So now the same politically corrupt FBI that let Hillary off the hook will be investigating the CLEARLY ILLEGAL obtainment of stolen documents by the NYTimes. A First Amendment defense by the NYT would be bleak at best.
The NYT will likely argue in court that they published the stolen documents under the "public interest exception." However, they would fail numerous elements or thresholds (but the NYT doesn't really care as I discuss below).
1) NYT actions are motivated by malice, spite and ill will (they admittedly endorsed Hillary Clinton and if it's stories regarding Trump/Clinton were analyzed, it would show that the NYT stories about Trump outnumbered the Hillary stories.
Further, it could be proven that stories about Trump were negative in substance and were composed to damage Trump, while stories regarding Hillary were positive in substance and created to glorify and put her on a pedestal.
2) NYT made cursory defamatory statements against Trump based on speculation and opinion.
3) Throughout this presidential process, the NYT has a history of statements that were made as part of a campaign of harassment undertaken to destroy Trump.
4) By publishing Trump's unauthorized documents, the NYT has invaded Trump's privacy.
5) Trump will win the case against NYT because he has already produced all financial disclosure forms required by law. Just because the NYT wishes to arbitrarily create its own law in which Trump must disclose 30 years of his tax returns, its actions are not only unethical, it's actions will be found unlawful.
6) Here's the most significant fact: the unauthorized tax documents at issue are from 21 years ago! It's obvious the NYT was desperately trying to "dig up dirt" on Trump, and discovered something from 21 years ago. Tax documents from 21 years ago FAR EXCEEDS, and is WAY BEYOND the SCOPE of permissible discovery, and thus, the public interest exception rule should fail.
7) This is the NYT STRATEGY: they hope their actions in the short-term will damage Trump. NYT knows a court case will be a long-term battle and will probably take 5-8 years to be adjudicated so they are not concerned about any multi-million judgment or bad publicity against them.
8)The NYTimes figures a $10-20 million court judgment against them is a drop-in-the-bucket, harmless, and an small investment venture hit that will help get Hillary elected. Lastly, Ieftists in this country are vile, disgusting, anarchist bottom-feeders!.
9) To the leftists: The DNC is not a U.S. government entity. The DNC computers, phones, and any other device is not part of OUR government. Our government has no duty to GUARD or PROTECT the DNC computers, phones, or private devices. The DNC does have a duty (if it so chooses) to protect its own hardware. Obviously, the DNC did not properly secure it's hardware, so they are to blame for any breach, not our government.
However, our government has an ABSOLUTE DUTY to guard and protect every U.S. citizens tax documents, PERIOD!
Illegally obtaining tax documents from our GOVERNMENT has nothing to do with some group hacking a NON-GOVERNMENT entity such as the DNC. Our government is culpable for the breach against Trump and the NYT is liable for damages to Trump.
10) My Hispanic family, friends and I are voting Trump/Pence 2016. We're not worried at all about this election. People are smart enough to know the media are CORRUPT! Trump will be our next President!
This comment was left by Mike Garcia at Breitbart.com - Read more of Mike Garcia's comments at https://disqus.com/by/disqus_rYCT0Ph2GF/
Read the Breitbart article http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/02/new-york-times-paid-no-taxes-2014/
Comment Category Tags