as obama

    1. Rchelle says

      There is no “almost”…they are ALL the same. Don’t be fooled into believing that they all don’t work for the same “boss”……

    2. Drawer22 says

      @willie1955 – Just because they don’t all have the same name doesn’t mean they differ in agenda.

      De Oppresso Liber

  23. Joshua Canova says

    This article got ten times more awesome than it already was when you used the term “doublespeak”. 1984, sadly, is becoming a reality.

  24. Irresponsible parent hater says

    She certainly is. You couldn’t have chosen a more appropriate title to go with toad face’s picture.

  25. Jean Townsend says

    What a homely woman! Aren’t most liberal women ugly as sin? Wow, when she was born, her mom must have said “Ah, what a treasure! Please bury it!”

  26. anarchyst says

    Let’s give “journalists” the same treatment that they espouse for gun owners. Only one story per month, every story to be approved by government censors, all journalists to be photographed, fingerprinted and background checked before being issued government “credentials on a yearly basis, all printing presses and media-owned equipment to be approved by government. No sale of equipment without government approval . . .

    1. DixieAngel_76 says

      Don’t give them any more bright ideas!

  27. Skepticles says

    “I can’t support it if everyone who has a blog has a special privilege …”

    Too many ardent advocates expressing themselves to you Diane? Who did strong arm you into public service and the spotlight anyway?
    Poor suffering Diane. That inheirant right to free speech empowers any and every common clod to examine Dianes’ public doings in, at times, an unflattering light. Like its the lights’ fault.
    Boo-hoo Diane!

  28. Kent2012 says

    here I was just humming along thinking that Lady Bird Johnson had instigated a program to make America and her highways beautiful and Whamo, some duncecap missed seeing that buttugly thing slithering around………..

  29. MAVET says

    I FIND IT IS TRULY IMPOSSIBLE TO NOT HAVE THE WORDS “UGLY FACE”, AND ‘FEINSTEIN” TOGETHER. IT’S SIMPLY APROPOS!

    1. Drawer22 says

      @MAVET – While I agree, the effects of guns and helicopters haven’t impacted so severely that I am unable to “hear” you unless you SHOUT. Please refrain.

      De Oppresso Liber

  30. RICK says

    Just my two cents worth, Feinstein you can kiss my arse, not on the and not on the right but right up the middle. You are worse than Obama, you commie loven traitor.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.