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

[Mac1958]

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.

Please see post 140. You're welcome.

 

[DBA]

Please see post 140. You're welcome.

Did you ask the same number of questions regarding any of the Trump allegations as well before coming to a conclusion? We all know the answer to this.

Many of your questions have already been answered and/or are irrelevant. For example, Zuckerberg clearly stated that the FBI contacted them.

 

[SC Patriot]

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.

Thus why I said "if those twitter dumps are accurate"

 

[Mac1958]

Did you ask the same number of questions regarding any of the Trump allegations as well before coming to a conclusion? We all know the answer to this.

Many of your questions have already been answered and/or are irrelevant. For example, Zuckerberg clearly stated that the FBI contacted them.

And yet, in reality, I can't say Trump has actually committed crimes. I don't know if he has broken any laws (although I'm interested in sedition), so I'll wait for the DOJ to shit or get off the pot. My interest in Trump, as I've said any number of times, is sociological.

One of the many merciful differences between you & I is that I have no obligation to a tribe. You have all the answers. You've made your decision, right away. What you don't know you'll just make up. Just stick on the Right, no matter what.

Me, I can just ask questions and take my time. Then I'll decide what I think. No tribe to defend.

That's why your opinion of me means nothing. Sorry.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

The FBI is the government, dumbass. IT's obvious numerous FBI personal were involved in deciding who to censor, and that's a clear violation of the law.

Only a fucking NAZI would defend this activity.

 

[bripat9643]

And yet, in reality, I can't say Trump has actually committed crimes. I don't know if he has broken any laws (although I'm interested in sedition), so I'll wait for the DOJ to shit or get off the pot. My interest in Trump, as I've said any number of times, is sociological.

One of the many merciful differences between you & I is that I have no obligation to a tribe. You have all the answers. You've made your decision, right away. What you don't know you'll just make up. Just stick on the Right, no matter what.

Me, I can just ask questions and take my time. Then I'll decide what I think. No tribe to defend.

That's why your opinion of me means nothing. Sorry.

It's the FBI who has committed crimes, dumbass.

 

[Mac1958]

The FBI is the government, dumbass. IT's obvious numerous FBI personal were involved in deciding who to censor, and that's a clear violation of the law.

Only a fucking NAZI would defend this activity.

What law was made, Einstein?

You're the First Amendment expert here.

 

[TNHarley]

It isnt a first amendment issue. They skirted the first, just like they do with many of our "rights"
That being said, it was an effort to manipulate voters. Which is NOT right.
I hope law suits drop like fucking crazy!

 

[SC Patriot]

What law was made, Einstein?

You're the First Amendment expert here.

The first amendment guarantees no American Citizen shall be censored by the federal government, including all of its agencies, departments and offices.

If...and I say IF the FBI, DHS or the DNS persuaded Twitter to censor anyone,....be it a liberal or a conservative, the first amendment has been breached.

What are the ramifications? Not sure of legal remifications....but very sure of how it will affect our constitutional republic.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Only the government can violate your First Amendment rights.

Legally this is not accurate. Private actors under the color of government can also be liable for violating Amendments. Thats proven case law.

 

[bripat9643]

What law was made, Einstein?

You're the First Amendment expert here.

"What law was made?" What the fuck does that mean?

Do you actually believe it's acceptable and lawful for government personal to designate private companies to violate the Bill of Rights?

 

[Blues Man]

Legally this is not accurate. Private actors under the color of government can also be liable for violating Amendments. Thats proven case law.

So then prove Twitter is an agent of the government

 

[Zincwarrior]

So then prove Twitter is an agent of the government

I have no intent to do so. I am noting that the statement was inaccurate. Private entities acting on behalf and the direction of the government can be found liable. BUT, there's potentially a lot of raid between that and this case.

 

[Mac1958]

"What law was made?" What the fuck does that mean?

Do you actually believe it's acceptable and lawful for government personal to designate private companies to violate the Bill of Rights?

Please see post 39. Or 71. Or 140.

You're just making shit up again. It's smarter to be honest and accurate. You clearly don't even know what the First Amendment says.

"Congress shall make no law...." No law was made. There could be real problems here, but no law was made. That's what it says.

But don't worry -- I'm not expecting honesty or accuracy from you. Only hyper-partisanship and middle school-level insults.

 

[Blues Man]

I have no intent to do so. I am noting that the statement was inaccurate. Private entities acting on behalf and the direction of the government can be found liable. BUT, there's potentially a lot of raid between that and this case.

Until it is proven that Twitter is acting as a government agent there is no validity to the statement that Twitter is violating anyone's right to free speech.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Very true.

 

[surada]

WIKI is meaningless.

You idiots keep pointing to Twitter being a private entity but this isn't about Twitter. This is about the government boot being applied to Twitter in the hopes of removing speech that was already exercised. AKA infringement

The majority of Americans think Trump is disgusting.. and they tend to be tolerant towards people who are a different color or faith or sexual orientation. Sponsors are keenly aware of this. They just aren't going to support religious extremists or Fascists.

Start your own social media.

 

[bripat9643]

So then prove Twitter is an agent of the government

Read the twitter files, dumbass.

 

[bripat9643]

The majority of Americans think Trump is disgusting.. and they tend to be tolerant towards people who are a different color or faith or sexual orientation. Sponsors are keenly aware of this. They just aren't going to support religious extremists or Fascists.

Start your own social media.

Trump has never displayed any intolerance of people based on their race, faith or sexual orientation. You're just a big fucking prog liar.

 

[surada]

Trump has never displayed any intolerance of people based on their race, faith or sexual orientation. You're just a big fucking prog liar.

Yes, he has. It's second nature to Trump.