Do you think Main Stream Media like CNN and CNBC should be imprisoned for perjury since they are such big fat liars?

not sure since i dont really know much of what theyre doing

Perjury is lying under oath, so I don't think that applies here. News outlets should be called out and punished appropriately for deliberately spreading known lies, but not for saying things that people just don't happen to like. Freedom of the press is part of the 1st Amendment too and I think a lot of people forget that. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at December 11, 2017 7:21 PM MST

They are proof that "freedom of the press" is something that is alright in theory, but it's a total monstrosity in practice.

Frankly I do not think mainstream New are big fat liars (or is FOX considered mainstream too?)

That said, a bit of lying is inevitable, every storu have many aspects and lacking unlimited space he must leave some things out of his report, and that is a tough call. How can he (or we) know which omittted delail makes it a "big Fat Lie". It is a judgement call every time.

One dubious statement I have heard lately is "Hillary gave 20% of US uranium to the Russians". I investigated that one, and personally consider it misleading. And almost certainly deliberately misleading.
because:
1) it was a sale, not a gift. A Uranium mining company wanted to sell 51% of their stock to a Russian buyer. and, as required by law, A group was assigned to look into the proposed sale to ensure that such a sale was not a security risk, or "Against the national interest" whatever that means. I assume Hillary was one of the several political representatives in that group. Other members of the group was members of the executive, such as the secretary of state, the secretary of the treasury, etc. The final recommendation of the group was to let the sale go through, and so it did.
so: not a gift, and not something Hillary had the power to give without the OK of the rest of the group
2) What was sold was not uranium as such, it was the right to mine uranium as pr the company's charter and permits. As majority stockholders the Russians can now decide that all uranium mined must be sold to Russia even it Russia only offer super-low prices, but consider the stink the other 49% of stockholders would raise if they do that, There are ways to get rid of a majority stockholder who so blatantly use his voting power to bankrupt the company ;-))
3) We might also consider the fact that US-mined uranium is more expensive than uranium mined most anywhere else. I expect that part of the reason the company wanted to sell stock was that they could not sell enough uranium at competitive prices. Or to put it more bluntly: The Russians got a lemon instead of an asset.

And even with all that, I would not call "Hillary gave 20% of US uranium too the Russians" a "Big Fat Lie".
Just deliberately misleading.

No.  Beyond the fact that any such determination is, in large part, subjective, it is not the government's purview to police the press.  The press holds a unique distinction in America,  being the only private enterprise protected under the Bill of Rights.  It was given such distinction on the basis that it serves the people.  The proper role of the press is to investigate and report...to shine a light upon those areas the government likes to keep in the shadows.  When the press does its job, the people can hold the government to account.  When it does not, it is up to the people to hold the press to account.  The proper role of both government and press is to serve the people, when either fail, it is up to the people to take corrective action.  We the people must take an active role in holding both press and government to do our bidding, and if we do not/are not willing to do so, then we should give up any pretense that we live in...or that we even desire to live in a 'free' society.

Not purjury. The MSM is not under oath. 
If they are all guilty of anything, it’s pandering to their bias and needless exaggeration. There are no laws against these.