The United States v Twitter, $10 billion class action lawsuit.

[the other mike]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

 

[alpine]

make sure your lawyer is not leaking brain juice this time...
this way at least you wont look dumb like the last time...

 

[Pogo]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

Hate to break this to you but a lawsuit has to have some kind of complaint on it.

You can't just walk around going "I sue you, I sue you too". This planet doesn't work that way.

And your OP seemed to have some weird irrelevant photo attached to it. No doubt "newly discovered'.
I dumped it.

 

[the other mike]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

Hate to break this to you but a lawsuit has to have some kind of complaint on it.

You can't just walk around going "I sue you, I sue you too". This planet doesn't work that way.

And your OP seemed to have some weird irrelevant photo attached to it. No doubt "newly discovered'.
I dumped it.

Your condescending attitude is noted.

 

[the other mike]

make sure your lawyer is not leaking brain juice this time...
this way at least you wont look dumb like the last time...

The only thing dumb about "last time"was underestimating the enemy's desperation.

 

[Viktor]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

View attachment 440313

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?
You are not the United States.
If you lose the lawsuit, you will likely have to pay court costs.

The way to hurt twitter is to boycott them. They survive on advertising revenue. If we don't use them, their advertisers will cancel their subscriptions and they lose money bigtime. There is already a boycott against Twitter. Just join it.

 

[Pogo]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

Hate to break this to you but a lawsuit has to have some kind of complaint on it.

You can't just walk around going "I sue you, I sue you too". This planet doesn't work that way.

And your OP seemed to have some weird irrelevant photo attached to it. No doubt "newly discovered'.
I dumped it.

Your condescending attitude is noted.

Doesn't matter. You still need some kind of point if you're going to court.

Ask Rooty Giuliani.

 

[the other mike]

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?

Conspiracy to manipulate the outcome
of the US presidential election.(several counts)

Violation of the First Amendment (several counts)

Domestic terrorism in the form of falsely and knowingly promoting conspiracy theories about Russia and our president. (several counts)

There's a whole list, but you get the general idea.

 

[Pogo]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

Hate to break this to you but a lawsuit has to have some kind of complaint on it.

You can't just walk around going "I sue you, I sue you too". This planet doesn't work that way.

And your OP seemed to have some weird irrelevant photo attached to it. No doubt "newly discovered'.
I dumped it.

Here's a guy hunting for people of a century ago who clicks a "disagree". He actually thinks you can just "sue" people for ----- no reason.

 

[Viktor]

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?

Conspiracy to manipulate the outcome
of the US presidential election.(several counts)

Violation of the First Amendment (several counts)

Domestic terrorism in the form of falsely and knowingly promoting conspiracy theories about Russia and our president. (several counts)

There's a whole list, but you get the general idea.

The first amendment does not apply to private property.
Who did they conspire with?
Accusing people is not terrorism

You still have to prove they cost you money.

 

[Pogo]

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?

Conspiracy to manipulate the outcome
of the US presidential election.(several counts)

Violation of the First Amendment (several counts)

Domestic terrorism in the form of falsely and knowingly promoting conspiracy theories about Russia and our president. (several counts)

There's a whole list, but you get the general idea.

The First Amendment makes no reference to Twatter. Actually it makes no reference to any business whatsoever. You can't "violate" something that never applied to you in the first place.

As for the rest you're gonna need what's called "evidence" --- in this case some kind of documentation that Twatter itself posted said material.

So actually ---- no, we don't get the idea.
And neither will a court.

 

[Crepitus]

That would ruffle some feathers.
I say we do it.

View attachment 440313

View attachment 440325

For what?

 

[the other mike]

For what?

To make you wet your pants.

The First Amendment makes no reference to Twatter. Actually it makes no reference to any business whatsoever. You can't "violate" something that never applied to you in the first place.

As for the rest you're gonna need what's called "evidence" --- in this case some kind of documentation that Twatter itself posted said material.

So actually ---- no, we don't get the idea.
And neither will a court.

[The First Amendment prevents the government from making laws ......which abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, .....]

In this case, Twitter, with the power of it's massive reach ( ability to control public information) has been given the right to publish UNBIASED BY POLITICAL influences.

They have far over-stretched this boundary.

 

[the other mike]

Twitter sure will be boring with only liberals there now.

One common denominator among the left --zero sense of humor .

 

[Ben Thomson]

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?

Conspiracy to manipulate the outcome
of the US presidential election.(several counts)

Violation of the First Amendment (several counts)

Domestic terrorism in the form of falsely and knowingly promoting conspiracy theories about Russia and our president. (several counts)

There's a whole list, but you get the general idea.

LOL!!...sounds like you nuts didn't learn a thing from all your 'rock solid' election lawsuits that got tossed.

 

[WinterBorn]

What is your cause of action?(Breach of contract, fraud or????)
How you will prove damages?

Conspiracy to manipulate the outcome
of the US presidential election.(several counts)

Violation of the First Amendment (several counts)

Domestic terrorism in the form of falsely and knowingly promoting conspiracy theories about Russia and our president. (several counts)

There's a whole list, but you get the general idea.

The First Amendment protects you from the gov't silencing you. It does not guarantee you access to a privately owned property.

 

[rightwinger]

Maybe Rudy G and Sidney Powell can represent you

 

[the other mike]

The First Amendment protects you from the gov't silencing you. It does not guarantee you access to a privately owned property.

By allowing Twitter to censor the NY Post -Hunter laptop story in October at the same time they removed the president's tweets,, our government in effect, silenced Donald Trump and his millions of supporters.

 

[WinterBorn]

The First Amendment protects you from the gov't silencing you. It does not guarantee you access to a privately owned property.

By allowing Twitter to censor the NY Post -Hunter laptop story in October at the same time they removed the president's tweets,, our government in effect, silenced Donald Trump and his millions of supporters.

Twitter did that. Not the gov't.

 

[Pogo]

For what?

To make you wet your pants.

The First Amendment makes no reference to Twatter. Actually it makes no reference to any business whatsoever. You can't "violate" something that never applied to you in the first place.

As for the rest you're gonna need what's called "evidence" --- in this case some kind of documentation that Twatter itself posted said material.

So actually ---- no, we don't get the idea.
And neither will a court.

[The First Amendment prevents the government from making laws ......which abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, .....]

In this case, Twitter, with the power of it's massive reach ( ability to control public information) has been given the right to publish UNBIASED BY POLITICAL influences.

They have far over-stretched this boundary.

Show the class where Twatter is a branch of government.