Random Politics & Religion #25

They never released his info nor threatened to in return for anything.

Trump is responsible

perpetual victimization by some imaginary liberal cabal

I don't care about your made-up hypotheticals. It doesn't make sense to blackmail or coerce this guy. He apologized before contacting CNN. The posters identity was never published but CNN made clear they made no agreement to never post it for whatever reason. Why the *** would you even publish a blackmail threat? Like I said, none of it makes sense.

in our super secret sexy love nest.

Not so loud!

If you’re going to create nasty memes to get attention, demand people give you credit for those memes, and celebrate when the president of the United States shares one with his 30 million followers, I have no sympathy for you. You’re not a martyr for the cause of free expression. There was a time that anonymity allowed Americans with unpopular or unconventional beliefs to make their arguments without fear of retribution. Today, the Internet has created an environment that incentivizes people to create detestable messages meant to troll and harass.

Then again, this story isn’t really about online harassment or “HanA**holeSolo,” the man who (might have) created a GIF of President Trump body-slamming a wrestler — which I feel the need to reiterate is fake violence — with a CNN logo imposed on his face. The story itself means little. This is about how places like CNN function these days. How they overreact to everything the president does. How many of today’s newsrooms give some people a pass and destroy others.

The search for HanA**holeSolo began before anyone knew he was responsible for anti-Semitic or bigoted posts. CNN tracked down the identity of HanA**holeSolo because he had committed thought crimes, the worst of which was mocking CNN. The story was meant to tie a Trump tweet mocking CNN to a hateful meme-maker and blow up.

That’s because news organizations have become obsessed with fighting Trump rather than covering him. For all the sanctimonious self-championing about the importance of journalism in the Trump era, stories like these have no real purpose. This piece didn’t educate viewers on the underbelly of social media or the habits of the president or anything else. It wasn’t an argument over ideas or policy. It wasn’t entertainment. It was a story birthed from the hysterics that erupted over a silly meme Donald Trump retweeted.

What CNN has done is induce some random troll to grovel and apologize for his wrongthink. Even if we concede that there’s a good reason to track down a meme-maker on Reddit, why doesn’t the network run the name? Without the name, in fact, there is no real story.

CNN claims it kept the poster’s anonymity to protect his safety. Are they saying anti-Trump activists will hurt the man? Are they saying there should be no repercussion for things we say? Is this protection afforded all Americans? Moreover, the piece itself (and the on-air personalities at CNN) dispute the idea that his name was withheld to protect safety. It is clear that if HanA**holeSolo had responded to CNN by saying, “No, I’m not sorry, losers,” he would have been outed.

From the finger-wagging piece:


Should HanA**holeSolo ever revert to his nefarious meme-making ways, “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.”

This is a threat. There is simply no other way for an open-minded person to comprehend the meaning of the line. I’ve read thousands of news stories and written a bunch of them, and I can’t think of a single instance I’ve ever run across a similar disclaimer. CNN has absolved the man of his sins. For now. I guess if HanA**holeSolo does anything they deem ugly, the network reserves the right to put him in “danger”?

In a now-deleted tweet, CNN’s oft-confused Chris Cuomo asks: “Should CNN reveal name of Reddit user who made trump wrestling video? Had a lot of bigoted and hateful material on page and website.”

Let’s chew on this question and assertion for a moment: For one thing, although Cuomo happens to be correct in this case, I don’t trust his definition of hate or bigotry. Moreover, are journalistic standards contingent on the target’s political views? If HanA**holeSolo had the wrong opinion on gay marriage or affirmative action, would that be enough to ruin his life? What if he sincerely apologized for these transgressions? Someone should ask Cuomo what the standard should be.

Cuomo, who, to his credit, doesn’t hide his contempt for conservatives or free expression, also tweeted, “if you want to be loud, be proud and own what you say.” Why doesn’t this go for the media’s anonymous sources, who are said to be protecting the republic from Trump? CNN uses anonymous sources — almost wholly — to report on the wrongdoings of the president. Why not loud and proud? Considering how those sources have badly burned CNN on more than one occasion, why do they not feature qualifications like, “CNN reserves the right to publish the identity of these people if they lie to us”? Only terrified, inconsequential Internet goofballs can have their anonymity and livelihoods threatened?

It’s important to remember that this entire controversy sprung from the hysterics surrounding a juvenile presidential tweet. Since the tweet, I have watched many journalists act as if Trump had called the Gestapo into action. This, only a few weeks after an out-and-loud progressive taken in by the frenzy of the day attempted to assassinate Republican congressional leadership, a story most journalists dropped quicker than the middling Trump Twitter troll.

No, this isn’t a First Amendment issue. Just because one of the nation’s most powerful journalistic institutions has the power to track down and ruin the lives of random Reddit users doesn’t mean it should. Just because it can coerce apologies, implicitly or explicitly, doesn’t mean it should, either. At the very least, it’s an abuse of its power and a waste of its resources.

Meaning they can publish his name should anyone else actually dox him or the story would change in some other way, you chucklefucks. What the hell benefit would CNN get from blackmailing or coercing some random literal *** off the internet? Use the non-lizard parts of your brains once in a while, please.

Yay, a funny. Meanwhile, there's still no motivation for a threat, no corroboration of a threat, and the guy still remains anonymous. I'm sure this'll all literally explode any minute now with the real story.

As if reddit and 4chan are something to be feared and not a loose collection of sentient fedoras MAGAing all over each other in between CoD matches. CNN (or any news organization) couldn't give two ***.

It would all be a non-story if the president hadn't tweeted his usual garbage.

I mean, it would be just as bad (but almost a dead certainty) if Pleebo were to accuse Republicans for the actions of that baseball shooter a few weeks back.

Now I feel dirty for praising Fox News.


This is why I shouldn't come into PnR.

Congrats BR.

You are now one of us.

/hands BR a lifetime membership to the NRA, some hippy repellent, and the book The Art of the Deal.

Oh *** off. Stop making ***like this up.

This is just gonna go in circles despite the actual facts. Enjoy your self-imposed victimhood.

President Trump’s voter fraud commission may have violated the law by ignoring federal requirements governing requests for information from states....

... Kobach did not address the question of whether his office complied with federal law in issuing its request for public information. And if the commission didn’t follow the rule of law, the resistant states might have another effective argument.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, information requests from agencies and other federal entities are supposed to first be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).

This 1980 law requires federal agencies to seek public input, including through a comment period, before a request for information. A 1995 amendment extended OIRA’s authority to include not only requests for information for the government, but also requests for information to the public.

The law also requires that agencies justify their requests for public information, specify how it will be used and provide assurances that data will be protected. The law also obliges the agencies to estimate how many hours it will take entities to respond.

It does not appear that the commission submitted its request to OIRA before sending a letter to states asking for voter information.

Experts say the failure to do so would be significant, since states would be under no obligation to respond to requests that violate federal law....

Well all accept the bit where everyone thinks that CNN made a massive bo-bo.