September 19, 2013
United States Senate
331 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Mrs. Feinstein (#diannefeinstein):
It is with utter disbelief that I find occasion to write to you once again concerning a disgusting act of anti-American, anti-constitutional cowardice on your part. On September 16, Americans watched you stand on a soapbox built on the dead bodies of brave Americans murdered at the Washington Navy Yard by liberal, registered democrat Aaron Alexis, a former member of the U.S. Navy, and advocate for even MORE restrictive gun control laws in direct violation of the Second Amendment.
I sit here now reviewing comments you made to a Senate committee in support of your amendment to deny Americans their First Amendment free speech protection because YOU, Ms. Feinstein, don’t consider them REAL or PROFESSIONAL journalists/reporters as defined for your purposes in the Media Shield Law. Or could it be because real “citizen journalists” are not bought and paid-for mouthpieces and propagandists for your liberal, anti-American agenda? Are you afraid of the FACTS? Do the TRUTH scare the hell out of you Dianne? Because if you are going to define who is and isn’t a REAL journalist or reporter, you can throw the Obama-supportive state-run media personnel at ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN, as well as half the liberal, biased newspapers in the country, right out the window. Because if these “so-called” journalists presented the FACTS with the same ethical backbone as they did during the Nixon administration, Americans would know the TRUTH behind Fast & Furious, Fort Hood, Benghazi, gunrunning to Syrian rebels, the I.R.S. and NSA scandals and Obama’s capitulation to the Islamic world and the Muslim Brotherhood, and most certainly the criminal undertakings of Congress itself!
As an amendment to the Media Shield Law, you would deny bloggers, videographers and others who are NOT employed by “news organizations” any of the rights, freedoms and protections of the First Amendment, because you don’t believe they are credible, knowledgeable or should I say, not TRUSTWORTHY ENOUGH to carry out the democratic party’s liberal, entitlement, anti-American/Constitutional narrative? That MAYBE they might actually think for THEMSELVES and research and report the FACTS. Am I right Dianne? Of course I am. Because just like your rabid assault on the Second Amendment, you will not rest until you have attacked the remaining 25. Well, darling… as a PROFESSIONAL, and a REAL, journalist who left the “profession” after some 20 years when it became apparent TRUTH and FACTS no longer mattered, you’re going to have a tiny bit of issues with your amendment. Mainly, the CONSTITUTION and most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit decision in Glik v. Cunniffe, et al., No. 10-1764 issued August 26, 2011. Here’s a bit of background on the case, just so you know the FACTS…
Boston resident Simon Glik witnessed three police officers making an arrest in 2007. Concerned that officers were using excessive force, he recorded the arrest with his cellphone. Officers confronted Glik and when he refused to stop videotaping the arrest, he was arrested.
Among the offenses he was charged with violating were Massachusetts’ wiretapping laws. Glik filed a civil rights action against the officers and the City of Boston for violating his First and Fourth Amendment rights. Now this is the part you’re gonna HATE… On August 26, 2011, Glik’s First Amendment rights prevailed as the U.S. CoA’s ruled that a private citizen’s right to videotape police officers performing their duties in a public space is “unambiguously” protected by the First Amendment. OUCH! Oh, but there’s more, Dianne. Let’s continue…
Writing for the majority, Judge Kermit Lipez explained that the First Amendment not only prohibits establishing laws against freedom of speech, but also “encompasses a range of conduct related to the gathering and dissemination of information.” Citizens have the right to observe actions and proceedings and investigate the facts that foster the free reporting and discussion of government affairs. They also have the right to share what they learn with fellow citizens.
The Court of Appeals reminds us that these rights are not restricted to so-called “professional” journalists. Journalism is the product of citizens, and increasingly there is little importance placed on whether or not an individual draws a paycheck from a media organization to do so. Every American citizen enjoys the rights of the press, but must also shoulder the responsibilities.
Judge Lipez offers an astute observation about the nature of journalism in the 21st century so vitally important as to be worth labeling profound. Judge Lipez acknowledged the revolutionary role of technology giving the “average” citizen the ability to gather and disseminate news as individuals:
“Moreover, changes in technology and society have made the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw. The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper.
“Such developments make clear why the news-gathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status.” The judge added, “News stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper.”
But my question to you Dianne is this: WHY, if a professional and responsible journalist is reporting a story based on FACTS and TRUTH does that individual need special protections and to be shielded against litigation? Let me answer that for you Ms. Feinstein…
With any right comes responsibility. Those presenting an accurate depiction of events must demonstrate above all a loyalty to journalistic truth, or any covenant with the audience over credibility becomes tainted. They must verify facts, put them into context, and disclose sources, methods and biases so the audience can engage in its own assessment process of the information. As NBC News reporter Chuck Todd has said, “Transparency is the new objectivity.”
But the leftwing, mainstream propaganda media doesn’t report truths and facts. They report narratives presented by the government and individuals such as yourself. It is only through the fact-finding, objective presentation by the very individuals you wish to discredit do we actually LEARN the TRUTH!. So YES, I can see why you would wish to discredit them. Just like myself, we’re here to keep tabs on people such as YOURSELF!
Please remember this SENATOR… the First Amendment, which prohibits Congress from restricting the freedom of speech, press, and religion, was created by our Founding Fathers to protect citizens from the TYRANNY of censored speech. What is vitally important is that is not be used to permit tyranny by one group of citizens (the professional media) over another to control who is afforded the privilege and respect of that speech.
So until next time, and I am sure there will be one Dianne, remember… we’re watching. We’re keeping tabs. And when it all falls to pieces for you and your anti-American cohorts, we’ll have all the evidence and truths we need to bring you to justice. Molon Labe, Dianne. We ARE taking America back!
Robert Philip Dean, USMC
Founder, The American Patriot Alliance
American. Christian. Marine