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

[Blues Man]

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.

Only the government can violate your First Amendment rights.

 

[rightwinger]

Not when that suppresses free citizens' free speech

The Private sector can suppress anything they want

If you want to spread lies and misinformation about COVID, they don’t have to help you

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

But they do, with YOUR SUPPORT, when they punished Disney for it’s free speech.

Now that IS a case of using the government actively suppress free speech.

They are still free to promote their WOKE BULLSHIT . They just won't do it on the taxpayers dime.

Fucking idiots equating Disney losing a tax shelter to the government telling twitter to shut me up are fucking fools

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Where in the Constitution does it say that a private company can't moderate it's published content whichever way it sees fit?

Spin spin spin. It's all y'all got.

This isn't about twitters right to crush my free speech.
ITS ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT TELLING TWITTER TO CRUSH MY FREE SPEECH

 

[Independent thinker]

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'm sure Garland's unbiased DOJ will get right on that, just as soon as he is done abusing his power trying to get Trump.

 

[rightwinger]

They are still free to promote their WOKE BULLSHIT . They just won't do it on the taxpayers dime.

Fucking idiots equating Disney losing a tax shelter to the government telling twitter to shut me up are fucking fools

The Government did not tell Twitter to shut up

They just helped identify Fake News

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I'm sure Garland's unbiased DOJ will get right on that, just as soon as he is done abusing his power trying to get Trump.

And parents at pta meetings lol

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Where in the Constitution does it say that a private company can't moderate it's published content whichever way it sees fit?

The problem is Dr Fauci and the Biden administration

 

[scruffy]

With being American? You“re so ready to call those who disagree with you unAmerican.

Censoring speech is un-American.

 

[Coyote]

Censoring speech is un-American.

Then why do you support it when DeSantis does it?

 

[Coyote]

They are still free to promote their WOKE BULLSHIT . They just won't do it on the taxpayers dime.

Fucking idiots equating Disney losing a tax shelter to the government telling twitter to shut me up are fucking fools

As usual you really don’t get point because you support using the strong the strong arm of the government to censor free speech. Disney criticized DeSantis’ “don’t say gay” law
and DeSantis punished the company by singling it out and altering it’s tax status. You see nothing wrong with this yet you are in an uproar because Twitter worked with the government to try and put the brakes on the proliferation of disinformation.

 

[SweetSue92]

Then why do you support it when DeSantis does it?

Once more:

Eliminating cushy tax breaks is NOT limiting free speech

 

[SweetSue92]

As usual you really don’t get point because you support using the strong the strong arm of the government to censor free speech. Disney criticized DeSantis’ “don’t say gay” law
and DeSantis punished the company by singling it out and altering it’s tax status. You see nothing wrong with this yet you are in an uproar because Twitter worked with the government to try and put the brakes on the proliferation of disinformation.

This is not difficult. It is really easy.

Please cite in the Constitution where any company has a right to cushy tax breaks.

OTOH can you cite where I have the right to speech free of coercion by the govt? OH YEAH!! Right in the First Amendment!!

 

[rightwinger]

Once more:

Eliminating cushy tax breaks is NOT limiting free speech

Retaliatory legislation limits free speech

 

[SC Patriot]

Twitter is a privately-owned company. It's not the government. This isn't a First Amendment issue.

Should a company -- especially a company that deals in freedom of expression -- fuck around with banning and shadow-banning and playing games? No, not in my estimation. Those are only band aids, and band aids usually make things worse. We just refuse to learn that one.

But this ain't a First Amendment issue.

Actually, it is.

Three different government agencies met with Titter on a weekly basis.

Now, I get it....per Admiral Kirby, they were just advising guidelines Twitter should follow but do not have to follow as they are a private corporation.

OK. I am good with that.

But.....why would the "guidelines " change so often that three different federal agencies needed to advise them on a weekly basis?

Do you truly not see something a bit off with that?

My accountant gets "new guidelines and changes" to the tax code once a year. Should the IRS contact him weekly to discuss changes in the guidelines?

Why would there be changes?

Don't be fooled. If those Twitter dumps are accurate, like it or not, it is a serious First Amendment right violation by some of the most powerful people in government. We should all worry.

 

[SC Patriot]

The Private sector can suppress anything they want

If you want to spread lies and misinformation about COVID, they don’t have to help you

Yeah yeah yeah.

I get that.

But do you really not wonder why 3 different government agencies needed to advise twitter on a weekly basis about "guidelines"?

Do you truly believe they had no advice on what was real and what was disinformation?

Really?

You sure?

 

[SC Patriot]

The Government did not tell Twitter to shut up

They just helped identify Fake News

Ah. I see.

So they had the laptop for 11 months and identified it as fake when, in fact, it was proven to be real.......

And they claimed the dossier was real when, in fact, they admitted afterward it can not be verified.

Seems you place a lot of trust in the FBI who seems to get it wrong quite often.

You aware that it took a month for them to interview a next door neighbor of the murdered Idaho students who told them, a month after the murders, that he heard a scream the night of the murders? A month?
I would think the neighbors would be the first they interview,

But what do I know.

 

[DBA]

If you're going to communicate with me, read what I actually write. If I don't say something, don't assume it. If you're not clear, ask.

I'm not an ideologue. My opinions do not fall obediently in line with those of either party. I have disagreements with both on virtually every issue.

That's all I'm asking.

Enough with the rhetorical babble. Do you believe the FBI should have mis-represented the information they provided Twitter and Facebook? If so, just say it. If you are truly the non-binary thinker you fancy yourself to be, this would be pretty easy. My guess is, TDS clouds your judgement.

 

[OldFlame]

Then why do you support it when DeSantis does it?

Is that your excuse for supporting it?

 

[Mac1958]

Actually, it is.

Three different government agencies met with Titter on a weekly basis.

Now, I get it....per Admiral Kirby, they were just advising guidelines Twitter should follow but do not have to follow as they are a private corporation.

OK. I am good with that.

But.....why would the "guidelines " change so often that three different federal agencies needed to advise them on a weekly basis?

Do you truly not see something a bit off with that?

My accountant gets "new guidelines and changes" to the tax code once a year. Should the IRS contact him weekly to discuss changes in the guidelines?

Why would there be changes?

Don't be fooled. If those Twitter dumps are accurate, like it or not, it is a serious First Amendment right violation by some of the most powerful people in government. We should all worry.

The First Amendment is pretty clear. "...make no law...." No law was made. That is not the issue.

HOWEVER....

That does not mean that some shady shit didn't happen, and it's where where we get into that dreaded word, "nuance". I don't know you enough to know where you stand on that word, but there are many here who go off the rails at its mere mention. They don't like complexity. Well, life can be complex, whether some like it or not.

SO, I would like to know:

• Did these meetings really happen? If so...
• Who instigated them?
• Why were they instigated?
• Who, exactly, was involved?
• What was discussed?
• Did the government authority dictate anything, or was it mutually agreed upon?
• Were any kind of commands or threats issued for non-compliance?
• Were any laws or regulations broken, anywhere?
• Was this covered up? By whom? How? Why?
• What other details can we find?

So at this point, I don't have enough information. Nothing would surprise me, that's for sure.