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

[Flash]

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

Votes have to be counted honestly.

Unlike in 2020 when the Democrats used the pandemic as a cover for fraudulent mail in and harvested ballots, counted by Democrats in Democrat controlled district.

It is called dishonesty and that is how Potatohead won the 2020 election.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

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

ROFL! Precisely the opposite, brain damage.

 

[Blues Man]

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.

FYI I haven't voted for any politician that is part of the corrupt duopoly in over 20 years.

and only the government can violate your first amendment rights.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

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.

I give absolutely no fucks about 1st amendment rights when it comes to Twatter, a private company. You don't have a constitutional right to social media. Fucking suffer. I don't care.

 

[easyt65]

and only the government can violate your first amendment rights.

We will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Blues Man]

We will have to agree to disagree.

First Amendment constraints don’t apply to private platforms, Supreme Court affirms

The case had caused concern for some online speech advocates

www.theverge.com

 

[Zincwarrior]

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

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

Ok Stalin.

 

[bripat9643]

I give absolutely no fucks about 1st amendment rights when it comes to Twatter, a private company. You don't have a constitutional right to social media. Fucking suffer. I don't care.

The FBI isn't a private company.

 

[Faun]

The FBI isn't a private company.

The FBI didn't block anything on Twitter.

 

[SC Patriot]

The FBI didn't block anything on Twitter.

The FBI knew the laptop was real and warned twitter that it was likely false information and therefore should not allow it to be posted.

If the tables were turned you would be up in arms and ranting and screaming in the streets you trolling political hack.

Ironically, the FBI knew the dossier was un verifiable yet for some reason they got FISA warrants using it.

Hmmmmmm

 

[bripat9643]

The FBI didn't block anything on Twitter.

The Twitter files show that the FBI directed Twitter who to censor.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

 

[Faun]

The FBI knew the laptop was real and warned twitter that it was likely false information and therefore should not allow it to be posted.

If the tables were turned you would be up in arms and ranting and screaming in the streets you trolling political hack.

Ironically, the FBI knew the dossier was un verifiable yet for some reason they got FISA warrants using it.

Hmmmmmm

They still didn't block anything on Twitter. Twitter did that. That's not a violation of the First Amendment.

 

[Faun]

The Twitter files show that the FBI directed Twitter who to censor.

Are you ever not a fucking moron?

The FBI couldn't make Twitter do anything, ya fucking moron.

 

[SC Patriot]

They still didn't block anything on Twitter. Twitter did that. That's not a violation of the First Amendment.

If the FBI advised that something is "false" that they knew wasn't false and advised that Twitter should not post it, that is Government interference in an election.

Sorry asshole. You are way to partisan for me.

Cya.

 

[Marener]

The FBI knew the laptop was real and warned twitter that it was likely false information and therefore should not allow it to be posted.

If the tables were turned you would be up in arms and ranting and screaming in the streets you trolling political hack.

Ironically, the FBI knew the dossier was un verifiable yet for some reason they got FISA warrants using it.

Hmmmmmm

This is not accurate. The FBI did not tell anyone to do anything with the laptop story.

 

[Faun]

If the FBI advised that something is "false" that they knew wasn't false and advised that Twitter should not post it, that is Government interference in an election.

Sorry asshole. You are way to partisan for me.

Cya.

Ciao, loser.

 

[Dragonlady]

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.

There are no first amendment rights for people dealing with a privately owned media platform. The first amendment only protects you from prosecution by the government for criticizing the government.

 

[SC Patriot]

This is not accurate. The FBI did not tell anyone to do anything with the laptop story.

Ah yes...

the FBI met with Twitter once a week.....but only go over guidelines.

You see, unlike you, I dont just make shit up. I apply logic to make my own decisions.

If the FBI simply wanted to advise Twiiter of guidelines they should follow, a simple booklet of guidelines is all that would be needed.

Instead, they chose to meet/speak with Twitter once a week....and then of course there are the 51 former feds that wrote and signed the letter saying the laptop was like disinformation...

And, of course, many of those 51 make a living offering their opinion on CNN, MSNBC, etc based on the information they get from the "inside"...

But no wrong doing there.

Wow.....I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn, you lemming.

 

[Marener]

Ah yes...

the FBI met with Twitter once a week.....but only go over guidelines.

You see, unlike you, I dont just make shit up. I apply logic to make my own decisions.

If the FBI simply wanted to advise Twiiter of guidelines they should follow, a simple booklet of guidelines is all that would be needed.

Instead, they chose to meet/speak with Twitter once a week....and then of course there are the 51 former feds that wrote and signed the letter saying the laptop was like disinformation...

And, of course, many of those 51 make a living offering their opinion on CNN, MSNBC, etc based on the information they get from the "inside"...

But no wrong doing there.

Wow.....I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn, you lemming.

They weren’t meeting weekly and you clearly have no idea what they were about.

Your “logic” is based on deep personal bias and selective reporting of information in conservative media. That’s why it’s not useful. It’s not objective.

The FBI was disseminating accounts they had evaluated to be part of foreign influence operation and to discuss security threats. They lasted about an hour. They generally occurred quarterly, which means four times a year, and had a few extra before the election when foreign influence operations accelerated.

The 51 former intelligence officials has no relation whatsoever. They acted as private individuals engaging in freedom of speech expressing an extremely rational concern that the story of the laptop is sketchy.

 

[Care4all]

Votes have to be counted honestly.

Unlike in 2020 when the Democrats used the pandemic as a cover for fraudulent mail in and harvested ballots, counted by Democrats in Democrat controlled district.

It is called dishonesty and that is how Potatohead won the 2020 election.

There is nothing fraudulent about voting via absentee vote. I've been voting via mail in ballot for over 20 years now....and I LOVE IT!

the convenience of having the ballot ahead of the election in my hands, where I can take each race and research the candidates, and take each referendum question and research it, before voting and at my convenience is priceless to me!

Before Donald Trumps FALSE CLAIMS about absentee/mail in ballots, it was REPUBLICANS pushing voters like seniors, to vote in this manner. Republican legislatures in the States that were expanding mail in voting to ALL citizens....

Over 30 states have expanded absentee/mail in voting to allow any registered voter, to vote in this manner BEFORE 2020 and before COVID came along.

This was a REPUBLICAN push to do so, in most of those States.

Donald Trump's LIES about it, hurt Republican voters and the Republican party.

My husband is a republican, and the republican party sent several mailers encouraging Matt to request an absentee ballot....

I have no problem expanding the use of them.

Voter rolls need to be kept clean as can be, voters should request a ballot, and other security measures states deem necessary....