Former FEC Chair Wants Law To Charge Readers Who Spread Fake News With Libel

By Aaron Kesel

A former commissioner of the Federal Election Commission, Ann Ravel, has proposed an insane new law that seeks to punish readers of news with libel if a story is deemed false. Yes, you read that right, she wants to charge you the person reading this right now. Talk about an Orwellian law.

The new proposal is titled Fool Me Once: The Case for Government Regulation of ‘Fake News.’  and would be implemented to “improve voter competence.”

This crazy woman wants to charge you simply for sharing “fake news” on Facebook, Twitter or in a comment section. Does Ravel realize she lives in the U.S., not communist China where information is filtered? Oh, but she’s not the only one off her rocker forgetting her Constitution baby bottle. The measure was co-written by Abby K. Wood, an associate professor at the University of Southern California, and Irina Dykhne, a student at USC Gould School of Law.

In their proposal, they wrote, “after a social media user clicks ‘share’ on a disputed item (if the platforms do not remove them and only label them as disputed), government can require that the user be reminded of the definition of libel against a public figure. Libel of public figures requires ‘actual malice,’ defined as knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth. Sharing an item that has been flagged as untrue might trigger liability under libel laws.”

“Ann’s proposal is full blown regulation of all political content, even discussion of issues, posted at any time, for free or for a fee, on any online platform, from Facebook to the,” Republican FEC commissioner, Lee Goodman told Washington Examiner‘s “Secrets.”

Goodman added:

A fatal flaw of Ann’s proposal is that it cannot define what is, or is not, ‘disinformation’ in a political message. Nevertheless, it proposes to tag threats of libel lawsuits and liability to thousands of American citizens who might want to retweet or forward a message that somebody else subjectively considers to be ‘disinformational.’ I call that the big chill.

Ravel would seek for regulation for “fake news,” not just paid ads, though the coined term by U.S. President Trump isn’t defined other than the Democrat’s description of “disinformation” which is quite broad.

The other two remaining questions are how the group would seek to accomplish being able to charge someone with a crime for just sharing a post with a link to an article, and who would “officially” determine whether an article is fake or not? With the existence of technologies like VPN’s and TOR that could mask ones’ real IP address and users using aliases online. To demask users would almost certainly be a feat in itself causing a stir at the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) and other privacy right organizations.

With U.S. President Donald Trump nominating Trey Trainor, a far-right lawyer from Texas to serve on the six-person panel it makes us less worried this will pass since Republicans now control the FEC committee. However, this proposal to sue readers simply for circulating a news article is a big exposure of the State and a new low. This measure is literally out of George Orwell’s 1984, attempting to control the flow of information by labeling everything “fake news.”

Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post and is Director of Content for Coinivore. Follow Aaron at Twitter and Steemit.

This article is Creative Commons and can be republished in full with attribution. Like Activist Post on Facebook, subscribe on YouTube, follow on Twitter and at Steemit.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

15 Comments on "Former FEC Chair Wants Law To Charge Readers Who Spread Fake News With Libel"

  1. So they want to criminalize the readers instead of the MSM? Figures.

  2. I love it – LOL – they would be charging fines to 90% of Americans because they listen to fake news 24/7 from their TVs to their radio stations. Not to mention the Hollywood movies and PBS documentaries!

  3. Herbert Dorsey | October 20, 2017 at 11:10 am | Reply

    Libel suits cannot be won in court if what is said about a person can be shown to be true. Also, this law would be unconstitutional as it infringes on our right of free speech.

    • Free Man (NOT) | October 20, 2017 at 3:11 pm | Reply

      Do you really think TPTB give a *hoot* about our free speech?

      • lightingstrikesthrice | October 23, 2017 at 12:23 pm | Reply

        Right on. That is why the word people is capitalized in the constitution. The capitalizing of the word people, designates it as to a specific ‘people’ or person(s).

  4. Ann Ravel has obviously become unraveled. Stupid asshat. No wonder the country is so screwed up with morons like this in charge of anything.

  5. “And Winston Smith laughed and laughed and laughed.”

  6. The US-Israel Special Relationship Time-line That AIPAC Doesn’t Want You To See

    “…1963– AIPAC Formed– The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) “America’s Pro-Israel Lobby” is formed, but refuses to comply with US law and register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. AIPAC has been in violation of federal law for nearly 50 years, but through political contributions and connections, AIPAC officials have remained above prosecution for their many violations of Federal law, including espionage (as addressed later).

    …2010– Israel Bribes US News Outlets for Biased Stories– Newly declassified files prove that Israel has actually been covertly paying American media outlets tens of millions of dollars to publish pro-Israel stories. Among other things, the documents revealed that Israel paid the Atlantic magazine $50,000 to disrupt a US peace proposal that would have allowed Palestinian refugees to return to their homes in Israel. These documents came from a Senate hearing, which ended up being censored by American politicians who received significant campaign financing from non-gentile sources. The bribed senators even went as far as sealing the most damning documents from the investigation.”

  7. Lets first discuss if the federal government was ever DELEGATED that authority. Here is a list of what “powers” are delegated to the feds, from “Publius Huldah, which is taken directly from the US Constitution: “In a nutshell, our Constitution authorizes the federal government to handle the following objects for the Country at Large:
    — Military DEFENSE, international commerce & relations; (caps mine)
    — Control immigration & naturalization of new citizens;
    — Domestically, to create a uniform commercial system: weights & measures, patents & copyrights, money based on gold & silver, bankruptcy laws, mail delivery & some road building; and
    — With some of the amendments, secure certain civil rights.
    As stated in the 10th Amendment, all others powers are reserved by the States OR The People…. (end quote”

    Though if you’re interested then in what exactly (in writing) are those who serve within the federal government lawfully authorized to spend money on? What would our Country’s financial condition be if WE THE PEOPLE had/do enforced the enumerated powers on Congress? It is the enumerated powers which list the objects on which Congress may appropriate funds:
    — immigration office (Art. I, §8, cl.4)
    — mint (Art. I, §8, cl. 5)
    — Attorney General (Art. I, §8, cl. 6)
    — post offices & post roads (Art. I, §8, cl. 7)
    — patent & copyright office (Art. I, §8, cl. 8)
    — federal courts (Art. I, §8, cl. 9)
    — military (Art. I, §8, cls. 11-16)
    — the civil list (Art. I, §6, cl.1)
    [and other objects listed in various other articles, sections, & clauses]

    Notice that foreign/military aid is not listed, matter of fact the US Constitution requires that those weapons, etc that are sold, traded, given, etc to foreign nations be given to the Militia of the several states in Art 1, §8, Cl. 16.

    So we can see that there is NO DELEGATION of those type of powers to the feds. Anything they do concerning that area is, like weapons bans, etc, a crime or two such as felonies, Perjruy, etc.

  8. This mean they’ll charge the government’s own copy editors, writers of propaganda? After all they will read and share ‘fake news’ direct from the source. Or will it be another keep on funding the C.I.A & F.B.I even though these agencies, their subsidiaries have credibly been proven to aid, abet, harbor, train, hire actual terrorist?

  9. Isn’t China doing this?

  10. will she start with the msm?

  11. Good to know Ann Ravel is the first and last word. Marxism at it’s finest…Silence please or if you don’t please…

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.