Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation

[Faun]

Nothing. It's a private platform. If she was preaching hate (what most of those idiots have been banned for) she doesn't have a case.

doesn't matter if its a private company a company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service if Face book says decision made are done with out bias that they are impartial all you have to do is prove that decisions made are done with bias that they are not impartial

these Tech giants like Facebook cant tell its consumers one thing and then act differently just like manufactories cant put a made in the US tag on products made in China

It's a private company, they are under no constraints to be impartial. They could have banned her for no reason if they wanted to. Instead the banned her for hate speech, a clear violation of their TOS. She has no case.

they are if they claim they are which Facebook and many other tech giants have under oath to congress

So all Loomer has to do is prove their decision was done with bias that they weren't impartial and not very hard to do with its record

A company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service they cant claim they are unbias that they are impartial and not be just like a manufacturer cant put a made in US tag on products made in China
Its called consumer protection
you against consumer protection? you against consumers not getting what a company claims they are getting?

Facebook doesn't produce a product. They provide a platform. You must abide by certain rukes to use their platform. Is you don't, they can remove you.

It's really just that simple. I already provided Facebook's partial list of TOS violations. She has no case.

they provide a service same difference
doesn't matter what their TOS says if that TOS isnt applied and enforced with out bias or impartiality which they claim it is they are in violation of misrepresenting their service

She was banned along with others who express hate speech, including Alex Jones and Louis Farrakhan.

 

[Crepitus]

It's a private company, they are under no constraints to be impartial. They could have banned her for no reason if they wanted to. Instead the banned her for hate speech, a clear violation of their TOS. She has no case.

they are if they claim they are which Facebook and many other tech giants have under oath to congress

So all Loomer has to do is prove their decision was done with bias that they weren't impartial and not very hard to do with its record

A company isnt allowed to misrepresent its product or service they cant claim they are unbias that they are impartial and not be just like a manufacturer cant put a made in US tag on products made in China
Its called consumer protection
you against consumer protection? you against consumers not getting what a company claims they are getting?

Facebook doesn't produce a product. They provide a platform. You must abide by certain rukes to use their platform. Is you don't, they can remove you.

It's really just that simple. I already provided Facebook's partial list of TOS violations. She has no case.

they provide a service same difference
doesn't matter what their TOS says if that TOS isnt applied and enforced with out bias or impartiality which they claim it is they are in violation of misrepresenting their service

You're grasping at straws.

no its you thats failing to understand either on purpose or you lack of basic comprehension skills so I will give a simplistic example

lets say this site US message board in their TOC says no cussing and we will enforce that rule with out bias we will be impartial
a bunch of right leaning members cuss a bunch of left leaning members cuss all the left leaning members get banned none of the right leaning members do

was US message board being unbias being impartial? no they weren't there for they misrepresented their survive because they weren't being unbias they weren't being impartial they lied they misrepresented the service they provided

Lol, I see that all the time here and other message boards but none of them have been sucesssucces sued yet.

 

[Faun]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

 

[progressive hunter]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

I cannot Speak for Laura Loomer but Ben Shapiro in no way posts hate speech even under the crazy Leftist definition

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

 

[The Original Tree]

The tech giants are about to get what they deserve. If they want to behave like publishers, then they can be subject to the same laws that publishers face. For instance, you can't go around labeling people as "haters, dangerous individual and white supremacists" without facing legal consequences.

Laura Loomer Files $3 BILLION Lawsuit Against Facebook for Defamation - Laura Loomer Official

On Tuesday, Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch and a former federal prosecutor announced the filing of a defamation lawsuit by conservative investigative journalist Laura Loomer against Facebook. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:19-cv-80893), alleges that Facebook and its wholly owned sister company Instagram, in banning Ms. Loomer from the social media sites, maliciously defamed her by publishing that she is a “dangerous individual” and a domestic Jewish terrorist.​

These Tech Giant Social Media Companies all Run by Radical Leftists have too much power and NO REGULATORY OVERSIGHT.

Usually I would be opposed to such oversight, but with The Election of Donald Trump, there has been an all out assault on Free Speech, and massive Censorship Efforts by Social Media to completely silence Conservative Sources.

Even Search Engines are Discriminating Against People.

Big Tech has become just another WING of The Racist Left and is telling Conservatives to go sit in The Back of The Bus.

 

[Darkwind]

Facebook is a private company and "RUN" the service they provide as they see fit.

However, slander and liable are civil offenses that any company MUST restrain themselves from doing so. A private company or not.

 

[Faun]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

Nope, it's to prevent exposure to legal liability in cases where the hate speech leads to criminal behavior.

 

[Darkwind]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I realize you weren't talking to Me, but I'll put My two coppers in and define hatred.

 

[The Original Tree]

Trial will take...5 yrs min with all the appeals?

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

 

[Dragonlady]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

When they start promoting hate.

 

[Faun]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

 

[The Original Tree]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

Nope, it's to prevent exposure to legal liability in cases where the hate speech leads to criminal behavior.

 

[The Original Tree]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

God will judge people on The Left on Judgement Day.

No need for any one to act as God's executioner.

Hell is a real place, and Evil, Liars, Slanderers, The Treasonous, And the Vile Idol Worshipers will all find themselves there.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

Nope, it's to prevent exposure to legal liability in cases where the hate speech leads to criminal behavior.

That is so difficult to ascertain. If I say I hate NY Jets fans is that hate speech if it leads to violence vs Jets fans? Slippery slope. Now if I say death to all Jets fans, kill as many as you can that it is a different animal.

 

[progressive hunter]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing.

you mean like the hatred for white people we hear everyday???

thats just speech you hate,,,and also truth if they do hate them,,,

facts dont care about your feelings,,,

this hate speech thing is just to silence opinion,,,

Nope, it's to prevent exposure to legal liability in cases where the hate speech leads to criminal behavior.

you mean like all the hate aimed at trump that results in attacks on anyone that even wears a hat with his slogan on it???

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

^^^This^^^

It becomes a slippery slope as to many Jews their speech equates to hate speech.

 

[Faun]

Maybe, but that was not the question.
mYou get one "conservative" person on that jury and they are never going home without every single penny of what the plaintiff asks.

People are pissed about this shit. They will want Facebook to suffer.

Facebook was being a dick. They were stupid about it and pissed off a lot of people.

But, it may take a long time before plaintiff gets paid. Or not, when Facebook wants to rid itself of bad publicity and wants to avoid as many duplicate suits as possible.

.

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

So when is Twitter and other Social Media outlets going to BAN Ohmar, Talib and AOC?

Facebook defines hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what they call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability.

Show me where Omar, Tlaib or Cortez expressed such hate speech on Facebook.....

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

FB to your point is already suffering bad publicity and I had never heard of Laura Loomer. If they ban someone like Ben Shapiro then all Hell will break loose.

Facebook is under no obligation to allow members to use their service to promote hate speech. And hate speech can be dangerous. We'll have to wait and see what she posted to warrant Facebook's actions si that we can then argue if it was hate speech or not.

theres no such thing as hate speech,,,

Of course there is. Hate speech is as simple as expressing hatred towards a specific group. It's not a legal term and does not present any legal consequences unless it becomes a verbal threat, but it is a thing and Facebook has a right to prohibit it on their website.

Define “hatred”. I believe that progressive Leftists are loons and are ruining this country. Does that equate to hate speech?

I would say not. But for example, just yesterday, one of your fellow loons posted such hate and expressed the eagerness to kill folks on the left because of his beliefs. His posts were removed and was rightfully banned from post. His speech was also dangerous because it became an actual threat to public safety. Facebook has the same right as USMB to protect itself from legal exposure for allowing such speech.

That makes sense. What did Laura Loomer post to get her banned?