Trump Jr. Sets Phasers To Wrecked, Blasts George Takei Into Deep Space

Content originally published at iBankCoin.com

You may have read about the giant CNN screw-up over a #FakeNews story concerning Donald Trump Jr. in which the network claimed two sources both happened to misread the date on an email and accidentally concluded that Wikileaks was passing information to the Trump campaign before it was made public - when in fact the emails had been published days before.

The network issued an embarassing correction, both in print and on air:

Washington (CNN)Correction: This story has been corrected to say the date of the email was September 14, 2016, not September 4, 2016. The story also changed the headline and removed a tweet from Donald Trump Jr., who posted a message about WikiLeaks on September 4, 2016.

Video: Here"s how @MKRaju corrected his reporting on @CNNNewsroom https://t.co/zy33tA3NIa

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) December 8, 2017

In the wake of all that, George Takei tried to launch his own follow-up "gotcha" at Trump Jr., tweeting "Uh-oh, Donnie" - with a link to a new article from a left-leaning news outlet with a mixed reputation for factual reporting, which claims that a Russian social media executive emailed Jr. and campaign aide Dan Scavino, invited them to create an account. OH MY GOD, EVEN IF TRUE. (............crickets...........)

Uh-oh, Donnie. https://t.co/sg74JR6VSp

— George Takei (@GeorgeTakei) December 8, 2017

In response, Trump Jr. launched a quantum torpedo and blasted Mr. Sulu into deep space...

Wrong again Georgie... I guess you have a bit more free time to read #fakenews now that it’s a bit tougher to ply kids with alcohol to assault them??? You know with all the added scrutiny. https://t.co/xUbvbfhMxN

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) December 10, 2017

Trump Jr. was, of course, referring to the accusation lodged against Takei by a former model who says that in 1981 he was invited to the "Star Trek" icon"s house when he was 23, plied with possibly spiked alcohol, and woke up to Mr. Sulu fondling his balls.

Takei denied the assault, saying the encounter "simply did not occur," however the actor"s frequent appearances on the Howard Stern show where he admitted to "grabbing men to persuade them" for sex and jerked off a guest didn"t help his case.

I think it"s safe to say, once again: Sulu down

Follow on Twitter @ZeroPointNow § Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Trump Sued For Blocking Twitter Users

A trying day for the Trump administration has turned more bizarre, when shortly after Donald Trump Jr. released the chain of emails released ahead of his correspondence with the Russian lawyer who had promised to deliver anti-Clinton information with the implied blessing of the Russian government, a free-speech group sued President Donald Trump for blocking Twitter users from his @realDonaldTrump account, arguing the practice violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit adds that because Trump frequently turns to Twitter to make policy statements, his account qualifies as a public forum from which the government cannot exclude people on the basis of their views. Twitter users are unable to see or respond to tweets from accounts that block them, although there is nothing preventing Trump from simply muting any accounts that bother him without the knowledge of the counterparty.

“President Trump’s Twitter account has become an important source of news and information about the government, and an important forum for speech by, to, or about the president,” Jameel Jaffer, an executive director at the Knight Institute said in a statement. “The First Amendment applies to this digital forum in the same way it applies to town halls and open school board meetings. The White House acts unlawfully when it excludes people from this forum simply because they’ve disagreed with the president.” 

The lawsuit was brought by the Knight First Amendment Institute, a non-profit organization affiliated with Columbia University, and joined by seven individual Twitter users, and claims that Trump blocked a number of accounts whose owners replied to his tweets with comments that criticized, mocked or disagreed with the president. The lawsuit, filed in Southern District of NY, claims that Trump"s blocking of the accounts amounted to an unconstitutional effort to suppress dissent, although we are confident that Twitter itself would have certain things to say about the purpose of the "block" function which it has been touting in recent months as a way to evade trolls.

According to Bloomberg, the Knights First Amendment institute first warned it may seek an injunction in early June when they sent a letter to Trump, his counsel, press secretary, and social media director. At the time, the institute represented two Twitter users, both of whom said they were blocked after criticizing the president on the social media platform.

"Everyone being able to see the president"s tweets feels vital to democracy," Joseph Papp, one of the seven Twitter users involved in the suit, said in a statement. As Reuters adds, Papp, an author, said he had been a registered Republican for 10 years and did not join the suit for political reasons, but that he "felt a deep sense of unease" when he was blocked.

The suit names Spicer and Dan Scavino, the White House director of social media, as defendants in addition to Trump. It asks for the blocking to be deemed unconstitutional and seeks an injunction to require the president to unblock users. The complaint follows a letter from the Knight Institute to Trump last month warning it would sue if users were not unblocked.

While the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, as it probably has bigger fish to fry at this moment, last month Sean Spicer said Trump"s tweets were considered "official statements by the president of the United States."

The Knight Institute"s arguments may have merit, independent free speech and internet law scholars say, in part because Trump"s tweets are used to announce policy decisions or can influence legislation. Previous cases involving politicians blocking users on Facebook may bolster its case.

The federal lawsuit, case number 1:17-cv-05205, is below.