progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 62,634
- 38,405
- 2,615
so what youre saying is you cant refute or debunk anything I said so youre going to resort to personal insults and other stupid stuff,,,
got it,,
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Harvard law professor: Twitter cannot violate the First Amendment
- Thread starter pyetro
- Start date
got it,,
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 62,634
- 38,405
- 2,615
shut up you scabbed up useless whore from canadaits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
If conservatives didn't lie, threaten and promote authoritarian platforms, they wouldn't have a problem.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 62,634
- 38,405
- 2,615
OMG!! you got me there,,,Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
After all that, will he be less boring?Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
.
When it comes to riveting commentary, the RWNJs... got nuthin'.OMG!! you got me there,,,Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
After all that, will he be less boring?Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
.
There will be new conspiracies, I suppose.
You've got to give the conservatives credit on their creative writing skillz. JK Rowling has got shit on their election conspiracies. I mean, an international plot spanning a decade, Hugo "I've been dead since 2013" Chavez throwing the election, Phili mob bosses having gansters fill in ballots, North Korea boating ballots into Maine, Krackens, 'Big Ones'...hell, Rudy Gulliani even melted on camera once.
Throw in Optimus Prime and you've got a best seller.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 62,634
- 38,405
- 2,615
if this was France 1800 I would listen to you,,When it comes to riveting commentary, the RWNJs... got nuthin'.OMG!! you got me there,,,Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
you might want to focus on current events,,,
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
No one has a right to post on Facebook or Twitter. It's good that they're showing their true colors, though, and hopefully it will lead to their eventual extinction via neglect.
Or here, for that matter.
BrokeLoser
Diamond Member
You’re sadly mistaken. That’s not at all how it works.If USMB were the only message board available, they wouldnt be able to for expressing an opinionUSMB can ban me anytime it wants.Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
You wouldn't be crying "free speech!"
Message boards would be liable for anything posted here. They'd have to shut down immediately, or be sued into insolvency.
Arguing to shut down 230 is arguing to shut down this board.
230 provides protection and immunity for web platform owners who allow third party content to be posted. If the web platform owner decides to publish the third party content they become publishers and they no longer qualify for 230 immunity.
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
You’re sadly mistaken. That’s not at all how it works.If USMB were the only message board available, they wouldnt be able to for expressing an opinionUSMB can ban me anytime it wants.Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
You wouldn't be crying "free speech!"
Message boards would be liable for anything posted here. They'd have to shut down immediately, or be sued into insolvency.
Arguing to shut down 230 is arguing to shut down this board.
230 provides protection and immunity for web platform owners who allow third party content to be posted. If the web platform owner decides to publish the third party content they become publishers and they no longer qualify for 230 immunity.
Every single post here is 'third party content'.
BrokeLoser
Diamond Member
Right...and USMB can’t arbitrarily publish the content without opening themselves up to potential lawsuits.You’re sadly mistaken. That’s not at all how it works.If USMB were the only message board available, they wouldnt be able to for expressing an opinionUSMB can ban me anytime it wants.Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
You wouldn't be crying "free speech!"
Message boards would be liable for anything posted here. They'd have to shut down immediately, or be sued into insolvency.
Arguing to shut down 230 is arguing to shut down this board.
230 provides protection and immunity for web platform owners who allow third party content to be posted. If the web platform owner decides to publish the third party content they become publishers and they no longer qualify for 230 immunity.
Every single post here is 'third party content'.
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
Right...and USMB can’t arbitrarily publish the content without opening themselves up to potential lawsuits.You’re sadly mistaken. That’s not at all how it works.If USMB were the only message board available, they wouldnt be able to for expressing an opinionUSMB can ban me anytime it wants.Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
You wouldn't be crying "free speech!"
Message boards would be liable for anything posted here. They'd have to shut down immediately, or be sued into insolvency.
Arguing to shut down 230 is arguing to shut down this board.
230 provides protection and immunity for web platform owners who allow third party content to be posted. If the web platform owner decides to publish the third party content they become publishers and they no longer qualify for 230 immunity.
Every single post here is 'third party content'.
Not with 230 gone. As this message board is a text book 'interactive computer service'.
Without 230, they'd be personally liable for any post here. They'd have to shut down immediately, or be sued into non-existence.
The conspiracy theories must be created in a well funded conservative think tank. The trained experts there understand the RWNJs mental patterns and know exactly what form the conspiracy theory must take for a given situation.After all that, will he be less boring?Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
.
There will be new conspiracies, I suppose.
You've got to give the conservatives credit on their creative writing skillz. JK Rowling has got shit on their election conspiracies. I mean, an international plot spanning a decade, Hugo "I've been dead since 2013" Chavez throwing the election, Phili mob bosses having gansters fill in ballots, North Korea boating ballots into Maine, Krackens, 'Big Ones'...hell, Rudy Gulliani even melted on camera once.
Throw in Optimus Prime and you've got a best seller.
They also discovered progressives must see solid evidence for all assertions, while a simple rumor quickly convinces conservatives of the conspiracy theory's veracity.
It's easy to understand the GOP's regular use of conspiracy rumors to distract their voter base's attention when reality begins to intrude.
.
The left is only useful idiots to the oligarchs controlling cyberspace. They know who will do their Bidening!!!they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use Facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Twitter is only obligated to it's board of directors and shareholders (less so)
But the real problem is MUCH deeper.
The left also owns the entire Internet....all the cellular Networks....and all the Media.
Greg
Skylar
Diamond Member
- Jul 5, 2014
- 52,660
- 15,671
- 2,180
The conspiracy theories must be created in a well funded conservative think tank. The trained experts there understand the RWNJs mental patterns and know exactly what form the conspiracy theory must take for a given situation.After all that, will he be less boring?Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
.
There will be new conspiracies, I suppose.
You've got to give the conservatives credit on their creative writing skillz. JK Rowling has got shit on their election conspiracies. I mean, an international plot spanning a decade, Hugo "I've been dead since 2013" Chavez throwing the election, Phili mob bosses having gansters fill in ballots, North Korea boating ballots into Maine, Krackens, 'Big Ones'...hell, Rudy Gulliani even melted on camera once.
Throw in Optimus Prime and you've got a best seller.
They also discovered progressives must see solid evidence for all assertions, while a simple rumor quickly convinces conservatives of the conspiracy theory's veracity.
It's easy to understand the GOP's regular use of conspiracy rumors to distract their voter base's attention when reality begins to intrude.
.
Nah. Any dipshit with a wordpress blog can start a conspiracy theory if you've got people desperte to be lied to. There are entire conspiracies based on nothing but a second hand tweet.
Remember the 'Head of the CIA killed in fire fight with US military in Germany' conspiracy? That blithering horseshit made a brown stain as it circled the bowl for almost a month.
And it was all based on one SECOND HAND tweet.
FFS, the entire QAnon conspiracy is based on the predictions of a dude whose accuracy was WORSE THAN GUESSING. Do you know how bad you have to be at predicting to be outplayed by a Magic 8 ball?
But there are hundreds of thousands of those dipshits fawning over every word.
Non sequitur. And verifies: When it comes to riveting commentary, the RWNJs... got nuthin'.if this was France 1800 I would listen to you,,When it comes to riveting commentary, the RWNJs... got nuthin'.OMG!! you got me there,,,Your posts speak volumes, so no further explanations are necessary. Only you are blind to it.and yet you fail to explain how,,,If the deep end has a deeper end, the RWNJs are now going off the deeper end, having left behind the deep end four years ago.why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
You are the idiot here, hands down.of course they are,, what are you an idiot??why do I care about those leftwing fuckers??Two words: FOX Noiseits more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
.
Fox is too far left for you?
Jesus. You've purchased a condo in the right wing echo chamber and live there year round, don't you?
.
that would make you the idiot for responding with nothing but noise,,
.
Progressive is just butthurt that Trump surrendered and all the lies OANN and NewsMax told him about how the election was going to go turned out to be meaningless bullshit.
A nap, a cookie and a shower and he'll be right as rain.
you might want to focus on current events,,,
.
Lol for fuck sake. You can have that opinion, but to suggest the GOVERNMENT should prohibit companies from operating in this way makes you sound like a complete dumbass.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
Similar threads
- Replies
- 122
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 956
- Replies
- 54
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 29
- Views
- 9K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 11
- Views
- 26
- Replies
- 134
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 32
- Views
- 80
- Replies
- 55
- Views
- 428
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8505
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 483
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-