• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jeff Bezos Accuses National Enquirer of Blackmail

Bucky said:
Again, you are just speculating. How do you know a. Mr Sanchez (whoever that is) provided N.I. the photos and b. Assuming Mr. Sanchez did receive photos perhaps his sister texted him the photos which does not make it stolen property.

You are confusing blackmail with journalism. As a shareholder of Amazon myself, I find these pictures extremely relevant. The stock price of Amazon has fallen 10% since Bezos announced his divorce. The public deserves to know.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right!
IF Mr. Sanchez did receive the photos from his sister, then Bezos probably has a weak case.
That is the biggest "if" there is surrounding the entire case.

So far however, there is no confirmation on that.
If it turned out that she sent the photos to her brother, then everything I referred to above has nothing to do with the situation and Bezos would appear as simply a man who "got took" by his journalist squeeze, and it wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened.

I am operating on the assumption that she did not send the photos to her brother.
I do freely and openly acknowledge your point about the possibility that she might have.

If so, boo hoo for Bezos, a case of awfully poor judgment and the little head thinking instead of the big head.
 
In any case, we better hope and pray that if this goes to SCOTUS, that they finally DO uphold that last vestige of privacy apart from and outside of "the public importance" where interpersonal communications are concerned.

Trust me, you do not want to live in a country where even that last tiny patch of trust evaporated.
And you don't want to be doing business in such a place either because corporate espionage will be nearly 100% legal.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Wouldn't be the first time Dersh was wrong.
Pecker is also trying to claim that it's "FAIR USE" under the copyright convention statutes, also dead wrong. Once again, if I send YOU something, and YOU do not give YOUR permission to Joe Blow to copy what I sent, it's a felony and Joe Blow can be charged, tried and convicted.

In this case, Joe Blow #1 is Lauren Sanchez' brother, who apparently might not have sought permission from Ms. Sanchez, and Joe Blow #2 is David Pecker, who received said purloined data FROM Joe Blow #1.

Wired and wireless communications are governed by both FCC Rules and Regulations and by other federal statutes.
And it covers a wide range of communications, including phone, computer, wired phone, television and radio, also including 2-way radio communications as well.

Lauren Sanchez' cell phone was not a publisher, thus "Fair Use" is completely out of the ballpark. Pecker thinks a person's private wireless device is just a platform for his newspaper to be displayed on, not surprising.

But it isn't, even if it is capable of doing so, it still is not "the newspaper" itself, it is the device that DISPLAYS the newspaper.
Big difference.

If Bezos had sent it to Lauren via FACEBOOK, then Pecker would be in the clear.
He didn't.
Click to expand...

Well, someone better tell the people behind the leak of the Pentagon papers then, because they broke the law after all....
 
truthatallcost said:
Bezos is a greedy money pig. I have no sympathy for him in general. You can elevate the greedy money pig to hero status to spite Trump if you want. That's your right, idc.
Click to expand...

I think that's the pot calling the kettle a mother****er.

"Greedy money pig" fits trump perfectly.
 
chuckiechan said:
So Mr. Bezo who is the owner of the Washington Post and the left's hit man, is crying about being Doxx'ed! LOL. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Karma is a bitch.

Spare me.
Click to expand...


But Stormy lied, right???

It is hilarious watching the cultists taking the high road against adultery!
 
Saladin4 said:
Funny to see you trump lovers defending these asswipes at the Enquirer...How low is your "kind" willing to go?
Click to expand...


Next they will be starting a go fund me page as aids is killing off Americas vampires, it was reported in the enquirer...
 
j-mac said:
You think he is wrong? Make your case....Snark over an anonymous message board phases no one....
Click to expand...

When has ‘do my bidding or else I release compromising information about you’ ever been protected by the first amendment? Dershowitz might have had a good argument if the National Enquirer had simply published the photos and text messages, but that isn’t what happened.
 
Last edited:
Idiometer said:
What does Batman have to do with it? And why do you assume liberals love Batman?
Click to expand...

Everybody loves Batman. Batman is a billionaire.

Liberals don't hate billionaires.

We hate money junkies.
 
j-mac said:
Well, someone better tell the people behind the leak of the Pentagon papers then, because they broke the law after all....
Click to expand...

Are we now comparing the Amazon CEO's dick to The Pentagon Papers?
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
In any case, we better hope and pray that if this goes to SCOTUS, that they finally DO uphold that last vestige of privacy apart from and outside of "the public importance" where interpersonal communications are concerned.

Trust me, you do not want to live in a country where even that last tiny patch of trust evaporated.
And you don't want to be doing business in such a place either because corporate espionage will be nearly 100% legal.
Click to expand...

Privacy is the least of the issues in this case. Bezos exposed a shocking business practice leveraged by the National Enquirer. They acquired - legally or illegally - compromising photographs and text messages which they itemized with a threat to publish them unless Bezos met a list of demands. It really makes one wonder who else they’ve targeted in this fashion and what their demands were in those cases. Money? Voting a particular way on a piece of legislation? Bezos was right to involve the FBI.
 
Napoleon said:
Privacy is the least of the issues in this case. Bezos exposed a shocking business practice leveraged by the National Enquirer. They acquired - legally or illegally - compromising photographs and text messages which they itemized with a threat to publish them unless Bezos met a list of demands. It really makes one wonder who else they’ve targeted in this fashion and what their demands were in those cases. Money? Voting a particular way on a piece of legislation? Bezos was right to involve the FBI.
Click to expand...

It's been the NatEnq business model since the paper began.
It's just that it's now on steroids.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Wouldn't be the first time Dersh was wrong.
Pecker is also trying to claim that it's "FAIR USE" under the copyright convention statutes, also dead wrong. Once again, if I send YOU something, and YOU do not give YOUR permission to Joe Blow to copy what I sent, it's a felony and Joe Blow can be charged, tried and convicted.

In this case, Joe Blow #1 is Lauren Sanchez' brother, who apparently might not have sought permission from Ms. Sanchez, and Joe Blow #2 is David Pecker, who received said purloined data FROM Joe Blow #1.

Wired and wireless communications are governed by both FCC Rules and Regulations and by other federal statutes.
And it covers a wide range of communications, including phone, computer, wired phone, television and radio, also including 2-way radio communications as well.

Lauren Sanchez' cell phone was not a publisher, thus "Fair Use" is completely out of the ballpark. Pecker thinks a person's private wireless device is just a platform for his newspaper to be displayed on, not surprising.

But it isn't, even if it is capable of doing so, it still is not "the newspaper" itself, it is the device that DISPLAYS the newspaper.
Big difference.

If Bezos had sent it to Lauren via FACEBOOK, then Pecker would be in the clear.
He didn't.
Click to expand...

I will also point out the Lauren Sanchez brother denies giving the pics to AMI. That doesn't mean he's telling the truth, but it means that either he, or AMI is lying.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
You're absolutely right!
IF Mr. Sanchez did receive the photos from his sister, then Bezos probably has a weak case.
That is the biggest "if" there is surrounding the entire case.

So far however, there is no confirmation on that.
If it turned out that she sent the photos to her brother, then everything I referred to above has nothing to do with the situation and Bezos would appear as simply a man who "got took" by his journalist squeeze, and it wouldn't be the first time something like that has happened.

I am operating on the assumption that she did not send the photos to her brother.
I do freely and openly acknowledge your point about the possibility that she might have.

If so, boo hoo for Bezos, a case of awfully poor judgment and the little head thinking instead of the big head.
Click to expand...

I also will point out that at the current time, Sanchez's brother denies any involvement in it. Let's suppose he's telling the truth. Someone is lying.
 
j-mac said:
Dershowitz today says it's a 1a issue, therefore no crime.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I hope they go after the NE and win, thus setting a president to go after other news organizations leaking government information.
 
Napoleon said:
Privacy is the least of the issues in this case. Bezos exposed a shocking business practice leveraged by the National Enquirer. They acquired - legally or illegally - compromising photographs and text messages which they itemized with a threat to publish them unless Bezos met a list of demands. It really makes one wonder who else they’ve targeted in this fashion and what their demands were in those cases. Money? Voting a particular way on a piece of legislation? Bezos was right to involve the FBI.
Click to expand...

Terry Crews said that they tried to intimidate him .. using forged receipts from him at a strip club even. And, where there are two, there are more.
 
It appears that it was indeed the Saudis who obtained private information from Bezos's cell phone.

According to Gavin De Becker, who has turned the information over to federal authorities:

Our investigators and several experts concluded with high confidence that the Saudis had access to Bezos’ phone, and gained private information. As of today, it is unclear to what degree, if any, AMI was aware of the details.

Jeff Bezos’ Investigator Gavin de Becker Finds the Saudis Obtained the Amazon Chief’s Private Data
 
Napoleon said:
Privacy is the least of the issues in this case. Bezos exposed a shocking business practice leveraged by the National Enquirer. They acquired - legally or illegally - compromising photographs and text messages which they itemized with a threat to publish them unless Bezos met a list of demands. It really makes one wonder who else they’ve targeted in this fashion and what their demands were in those cases. Money? Voting a particular way on a piece of legislation? Bezos was right to involve the FBI.
Click to expand...

As an aside, I'm just trying to imagine a non-billionaire going to the FBI with this.

They'd be escorted out of the building by security.

Bezos is such complete scum that it's impossible to care about this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom