[ExI] A test of the US constitution

[Ben Zaiboc]

On Saturday, 19 September 2026 at 13:30, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 19, 2026 at 4:09 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
>> Trump's most recent attempt to restrict the freedom of the press, prompted this in a news report about it today (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6e30580jqjpo):
>
> If they no longer have access to the White House then I think what CNN and MSNBC should do is simply stop broadcasting any live speech made by Donald from the White House; after all they are news organizations and Donald's speeches almost never contain anything that is both new and true. They can record his speeches and, for the rare occasions when he actually says something newsworthy, play that portion back later. Donald loves to talk for a very long time so they need to be edited down, we really don't need to hear yet again about his discovery that "most people don't know it but the word "dumb" has a "b" in it", or how he could tell thedifference between a giraffe and a camel on a cognitive test for dementia.
>
> And for those that insist on listening to every last sound that comes out of Donald's pie hole there is always Fox News and Newsmax and C-Span.
>
> John K Clark
>
>>

That sounds like a good idea, but it has nothing to do with the main problem here.

If all independent news outlets are barred from the white house, even for a single day, that's one day where the administration can do things that would otherwise be reported, effectively in secret, unreported to the public.Not the normal secret stuff that all govenments do, but things that the public should, and normally would, learn about.

That's a direct attack on democracy, and a firm step in the direction of authoritatianism.

Your constitution should be able to prevent that kind of thing. I hope it will in this case, but that seems to depend on how independent and uncorrupted the courts are, as well as whether your legal system allows a presidential order to take effect while its legality is being decided in the courts, rather than being blocked.

---
Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260919/075b7a6b/attachment.htm>