Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

http://fox40.com/2016/05/31/glenn-beck-suspended-by-siriusxm/

Thats fair.

<---- Not a fan of Beck, at all.

However, it sounds like a guest said it, not Beck. Is this a "We're going to put the show on a muzzle for a week to avoid a lawsuit from Trump"?

If Congress won’t remove him from office, what patriot will step up and do that if, if, he oversteps his mandate as president, his constitutional-granted authority, I should say, as president,” Thor said. “If he oversteps that, how do we get him out of office? And I don’t think there is a legal means available. I think it will be a terrible, terrible position the American people will be in to get Trump out of office because you won’t be able to do it through Congress.”

I can't believe there are people that still listen to that overwrought, posturing buffoon. (Beck, not Trump)

He's the Maher of the Right. Utterly worthless to rational discourse, and only serve to further entrench the ideology of their true believers.

He's just asking the question.

Could someone just shoot Trump? You know. For science.

So wait... this "Thor" dude (what a last name tho)... did he explicitly call for assassination or was it implied?

If he called for it, I believe the Secret Service quickly come calling as well. Thats a federal felony IIRC.

 whembly wrote:
So wait... this "Thor" dude (what a last name tho)... did he explicitly call for assassination or was it implied?

the Article wrote:
If Congress won’t remove him from office, what patriot will step up and do that if, if, he oversteps his mandate as president, his constitutional-granted authority, I should say, as president,” Thor said. “If he oversteps that, how do we get him out of office? And I don’t think there is a legal means available. I think it will be a terrible, terrible position the American people will be in to get Trump out of office because you won’t be able to do it through Congress.”

They tried to dance around it, but unlike kronk with the ladies, it wasn't slick enough.

 feeder wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So wait... this "Thor" dude (what a last name tho)... did he explicitly call for assassination or was it implied?

the Article wrote:
If Congress won’t remove him from office, what patriot will step up and do that if, if, he oversteps his mandate as president, his constitutional-granted authority, I should say, as president,” Thor said. “If he oversteps that, how do we get him out of office? And I don’t think there is a legal means available. I think it will be a terrible, terrible position the American people will be in to get Trump out of office because you won’t be able to do it through Congress.”

They tried to dance around it, but unlike kronk with the ladies, it wasn't slick enough.

Okay... maybe I need to hear it because the way I read it, was that once Trump's President... and he turns out to be horribad, there's no way to remove him from office. You're not going to find enough Congress-critters to convict/remove a sitting President these days.

Oh.. the DrudgeReport* fanned that assassination implication.

*Drudge is a known Trumper sycophant.

So Beck is being held accountable for something one of his guests said.....

Finally

When hosts don't call out their guests for their bs, they should be held accountable for it.

Was the programme live? If not they chose to run those comments despite having the option not to, likely for the very reason that they're inflammatory and draw attention. All publicity is good publicity, Beck is off for a week, it won't hurt his audience one bit when he comes back on.

Not a fan of trump or beck, but it seems odd to penalize beck for something a guest said, especially if it was a live show.

Its his show. His picked guests. The buck stops with him.

I remember people making similar accusations about President Obama being assassinated but I don't recall anyone getting their show shut down for a week.

From what I read, I find it quite odd that his show was suspended. Obviously the people that own the station have a right to control the content but I don't think what his guest said that extreme. He danced around removing him from office if he goes above the law but it was pretty oblique.

Maybe I've listened to too many crazy right wing nonsense rants when I was following that Bundy affair and it's skewed my perception of normal discourse, though.

 Ouze wrote:
From what I read, I find it quite odd that his show was suspended. Obviously the people that own the station have a right to control the content but I don't think what his guest said that extreme. He danced around removing him from office if he goes above the law but it was pretty oblique.

Maybe I've listened to too many crazy right wing nonsense rants when I was following that Bundy affair and it's skewed my perception of normal discourse, though.

I've yet to "hear" the interview and I suspect the insinuation *may* come off stronger than in print.

Oh, and this Thor dude... (again, what-a-last-name!) he's a righty #NeverTrumper... A-OK in my book!

But, he's point is a bit flawed imo.

If the President is truly a disaster, and Congress is recalcitrant to the idea of impeachment... simply primary the biotches*.

*Admittedly not an easy thing to do... but it *is* an option.

It's really strange that for all the terrible things Beck has said, he ends up getting a suspension over this bit of nonsense. I mean, it was clearly a nudge nudge wink wink statement about killing a future president... but it was Trump that said it, it was a guest on his show. Unless the conversation around that shows Beck's leading the guest down that path, I don't see how he can be punished for this.

It might be a publicity thing - maybe Beck wanted a week off and so why not do it with a nice publicity stunt? Or maybe the greater Republican establishment is looking to flex its muscles against the people who haven't fallen in to line with Trump?

 feeder wrote:
I can't believe there are people that still listen to that overwrought, posturing buffoon. (Beck, not Trump)

He's the Maher of the Right. Utterly worthless to rational discourse, and only serve to further entrench the ideology of their true believers.

I couldn't agree more with this comment. I think it's such a waste of intelligence on both their parts, they are both really smart people but completely useless in my book because of how they choose to use it

 Ahtman wrote:
I remember people making similar accusations about President Obama being assassinated but I don't recall anyone getting their show shut down for a week.

They should have. I'd been fine with the Secret Service making an example of them.

Issuing threats against a sitting president is a felony. IDK about threats against a candidate. Technically Trump isn't a candidate yet, FWIW.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Issuing threats against a sitting president is a felony. IDK about threats against a candidate. Technically Trump isn't a candidate yet, FWIW.

Tell that to the Secret Service who escort Trump and every other major presidential candidate since Robert Kennedy assassination

The protection detail doesn't mean there is an actual law on the books making it a felony to issue threats against a candidate, and in fact there isn't one, according to Wikipedia.

I love it when people go to such wasted lengths to speculate what to do about a Trump presidency. Don't worry it will never happen. We're stuck with the Clinton machine for four years I'm afraid.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The protection detail doesn't mean there is an actual law on the books making it a felony to issue threats against a candidate, and in fact there isn't one, according to Wikipedia.

Threats against anyone as far as I'm aware is illegal. Trump is a candidate just not the GOP nominee yet to be correct

 Chute82 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The protection detail doesn't mean there is an actual law on the books making it a felony to issue threats against a candidate, and in fact there isn't one, according to Wikipedia.

Threats against anyone as far as I'm aware is illegal. Trump is a candidate just not the GOP nominee yet to be correct

No. I can say I going to use your guts for garters, but thats not actionable. Local laws vary but generally it has to be immediate, specific, and actionable (aka if I say I going to run you over with a tank thats not actionable unless my address is Fort Hood).

El Presidente has some special protections.

Kinda disappointed by this. Not a fan of Beck at all, but A) his guest said it not him, B) his comments were pretty vague, not much of a threat and C) I think they did this to appease the almighty Hairpiece before he could sue them.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Kinda disappointed by this. Not a fan of Beck at all, but A) his guest said it not him, B) his comments were pretty vague, not much of a threat and C) I think they did this to appease the almighty Hairpiece before he could sue them.

What grounds does Trump have to sue? I think this is more about Sirius management trying to tell Beck to stop his overwrought freak out over Trump. I'm not a fan of Trump either but I also don't think he's the boogey man that some people make him out to be. Do I think Trump would be a bad President? Yes, but we've had bad presidents before, Trump isn't going to single handedly destroy the country or the world if he's elected. Besides, I thought Beck had his own network or whatever.

Could be worse. Trump could have taken a page from Filipino Trump's book, or a few bullets from his magazine at least.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Kinda disappointed by this. Not a fan of Beck at all, but A) his guest said it not him, B) his comments were pretty vague, not much of a threat and C) I think they did this to appease the almighty Hairpiece before he could sue them.

Imma trademark 'The Almighty Hairpiece™'...

Prestor Jon wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Kinda disappointed by this. Not a fan of Beck at all, but A) his guest said it not him, B) his comments were pretty vague, not much of a threat and C) I think they did this to appease the almighty Hairpiece before he could sue them.

What grounds does Trump have to sue? I think this is more about Sirius management trying to tell Beck to stop his overwrought freak out over Trump. I'm not a fan of Trump either but I also don't think he's the boogey man that some people make him out to be. Do I think Trump would be a bad President? Yes, but we've had bad presidents before, Trump isn't going to single handedly destroy the country or the world if he's elected. Besides, I thought Beck had his own network or whatever.

Politics aside, Trump would sue because it's Trump. It's already been shown he has no qualms about having a hissy fit in public. He has clashed with Fox and plenty of other news sources in the past, why wouldn't he go after Beck?

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/03/16/donald-trump-wont-attend-next-g-o-p-debate-on-fox-news/?_r=0


Also I disagree on Trump destroying the world. He's no career politician, but he's a money grabbing, power hungry narcissistic tyrant. He's also made a lot of anti-immigrant/anti-muslim comments that are outright racist and nigh threatening. That and a lot of the base group he appeals to are verbally and physically violent.