Will ANYONE in the government be held accountable for violations of the first amendment via Twitter?

[Mac1958]

If the government pressured Twitter to suppress the Hunter story - that seems like a pretty clear violation. Especially if it was done for political reasons, rather than public safety. I don't know the facts of what went down. If the Twitter people say they weren't coerced, that would make it pretty tough to prosecute.

I guess it would depend on the nature of any pressure. Maybe things were said off the record. Maybe they were just suggestions that the Twitter people agreed with (even if they may have been biased). Maybe they were appropriate.

I sure as hell don't doubt bias, but I would need to see proof that there were official government instructions. If this really happened, I would guess it was more like a wink and a nod among people with parallel political agendas.

Twitter isn't a public utility, so what they do of their own free will is up to them. I don't like that kind of shit, but it's not illegal.

 

[SC Patriot]

If the government pressured Twitter to suppress the Hunter story - that seems like a pretty clear violation. Especially if it was done for political reasons, rather than public safety. I don't know the facts of what went down. If the Twitter people say they weren't coerced, that would make it pretty tough to prosecute.

They cover their tracks well.

One must wonder why 51 former intelligence officers signed a letter stating that the laptop had all the signs of Russian disinformation.

Not one of them asked someone currently employed in those agencies what the truth is?

You see, an individual NO LONGER employed by the federal government can not be accused of breach of the first amendment.

Ironically, however, they are allowed to get paid to talk about their federal government contacts and the information they give them.

This is ugly....and whereas it hurts the right this time, it may very well hurt the left next time.

And either way, it is bad for America.

 

[bripat9643]

Let's see...let's try this again.

In March. Disney makes a public statement criticizing the "don't say gay law".

Following that, angry denouncements from DeSantos.

April - denouncements turn to threats on removing Disney's special tax status.

DeSantis even admits to threatening Disney

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he warned Disney not to get involved in schools debate: 'It's not going to work out well for you'

"I told them, 'You shouldn't get involved it's not going to work out well for you,'" the Republican governor said.

www.google.com

"I though it was a mistake for Disney to get involved and I told them, 'You shouldn't get involved it's not going to work out well for you,'" DeSantis, a Republican, said in an interview with conservative commentator Dave Rubin released online to subscribers on Monday.

Then, within 3 months he does that. To Disney ONLY.

What you feel about the tax being right or wrong is irrelevant to the free issue and subsequent retaliation.

Had Disney not criticized the bill they would not have had their tax status removed.

That is the clear example of the government violating free speech rights.

It could be. Why don't you file a suit?

 

[bripat9643]

I guess it would depend on the nature of any pressure. Maybe things were said off the record. Maybe they were just suggestions that the Twitter people agreed with (even if they may have been biased). Maybe they were appropriate.

I sure as hell don't doubt bias, but I would need to see proof that there were official government instructions. If this really happened, I would guess it was more like a wink and a nod among people with parallel political agendas.

Twitter isn't a public utility, so what they do of their own free will is up to them. I don't like that kind of shit, but it's not illegal.

Whether it's "off the record" or not, it's a violation of the First Amendment. it doesn't matter whether they were "just suggestions." making such suggestion is interference. It's against the law. It doesn't matter whether Twitter personal agreed with it, it's still against the law. It doesn't matter whether it's a "wink and a nod among people with parallel political agendas." It's still against the law. It's not of Twitter's "own free will" if government is telling them what to do.

You have no respect for the Bill of Rights, period. You're a fucking NAZI douchebag.

 

[bripat9643]

So the fact that the FBI was working with social media about foreign actors means that they weren’t violating the first amendment.

Right?

Wrong.

Furthermore, no one is buying the "foreign actors" horseshit.

 

[Flash]

I am still waiting for the asshole Democrats to be held accountable for stealing the 2020 Presidential election with using the pandemic to cover up fraudulent mail in and harvested ballots, counted by Democrats in Democrat controlled swing districts. Voters decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Let's see...let's try this again.

In March. Disney makes a public statement criticizing the "don't say gay law".

Following that, angry denouncements from DeSantos.

April - denouncements turn to threats on removing Disney's special tax status.

DeSantis even admits to threatening Disney

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said he warned Disney not to get involved in schools debate: 'It's not going to work out well for you'

"I told them, 'You shouldn't get involved it's not going to work out well for you,'" the Republican governor said.

www.google.com

"I though it was a mistake for Disney to get involved and I told them, 'You shouldn't get involved it's not going to work out well for you,'" DeSantis, a Republican, said in an interview with conservative commentator Dave Rubin released online to subscribers on Monday.

Then, within 3 months he does that. To Disney ONLY.

What you feel about the tax being right or wrong is irrelevant to the free issue and subsequent retaliation.

Had Disney not criticized the bill they would not have had their tax status removed.

That is the clear example of the government violating free speech rights.

They are still free to be woke fucktards and scream it from the top of their woke tongues.

The fact that you can't see the difference is baffling. You're either really stupid or just playing dumb.

 

[busybee01]

To anyone but the most partisan it is clear that first amendment violations are abundant but will ANYONE be held to account for it?

If not our so called constitutional rights are nothing but a figment of our imagination IMO.

It is obvious to anyone who is non-partisan that there were no 1st amendment violations.

 

[busybee01]

I am still waiting for the asshole Democrats to be held accountable for stealing the 2020 Presidential election with using the pandemic to cover up fraudulent mail in and harvested ballots, counted by Democrats in Democrat controlled swing districts. Voters decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything.

No one stole the 2020 election. Voters made their decision.

 

[Coyote]

They are still free to be woke fucktards and scream it from the top of their woke tongues.

The fact that you can't see the difference is baffling. You're either really stupid or just playing dumb.

Oh I see the difference alright. It’s ok for the government to use it’s power to censor free speech by PUNISHING an entity for exercising it’s free speech rights because they are “woke fucktards”...even though no law was broken.


Meanwhile…I am not sure if you noticed, but Twitter was working with the government to identify disinformation, not being coerced by the government. And as you also noted in the above example, all these rightist looney bin rejects are also free to scream their message on other platforms.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

To anyone but the most partisan it is clear that first amendment violations are abundant but will ANYONE be held to account for it?

If not our so called constitutional rights are nothing but a figment of our imagination IMO.

Nope. Laws only work against MAGA republicans. Everyone else is free to be a scumbag

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Oh I see the difference alright. It’s ok for the government to use it’s power to censor free speech by PUNISHING an entity for exercising it’s free speech rights because they are “woke fucktards”...even though no law was broken.

You truly are a stupid fucking bitch.

Their speech REMAINS INTACT. None of their tweets, press releases or otherwise public statements have been pulled down.

Now fuck off ya dumbass

 

[easyt65]

Only the government can violate your First Amendment rights.

Welcome to the 'People's Republic Of The Divided States Of Amerika' where your authoritarian Democrat Marxist rulers are above both the Constitution and laws they impose on its people.

Please try NOT to have a nice day - they hate when the peasants are happy. It makes them feel like they are doing something wrong.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I see the first two responses are from idiots who can't grasp the idea that the government is BANNED from interfering in the free speech of its citizens yet went out of its way to do that very thing by putting pressure on Twitter and most likely every other social media site

At this site no surprise.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You truly are a stupid fucking bitch.

Their speech REMAINS INTACT. None of their tweets, press releases or otherwise public statements have been pulled down.

Now fuck off ya dumbass

Winner for best damn post on this thread.

 

[Coyote]

You truly are a stupid fucking bitch.

Their speech REMAINS INTACT. None of their tweets, press releases or otherwise public statements have been pulled down.

Now fuck off ya dumbass

You are right, it is different. The government, using it’s power punish someone for free speech (which would certainly suppress it) is worse. It is both an abuse of power and suppressing free speech.

 

[Coyote]

It could be. Why don't you file a suit?

Why would I? I have no standing.

 

[Flash]

No one stole the 2020 election. Voters made their decision.

Bullshit. Voters decide nothing. Those who count the voters decide everything.

In this case it was the dishonest Democrat turds doing the counting.

 

[Care4all]

Okay Mac. Here is the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So without whining about how victimized you are, explain to me what you meant by "read the first amendment", and tell me you DIDN'T mean the part that says "congress shall make no law...."

Did they stop the press from writing and publishing the article?

The answer is NO. They Did not stop or interfere with the article being written and published by the New York Post.

 

[Care4all]

Bullshit. Voters decide nothing. Those who count the voters decide everything.

In this case it was the dishonest Democrat turds doing the counting.

if you don't count the votes, how do you expect to have a winner or loser???