Obama has Missouri law enforcement checking the honesty of ads for potential lawsuits. Legal?

How could 0bama prove he is right? He is not in office. One of the ads does not talk about taxes either it talks about NOT being bitter clinging to guns and religion....and having the RIGHT to bare arms.

These wacko's in the Democratic party act like they have not been in the United States their whole life's and all of the sudden "tradition must change for the 21st century?" seems mighty weak considering FACT CHECK favors the NRA in this. Also notice in the Truth Police they say nothing about upholding the LAWS for McCain when oddly enough 0bama has recently taken the lead in FALSE ADS....

Why the big surprise ? Obama is a thug from Chicago who has for a long time been called by the people of Chicago "The Prince of Corrupt Chicago Politics". He didn't get that name for being a nice guy you know. It's no coincidence that he always managed to get people running against him taken off of the ballots. He uses the usual thug tactics of coercion, bribery and intimidation. He lies like there's no tomorrow and the debate was a perfect example of that. Even when Sen McCain pointed out that he was not being truthful, he just shook his head and said "that's just not true John" over and over again. Hell, he knew he was busted and as usual tried to spin it. Now he's in Missouri pulling the same old intimidation stunts. Well, if it were me, and I were McCain, I'd have the U S Attorney for Missouri checking out Obama and considering charges for unlawful use of a state agency. Any way you cut it, Obama's a crook and anybody with the brains God gave a rock can see it !

RN

I'm an Obama supporter. I guess we'll find out the truth of this if McCain decides to launch ads in Missouri accusing the Obama campaign of doing this. I don't think its very fair for anyone, especially someone running for President, to completely distort the facts or records for their own political gain.

I'm not a law expert, but people, if they can legally prosecute someone for running ads that are false like that, obviously there is a law restricting that!

P.S. I haven't seen this on Fox News yet (national news)

how come?

people may have different views

but you can only have one real truth

and if the facts don't equal up then it's a lie.

So if someone can show that the facts of an ad are not correct they have the right to call it out.

and depending on that states Defamation law this could be legal. and I'm guessing that they picked Missouri because it is legal.

I don't think it's a dangerous precedent to set. if you can't back up what you say in ads then you shouldn't say them.

I think this would help keep things more honest.

and I am sure McCain has is own watch dogs looking at what Obama says in his ads to see if they are truthfull

This is wrong. Why, because it is not across the board, they aren't looking at all politicians just those affecting one. You have public servants saying they are watching attacks on O'bama.

They also said they aren't just looking at lies, but perceived. Well, who's judgement call is that. They indeed say the will pursue litigation, then they will used that litigation to pump ads across the nation saying these ads were being challenge by Missouri authorities as lies or perceived lies.

Get real this is politiciking at it's worse. Manipulating the law to blackmail the public against free speech.

So, what are they afraid of:

Acorn,

Retzko,

Johnson,

Fannie Mae, Freddie

and how about the family of the soldier he's got the Me too bracelet from.

Blackmail politics people. This is wrong. Where are the taxpayers of the state asking for equal protection for the other candidates.

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. — Gov. Matt Blunt and Republicans are accusing Barack Obama’s campaign of assembling a “truth squad” with law enforcement officials to intimidate Obama critics from speaking out against the Democratic presidential candidate. Yet a top Republican National Committee official admits the Democratic prosecutors from across Missouri “haven’t specifically said” they would use their prosecutorial powers on Obama’s behalf. On Wednesday, Obama’s Missouri campaign announced U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill would lead a group of Democratic lawmakers, prosecutors and one sheriff “who will be proactive in letting voters in the Show-Me State know the truth in the face of the distortions by the McCain campaign,” according to a news release. The group includes prosecutors from St. Louis, Dunklin, Lafayette, Cass, Clay, Ripley, Audrain and Jackson counties volunteering to be surrogates for Obama on their own time. Despite having law enforcement officials on the truth squad, none of them have publicly said they will invoke their official powers to enforce facts about Obama’s record. Frank Donatelli, deputy chairman of the Republican National Committee, held a conference call with reporters Saturday morning while touring the state’s offices for GOP presidential candidate John McCain. In a telephone interview with the News-Leader, Donatelli admitted the Democratic prosecutors “haven’t specifically said” they would use their prosecutorial powers on Obama’s behalf. Donatelli said prosecutors don’t normally join campaign truth squads because their mere presence as a campaign attack dog “has a chilling affect on people’s rights of free speech.” But a review of McCain’s own truth squads shows he has a district attorney from New Mexico and the South Carolina attorney general ready to respond to misleading ads from Obama and Democrats in their respective states.

There is this funny thing called the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. It says that the freedom of speech shall not be abridged. Guess what you're doing if you try to eliminate the possibility of someone running a television ad you don't agree with?

Moreover, proving libel is very difficult for a public figure. One must be able to prove that the libel too place "with actual malice" and that is usually a deal breaker. It certainly would be in this case.

Forget More Buy More: This is not for the police to decide!! This is something that is up to Obama to take up in a court of law, not by acting as a communist dictator instructing the media to pull adds (as he has done with stations regarding NRA ads in the past), and it is not up to Obama to enact law enforcement to act on his behalf to regulate campaign ads. Or maybe he has a good idea after all. Maybe John McCain should do the same. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Michael S. - He has went far beyond asking democrats to be involved in this....he has asked the POLICE, hence the term POLICE STATE.

It is OK if they are watching Obama ads too. But I bet they won't.

Do you realize that if we become a Socialist country the one thing we loose is the one thing liberals enjoy. That is freedom of speech,

Vote McCain

tcw

We already have one liar in the White House. It is high time liars are treated like the criminals they are. You are free to speak, but the moment you slander someone or lie using the FCC regulated media, then you are committing fraud and that my friends is illegal.

The First Amendment has be defined by the Supreme Court. You can say whatever you want, except yell fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire, just to cause a panic. First, you lied whey you yelled fire, second the lie is meant to cause mass confusion and panic. McCain is yelling fire on television to a whole nation, he is lying. End of discussion.

"Who is to say what is a lie or what is the truth?"

The law says whether something is slander or not. Every single politician stretches the truth but certain ads are complete lies with zero substantial sources to back them up. Anyone can bring up a lawsuit for slander even McCain. The fact that McCain has not shows that there is some type of truth to Obama's Ads. You did not see Obama bringing up a lawsuit for the ad that said he would give sex education to kindergarteners. It just shows that these NRA ads did not have a single drop of truth in them.