BREAKING NEWS--Biden Secret Emails

[Prayer Warrior]

I think most people understand this; but there are some Republicans who apparently want to be able to dictate to Facebook and Twitter what they should do. They preach less government interference and control -- but we see that's not true. They are obviously trying to intimidate Facebook and Twitter into operating on behalf of Donald Trump. This is how Russia and China operate, isn't it?

But it is hot air at this point. The Senate can't pass legislation by itself. They'd need to get a bill that would pass the House also and signed by the President. If they think they can do that before the election, more power to them. After the election. they may not control either house in Congress or the White House. How are they going pass a law then? This is cheap theater.

LOL! It’s Twitter and Facebook who are acting like Communists by restricting the flow of information.

 

[JohnDB]

I think most people understand this; but there are some Republicans who apparently want to be able to dictate to Facebook and Twitter what they should do. They preach less government interference and control -- but we see that's not true. They are obviously trying to intimidate Facebook and Twitter into operating on behalf of Donald Trump. This is how Russia and China operate, isn't it?

But it is hot air at this point. The Senate can't pass legislation by itself. They'd need to get a bill that would pass the House also and signed by the President. If they think they can do that before the election, more power to them. After the election. they may not control either house in Congress or the White House. How are they going pass a law then? This is cheap theater.

Those caught interfering with a federal election go to jail.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Not quite...
They are basically becoming a "honey trap".
Attracting businesses to destroy them.

Also they have destroyed people's businesses.
Conservative talk programs requiring subscriptions are routinely shut down intermittently while Antifa and BLM and even those promoting rioting, violence, and looting are left unimpeded.

That's discrimination based upon political leanings and again not allowed.
The knife of freedom cuts both ways and they are about to find out the other side of that blade's edge.

Many are waiting for the opportunity to sue them.
Dump the stock if you own any...it's going to be very expensive for them.... tortious interference with a contract carries triple damages as punitive damages.

I must say that I’m impressed by your assessment of this issue. This goes for @Grailhunter too!

 

[JohnDB]

I must say that I’m impressed by your assessment of this issue. This goes for @Grailhunter too!

I actually stayed awake in US Government classes...they even forced me to memorize the preamble of the constitution and be able to recite it.

Plus I've been unfortunate in having many friends over the years that practice law.

 

[Giuliano]

Those caught interfering with a federal election go to jail.

I don't see how refusing to allow something on your site is interfering with a federal election. On the contrary, this story run by the NY Post is distinctly political intended to influence the election. Facebook and Twitter could be breaking the law by permitting it on their sites. They do not owe it to the Trump campaign to run stuff that Trump wants them to run. That is how Communist countries operate.

 

[lforrest]

They are obviously trying to intimidate Facebook and Twitter into operating on behalf of Donald Trump. This is how Russia and China operate, isn't it?

That is obvious only to someone who is biased against the president. What people really want is for these social media platforms to not censor along party lines. It is clear this needs to be done, but how to achieve it is still unknown.

This is a new situation not considered by the framers, private firms never had this level of access to the public before.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I actually stayed awake in US Government classes...they even forced me to memorize the preamble of the constitution and be able to recite it.

Plus I've been unfortunate in having many friends over the years that practice law.

Lol! Gotta love them lawyers!

We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

There, I did that from memory. Did I leave anything out??

Edit: This is copied and pasted from the Internet:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[Seven of Nine]

I think most people understand this; but there are some Republicans who apparently want to be able to dictate to Facebook and Twitter what they should do. They preach less government interference and control -- but we see that's not true. They are obviously trying to intimidate Facebook and Twitter into operating on behalf of Donald Trump. This is how Russia and China operate, isn't it?

But it is hot air at this point. The Senate can't pass legislation by itself. They'd need to get a bill that would pass the House also and signed by the President. If they think they can do that before the election, more power to them. After the election. they may not control either house in Congress or the White House. How are they going pass a law then? This is cheap theater.

I'm actually glad to see Facebook and Twitter taking action against some of Trump's posts and tweets. I think it's about time.

Trump Covid post deleted by Facebook and hidden by Twitter

Facebook and Twitter put warning label on Trump's posts on voting twice

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Speaking of Communists, I'm reading an alarming article in The Epoch Times titled "Communist China's Silent War Against America." It's very worth the read. I'll probably post portions of it here.

 

[JohnDB]

I don't see how refusing to allow something on your site is interfering with a federal election. On the contrary, this story run by the NY Post is distinctly political intended to influence the election. Facebook and Twitter could be breaking the law by permitting it on their sites. They do not owe it to the Trump campaign to run stuff that Trump wants them to run. That is how Communist countries operate.

The story falls well inside of guidelines of publishing whatever the NY Post wishes to post because of the legitimate sources it is drawn from.

The sources may fall under scrutiny...and truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel.

 

[Giuliano]

Not quite...
They are basically becoming a "honey trap".
Attracting businesses to destroy them.

Also they have destroyed people's businesses.
Conservative talk programs requiring subscriptions are routinely shut down intermittently while Antifa and BLM and even those promoting rioting, violence, and looting are left unimpeded.

That's discrimination based upon political leanings and again not allowed.
The knife of freedom cuts both ways and they are about to find out the other side of that blade's edge.

Many are waiting for the opportunity to sue them.
Dump the stock if you own any...it's going to be very expensive for them.... tortious interference with a contract carries triple damages as punitive damages.

What you call "discrimination based on political leanings" is commonplace. According to your philosophy a corporation or its executives wouldn't be allowed to donate to political campaigns unless they donated to the opposition too.

We have a rule that prohibits religious organizations from being political; and the Republicans flout that rule all the time and want to change it. They want to make churches a tool of the political parties.

What's grating Republicans now is that they're not getting what they want. I suggest they start their own social media companies. Then they could run them as they see fit. It's called free enterprise. Imagine that. Or don't Republicans know how to start a social media company with enough appeal that they could compete? Is the Republican Party that much of a minority?

 

[JohnDB]

Lol! Gotta love them lawyers!

We the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

There, I did that from memory. Did I leave anything out??

Enhance the Blessings of liberty...not secure.

But good job!

 

[Giuliano]

The story falls well inside of guidelines of publishing whatever the NY Post wishes to post because of the legitimate sources it is drawn from.

The sources may fall under scrutiny...and truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel.

I remind you that the Daily Mail ran a story about Melania Trump which it settled out of court when she sued.

As for the sources? Uh yes, a newspaper has some obligations to see to it that it's sources are trustworthy and sane; and other companies can look at a story and say, "That doesn't look like they had reliable sources. That looks like fake news -- we won't promote it -- we don't want to have anything to do with it."

Arguing that Facebook and Twitter are obliged to allow that story would be saying they are obliged to allow what they consider "fake news" on their sites. The NY Post is known to have a political bias; and the story itself is crazy with several inconsistencies.

 

[JohnDB]

What you call "discrimination based on political leanings" is commonplace. According to your philosophy a corporation or its executives wouldn't be allowed to donate to political campaigns unless they donated to the opposition too.

We have a rule that prohibits religious organizations from being political; and the Republicans flout that rule all the time and want to change it. They want to make churches a tool of the political parties.

What's grating Republicans now is that they're not getting what they want. I suggest they start their own social media companies. Then they could run them as they see fit. It's called free enterprise. Imagine that. Or don't Republicans know how to start a social media company with enough appeal that they could compete? Is the Republican Party that much of a minority?

They got a special protection 230 something or another...
But it keeps them from being sued for something someone posts that doesn't defy decency standards. (Those they are allowed to delete)

But Open Sourced News platforms are supposed to allow anyone anywhere...

But discrimination is basically not allowed so long as it is not criminal promotion (decency standards apply) political rhetoric doesn't defy decency standards. It is not allowed for them to discriminate on political matters... especially political matters. That's the focus of the first amendment...and where their protection is drawn upon.

 

[Giuliano]

Enhance the Blessings of liberty...not secure.

But good job!

Do the "blessings of liberty" include forcing social media companies to allow anything on their sites?

 

[JohnDB]

I remind you that the Daily Mail ran a story about Melania Trump which it settled out of court when she sued.

As for the sources? Uh yes, a newspaper has some obligations to see to it that it's sources are trustworthy and sane; and other companies can look at a story and say, "That doesn't look like they had reliable sources. That looks like fake news -- we won't promote it -- we don't want to have anything to do with it."

Arguing that Facebook and Twitter are obliged to allow that story would be saying they are obliged to allow what they consider "fake news" on their sites. The NY Post is known to have a political bias; and the story itself is crazy with several inconsistencies.

Daily mail is not "Open Sourced". It is edited and published....and they have no protection. Completely different critter.

 

[JohnDB]

Do the "blessings of liberty" include forcing social media companies to allow anything on their sites?

YES
Especially since they are open sourced and not edited or publishing....they are supposed to be just a platform.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Speaking of the Communist, I just found

Enhance the Blessings of liberty...not secure.

But good job!

Here it is copied and pasted from the Internet. It is "secure." Sowwy!

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[Giuliano]

They got a special protection 230 something or another...
But it keeps them from being sued for something someone posts that doesn't defy decency standards. (Those they are allowed to delete)

But Open Sourced News platforms are supposed to allow anyone anywhere...

But discrimination is basically not allowed so long as it is not criminal promotion (decency standards apply) political rhetoric doesn't defy decency standards. It is not allowed for them to discriminate on political matters... especially political matters. That's the focus of the first amendment...and where their protection is drawn upon.

Congress has already hinted to the social media that unless they do a better job of regulating content on their sites, the government may remove that protection and impose regulations.

There's more to it than decency. In India, people have been lynched because of junk circulated on social media. I remind you too that social media has been used to coordinate crimes -- like having a crowd of people show up at a store to loot it. It is being used to promote crazy conspiracy theories which fool people who then commit crimes and wind up in jail because they believed the stories. There are problems that both Congress and the social media companies know need fixing.

Republicans apparently don't like it when stories they'd like promoted are censored. That's saying social media shouldn't try to regulate content themselves. That's an argument in favor of allowing fake news to thrive.

 

[JohnDB]

Speaking of the Communist, I just found

Here it is copied and pasted from the Internet. It is "secure." Sowwy!

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Huh...
You got one on me....

Must be getting old...or influenced by schoolhouse rock.