8640
Holy Shit (twitter.com)
posted ago by Djpele12 ago by Djpele12 +8643 / -3
Comments (880)
sorted by:
1411
Djpele12 [S] 1411 points ago +1416 / -5

..........Therefore, if the very dangerous & unfair Section 230 is not completely terminated as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), I will be forced to unequivocally VETO the Bill when sent to the very beautiful Resolute desk. Take back America NOW. Thank you!

636
TinyKraken 636 points ago +644 / -8

Aight, let's do it.

233
deleted 233 points ago +263 / -30
341
BidenwontwinPA 341 points ago +351 / -10

GOPers who vote against POTUS' veto are begging to be primaried then

Edited from "asking" to "begging" as the latter sounds better (Thanks u/Tookens)

243
inspir3dgenius 243 points ago +248 / -5

I'd bet this is another headfake to produce just this result and have them out themselves while under the spotlight.

134
kudupoo 134 points ago +138 / -4

That's a bingo.

50
donaldismydad 50 points ago +54 / -4

bing, bing, bing, BINGOOOOOOOOOOO! LET'S FOOKING GOOOOOOOO!

12
TalmudIsToiletPaper 12 points ago +15 / -3

WHAT FUNNN!!!!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
74
Oxi-Glo 74 points ago +77 / -3

Not just that, but now a bunch of east coast journos are gonna have to suddenly get back to work at 10 in the night to start tiredly writing about it.
Our favorite president likes to troll in layers!

18
Wtf_socialismreally 18 points ago +20 / -2

But that's ogres

10
deleted 10 points ago +12 / -2
9
inspir3dgenius 9 points ago +10 / -1

Superstar is too common a title for such a man.

3
MegoThor 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good thing he’s a WWE Superstar Hall of Famer.

8
MAGA_4EVER 8 points ago +9 / -1

Right? I love it when he fucks up their nightly plans

42
deleted 42 points ago +44 / -2
11
elodrian 11 points ago +12 / -1

Fixing a problem before it bites you in the ass is a genius move. Anyone can spot problems in hindsight.

11
Oldnormal 11 points ago +12 / -1

He’s art of the deal-ing it

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
53
kudupoo 53 points ago +55 / -2

"He's making a list, checking it twice...."

60
1980five 60 points ago +62 / -2

“He’s gonna find out who voted twice...”

Donald Trump is Coming To Town

60
DeboonkedFact 60 points ago +61 / -1

He knows when they've been printed, he know when they've been faked. He knows when they're brought in late at night and he knows who's on the take.

10
AngrySerb1 10 points ago +13 / -3

Nice rhyme. I thought you'd finish with " he know who's been naughty or nice so be good for goodness sake "

34
watchman87 34 points ago +35 / -1

trump is the best santa

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
14
TheOne1 14 points ago +15 / -1

Better be good, TrumpClaus is coming to town...

51
fuzzydunlop 51 points ago +56 / -5

Every single republican who hasn't called out the fraud has to be primaried

71
deleted 71 points ago +72 / -1
17
TheJake 17 points ago +17 / -0

"Primaried" is that some new LMNOP gender term?

U right

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
4
pbm_ 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is the sad sad condition of things if a major correction is not made

15
deleted 15 points ago +16 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
7
Carry_Your_Name 7 points ago +7 / -0

Why would they call out if some of them have benefited from the fraud personally to retain their power?

33
deleted 33 points ago +33 / -0
9
standing_by 9 points ago +9 / -0

Based.

10
Tookens 10 points ago +11 / -1

*begging

7
BidenwontwinPA 7 points ago +7 / -0

Changed it

9
Trump2024 9 points ago +9 / -0

I knew you two were in cahoots!

87
deleted 87 points ago +91 / -4
67
NihilistCaregiver 67 points ago +80 / -13

4 years too late

59
Gesirisi 59 points ago +65 / -6

4 years ago, many millions of people wouldn't have seen the problem as they do now. The problem has been exposed big time..

38
deleted 38 points ago +42 / -4
26
Sagan 26 points ago +28 / -2

You need the public support, right now the public will agree 100%

8
Acceptdecline 8 points ago +9 / -1

Gotta build a strong case for the argument I suppose

8
FluhanWu 8 points ago +8 / -0

This is a good point. That was used on Gadaffi. “he went against twitter” he didn’t have 80+ million to protect him.

5
MAGAMAN4EVA 5 points ago +5 / -0

4 years ago this site was on Reddit. Imagine trying that now.

7
BeardedNinjaPede 7 points ago +9 / -2

That's why we have elected representatives. They're supposed to look into things like the actual effect of laws they pass and correct problems with them. Every citizen is not required to be an activist expert in every single matter in a republic, ideally. The POTUS should not be the one effectively making law. Legislatures should because of separation of powers. Our representatives have failed us miserably for many decades.

2
CuomoisaMassMurderer 2 points ago +2 / -0

Muh you have to pass it to know what it says

2
RebirthOfTheRepublic 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yea but if the president made that move they would have focused on it and saw. Years ago. And maybe we would have gotten it done before the election. Giving us the ability to shine so much light on their plots. That they couldnt have done it.

But now its pointless. Either he wont be president to actually do it or it will be after the war. In which case those who would act against the interests of the American people would already be locked up or laid down.

0
DWEPHCNPCS2020 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's not pointless at all. If they all did not commit the crimes that will be exposed, how would the swamp ever be drained? Think about it. Crimes had to come first.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lmao if you seriously imagine you know enough to critique Trumps timing, tactics or strategy. Do you also imagine this marks the beginning of Trumps Big Tech takedown rather than the final phase? You could learn so much if you recognized how much our VSG is offering. For free. God bless those with questions rather than opinions; including me!!!

10
pddx22 10 points ago +10 / -0

Hardly declaring war, more like telling the truth about the war they’ve been waging for four years against him and decades against us.

45
deleted 45 points ago +50 / -5
68
Anaconda 68 points ago +74 / -6

how many of these worthless fucktards are ignoring the fraud happening? ALL of those states that have been stolen and are being challenged have GOP LEGISLATURES and they are doing fucking nothing to help the POTUS out.

27
ClownTamer 27 points ago +27 / -0

I don’t think they’re ignoring it. I think most of them would rather have Trump out because they liked being the controlled opposition that didn’t have to work for a living because they were uniparty, and a portion of them are simply scared for their lives. Neither are good, but it’s not ignoring, it’s an active or passive betrayal.

2
tw1stynipple 2 points ago +2 / -0

boom right here. Think about it.

A lot of these rusted on bureaucrats have been suckling at the teet of Government handouts for a long time and lining their pockets. Like many other humans they get greedy.

The Bush terms seem to have created some proper swampublicans who would have been rubbing elbows with that whole corrupted apparatus. What the fuck do you do with all these people.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Everywhere is not CA. We have fighters.

1
ClownTamer 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m talking about RINOs. There are a lot of RINOs and they suck.

13
RedTX 13 points ago +13 / -0

Perhaps they are also Dominion-aided as well? Or maybe they like kickbacks and bribes? It just seems like the RINOs like his endorsement to get the vote, then turn their backs on him(us) once they’re in...whatever the case may be, they are really shitty for being that way.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
19
Bizz 19 points ago +19 / -0

How many have been helping him this last month? With us harassing them...

1
TP4bunghole 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just look at what they're doing with this election travesty.

They don't give two shits what we think, about anything.

-22
deleted -22 points ago +8 / -30
18
Oggeo 18 points ago +21 / -3

Yet the two ideas are completely separate from each other and you have no idea what you are talking about.

Trust me.

5
Nuralook 5 points ago +5 / -0

"Trust but verify" What are you actually saying?

0
deleted 0 points ago +8 / -8
3
stoic_troll 3 points ago +3 / -0

You think it would be impossible for the Senate to amend the NDAA with one paragraph about Section 230 and then flip it to the House?

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

"you're underestimating how much of the GOP will actually back Trump on this."

That's exactly the opposite of everything else you're saying. You're sending a mixed message.

0
DWEPHCNPCS2020 0 points ago +1 / -1

He won't have to. He can and will ultimately just shut him down. They've committed treason and have been caught.

9
deleted 9 points ago +11 / -2
7
MSG1000 7 points ago +7 / -0

Just because X number of people voted for it last time does not mean X amount will vote for it again. Big difference here is whether Trump and his supporters want something or not.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +3 / -8
3
MSG1000 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why do you think there won’t be any defectors to Trump? RINOs are many but they aren’t 100%.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Your wording suggests you imagine you're a psychic or time traveller. Using the phrase "in my opinion" or the abbreviation imo could eliminate distracting concerns around your mental health. Peace.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

You're ignoring us flooding them about this, and protests. If we do nothing? You're right, they do nothing.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

The really corrupt thing is having this issue in this bill to begin with.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why do you believe so?

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

No. Why should I?

-31
deleted -31 points ago +6 / -37
10
Doctor_Strangelove 10 points ago +11 / -1

Nah.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
20
deleted 20 points ago +21 / -1
7
p8riot 7 points ago +8 / -1

We're +9 in the House after the election, that's just so far..

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +4 / -4
3
p8riot 3 points ago +3 / -0

True. I take it back.

2
ChippingToe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ok but dont ever let it happen again

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

When does this get voted on?

12
montanapede 12 points ago +12 / -0

They have to vote again. I have to believe some GOP senators will change their minds.

48
SutopSutolf 48 points ago +50 / -2

He's preparing shit for sure.

45
paganbutterchurner 45 points ago +47 / -2

Better sel your stocks in big tech, google, Facebook, Twitter, insta. There’s gonna be a line up of disenfranchised republicans waiting to ream (sue) them .

All those years of fake google results, censoring and banning , suppressing. Finally gonna shake them up, their whole business model will change. If they continue to censore they will be bankrupted. Their board of directors will fire Jack Dorsey for being a communist publisher count . This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Remember folks, big tech is also SPYING on you withgoogle assistant. China is cock deep in googles ass. Might as well sieze that company and break it up while we are at it

12
diversityisghey 12 points ago +12 / -0

Lol don't put your bets on it. I guarantee right now these big tech companies are throwing money at these people to make it veto proof.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

TRY. They are trying, of course. All they can do is try.

This is why bribery / lobbying must be illegal. Take money out of politics!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
5
deadbugdale 5 points ago +5 / -0

Short Facebook?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
Dan_Slider 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just sell your stocks in them right now either way. With the shit they've done this year alone, does anybody really think their stocks are going to get better with time?

And who knows, maybe everybody selling right now might trigger a collapse in their stocks, how funny would that be.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
20
Forgototherpassword 20 points ago +20 / -0

If Goolag is in fact CIA setup, and CIA assisted in borking the election, this is like Eisenhower and Kennedy speaches wrapped up in one.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trumps 2018 EO declared a National Emergency due to the threat of foreign influence in our elections. Domestic assistance in any interference is also covered including spreading propaganda and disinformation. Corporations and individuals involved can immediately have all assets frozen. Its a broad and vicious EO imo. Notice that GEOTUS has been framing Big Tech censorship etc as threats to our National Security? That framing is intentional and should terrify the SV Oligarchs.

16
Bidensbrain2020 16 points ago +16 / -0

Why can't he just properly enforce 230.. declare twitter in violation as they clearly are and rescind their protection? Get a new FCC head

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Projection from a guppy?

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because he's a genius who understands how to win and that winning involves many moves and players? Imo he's been handling the Big Tech take down brilliantly since early 2017. Its been one of my favorite sub plots in this "movie".

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's true, can't wait to see what happens next

188
GlacialSpeed 188 points ago +190 / -2

OMG!

Yes, playing offense now!!!

153
CisSiberianOrchestra 153 points ago +162 / -9

The doomers must be having a really rough time right now. They were masturbating furiously over the AP headline about Barr, only to find out that what he actually said was misrepresented. And now this.

50
Zojhar91 50 points ago +50 / -0

Quality username.

25
inspir3dgenius 25 points ago +25 / -0

A veteran of the Meme Wars. Better recognize.

4
JesusisKing 4 points ago +4 / -0

fact

10
Yheymos 10 points ago +10 / -0

Yes, I much prefer the CisSiberianOrchestra rendition of Christmas Canon over the TransSiberianOrchestra version.

29
ChocolateEvryday 29 points ago +29 / -0

Lol @ "masturbating furiously". So descriptive yet so metaphorical.

11
RussianAgent13 11 points ago +11 / -0

It is quite literal, I assure you.

7
Haitianbychoice360 7 points ago +7 / -0

Laughs in toobin.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
12
Kekbewithus 12 points ago +34 / -22

Doomers are not the enemy they are just cautious or concerned patriots. We don’t need more division right now.

22
CisSiberianOrchestra 22 points ago +29 / -7

No, they're Denethor from The Return of the King. All they do is spread pessimism and defeatism while hiding behind the excuse of "I'm a realist." A bunch of them today were publicly making threads gloating that "See? You Qanon fags were wrong!" I'm not even a Qanon follower and I found it disgusting.

20
Ekgamut 20 points ago +21 / -1

Yeah, I noticed that anti-Q are even worse than Q folks. I disagree with Q on most things, but they can believe in whatever they want. Anti-Q folks reminds me of how leftists treated us. I find it kinda funny because I don’t see pro-Q posts everywhere, but I see anti-Q posts everywhere.

13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
2
ThePowerOfPrayer 2 points ago +2 / -0

I love all the differing viewpoints and try to see things from everybody's perspective.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Doomers are fine as long as they lurk rather than post. Posting turns them into Energy Vampires.

6
GhettoRothschild 6 points ago +7 / -1

I think Q people are widely varied from “trust the plan” 4-D chess optimism, all the way to “all the bad actors have already been secretly eliminated and all their new videos are holograms or clones.” The latter, I strongly disagree with of course, but the media liked to go after the craziest claims from the fringe part of the Q community and blast those out on television for Trump to disavow and rattle part of his base. That way, when he leaves Q followers alone, or defends them at all, the media can then paint all the craziest shit on him.

4
TotesNotKaren 4 points ago +4 / -0

Did the whole 4-D chess thing even start with Q? I’ve been on TD since 2015, and I remember a whole lot of ‘Trump is a 4-D chess master’ and ‘Trust Trump’, but I don’t remember any Q until after the election.

I firmly place myself in the ‘Trump is a 4-D chess master’ camp, just because he’s proven himself to be repeatedly over the last 5 years, but I just kind of ignore Q. There are some interesting things about it, but I put about as much stock in it as I would any other pede’s opinion post.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Those same people are also MAGA and Trump supporters so why conflate individuals having fun speculating about what's happening with Q rather than Trump who the media refers to as the Conspiracy Theorist in Chief? Why fall for such sophomoric media smear tactics instead of wondering why, next to Trump himself, Q has inspired such global, co ordinated, unrelenting and increasingly unhinged attacks. Why indeed.

4
Crockett 4 points ago +5 / -1

The Anti-Q stuff is definitely worse than the Q stuff. The Q people seem to have confirmation bias, overactive pattern-matching, and optimism, at worst. The Anti-Q people basically say that Q is a dangerous cult that's going to get people killed, and that even being disinterested about them is tantamount to collaborating with terrorists. Which is fuckin nuts. A heck of a lot more damaging to politics than Q itself could ever be.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

How odd that you turn millions of anonymous unique individuals from around the world into a collective "Q people" then start psycho analyzing your creation as if its real. Do you do the same with MAGA people too? If so, why? Why opine about what you haven't personally researched via primary sourced data ie the almost 5,000 drops over more than three years? General Flynn has. So I have I. Btw do you follow Scott Adams? Anyway, Peace.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Out of almost 5,000 posts over three plus years, you disagree with most of them? Odd. Questions, links to open source files, photos, video clips etc. What's to disagree with? If you meant the format isn't a match for you I can understand that. It definitely is geared to the chan communities which thrive on mental engagement although it expanded to be accessible to reddit refugees and other normies too. To each his own but what's there to disagree with when its just a matter of personal preference?

13
EnemiesDestroyed 13 points ago +13 / -0

They’re that red-headed kid on The Magic Schoolbus that is always whining. Hey, Trump’s like Miss Frizz!

5
2KEK_Chigurh 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is funny.

5
EnemiesDestroyed 5 points ago +5 / -0

Get our professional Meme Battalion on this!

Miss Frizz always wins, through thick and thin, just like GEOTUS!

19
deleted 19 points ago +26 / -7
26
Kekbewithus 26 points ago +26 / -0

The DOJ and FBI have done nothing for 4 years it would be crazy to blindly trust them.

Anyone who is skeptical of Barr I think has solid ground to stand on.

9
DJ_NeckFace 9 points ago +9 / -0

Never trust the AP

4
Kekbewithus 4 points ago +4 / -0

Also true, the AP article reeks of gaslighting and an attempt at division.

However, anyone who is skeptical of Barr should be, he hasn’t done shit publicly.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why do you imagine that if YOU don't know about what they've achieved/been doing that means theyve done nothing? Perhaps a bit egocentric? Do you even follow their social media accounts or the WH You Tube Channel?

10
Knight1_of_Sunset 10 points ago +10 / -0

breaks on the Trump Train.

WHAT BRAKES?! WE GOT RID OF THEM YEARS AGO!

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
7
Bill07 7 points ago +8 / -1

That's not possible. There are no brakes to apply.

17
Harambe 17 points ago +19 / -2

You'd be surprised at how many are actually the enemy.

You think doomer mentality is normal? Its manufactured and first displayed by goons. They try to shape opinion by mass bombarding sites like ours with their shitty opinion from up top.

12
Kekbewithus 12 points ago +13 / -1

The US election was rigged I don’t think there were any “doomers” prior to 11/3.

People have a right to be concerned after the US election was rigged.

Personally I think Trump will bring us through this but it’s going to get ugly with military being involved via the insurrection act. Most of us thought we would simply win in a landslide on 11/3. Nobody anticipated this level of fraud.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Those who read Q drops were very prepared. Being prepared helped Q followers withstand the doom shilling. Special ops versus civilians. However This community has risen to the occasion despite not knowing as much as Trumps chan community did and is even more high energy than in 2016. Imho. Bravo!!!!

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

A year ago we all knew there would be this level of fraud. We haven't had an honest election in 20 years or longer.

7
EnemiesDestroyed 7 points ago +7 / -0

100%. We can tell if we pay close attention to their language. I notice they tend to be snarkier than us, even when they... ‘agree’. Very self-indulgent people.

4
Doctor_Strangelove 4 points ago +4 / -0

Bingo. Shareblue shills and wumao practicing English grammar. They are out in force at any halfway decent chance of pushing defeatist narratives. Flak when over the target.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

"wumao?"

12
deleted 12 points ago +13 / -1
8
Kekbewithus 8 points ago +8 / -0

I agree pessimism isn’t useful. Division is only created when people aren’t on the same page — nobody knows how this will turn out but I think everyone here (aside from shills) is fighting for the USA and the US constitution.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Doomers don't fight; by definition, they've given up.

10
kuru_clinton 10 points ago +10 / -0

I had a few hard moments recently and have kept my fucking mouth shut, doomers take heed

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly! Use this site to find solid info, bw encouraged, and learn how to help.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
9
Billybobcuccio 9 points ago +11 / -2

He was talking out of both sides of his mouth the lard ass should have just said no comment. The fucking Chinese own dominion You’d think he would atleast acknowledge that .

3
HeadExam 3 points ago +5 / -2

What did he say that was misrepresented?

6
kebabdrogo 6 points ago +6 / -0

He said FBI and Justice Dept attorneys have not found voter fraud. He didnt say looking into more fraud allegations was being halted. He didnt say Trump is wrong.

2
Cozette 2 points ago +2 / -0

ENOUGH cases of fraud to change the election. So far. Barr is VERY skilled at lawyer speak, AG speak and DC speak. Media propagandists count on their targets ignorance of those ways of speaking and how to translate it.

5
LiberalismIsTheVirus 5 points ago +5 / -0

That's what I like to see

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
-20
deleted -20 points ago +10 / -30
7
Anaconda 7 points ago +14 / -7

he is more of a patriot and man than you will ever be, you basement dwelling fuckwad

3
pmyourcovfefes 3 points ago +3 / -0

You’re quite the character on this forum 🤪. I did defend you as a doomfag but you’re our doomfag 😂😂😂

What in your other posts are saying fuck Sydney Powell for? She seemed to have been a great deal of help to Flynn.

Why wouldn’t she help expose election fraud?

3
uzi5v2 3 points ago +6 / -3

Have you not realized we already won? All this is just a formality. Either they give us what we want or we take it.

89
deleted 89 points ago +89 / -0
22
friendofno1 22 points ago +23 / -1

I still don’t know what 230 is or how it influences twitter. I’ve read about it but I guess I’m retarded

20
Greg-2012 20 points ago +21 / -1

Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act allows Twitter and Facebook to censor. They are classified as 'content providers' but they are acting like 'publishers'. By censoring, they are picking and choosing what gets published. If they were re-classified as 'publishers', they would be liable for all content on their websites.

13
Allyourbase 13 points ago +14 / -1

We lose our protection......

4
Ockoson 4 points ago +5 / -1

That is true but remember we know how to control our emotions and have generally a better sense of decency and fairness over the left.

3
deleted 3 points ago +6 / -3
11
1A2A 11 points ago +11 / -0

Doesn’t the government just need to enforce the laws on the books vs destroy 230? Problem is the government is full of communist I guess.

3
ADAM_SCHITT 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes

0
Jarlason10 0 points ago +1 / -1

No. There are loopholes in 230 that has allowed these platforms get away with what they've been doing.

8
ADAM_SCHITT 8 points ago +8 / -0

Based on how things normally go in congress, Big Tech will write a new version of section 230 that will help them and screw all the smaller sites like us.

1
no_step_on_snek 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fuck no it isn't.

If you think that the big sites will sink without 230 at this point you're delusional. All that happens is every small website hosting user generated content, like this one or bitchute or video.maga.host or anything else gets brigaded by the cancel commies with CP or pirated movies and the next day every site but twitter and facebook is gone.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Got it. Drumpfs stupid and youre not. Did you also screech over Net Neutrality getting nuked or did you understand Trumps strategic reasons for doing it?

2
RiffFantastic 2 points ago +2 / -0

Honest question. How so?

2
InterestingReference 2 points ago +2 / -0

If for example, a user on this site wrote something that could be considered slander, a death threat, etc, the site owners could be sued for allowing slander to exist here. The site would be targeted by the left, and brought down quickly.

Also there is rampant misinformation about what 230 would lead to. It is quite literally the death of social media - no platforms could exist if they were liable for all content. It would be China levels of censorship to avoid lawsuits.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lol. Someone who either hasn't read the Art of the Deal or isn't applying what you read to what Trump is doing now. Hence your unnecessary concerns.

1
RiffFantastic 1 point ago +1 / -0

Maybe 230 should be removed for social media that engages in censorship. Leave it alone fir those that don’t.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
magacoder 1 point ago +1 / -0

All companies operating on the internet in America would.

Which means it would force new legislation which could account for these new tech monopolies, not a bill written in '96 for a bulletin board.

1
CuomoisaMassMurderer 1 point ago +1 / -0

No we wouldn't. We admit our bias.

4
AngryCanary 4 points ago +4 / -0

230 doesn't allow them to censor, it's supposed to discourage censorship because it protects them from liability for user content. The problem is it's not being interpreted in a way that large multi-billion dollar "platforms" lose their platform status if they don't allow free-speech content.

Without 230, it would make all community websites impossible. I've seen a lot of posts here which, if the hosts were liable, would easily drive them into bankruptcy or worse.

230 needs to be re-interpreted in the context of monopolies and anti-Trust and billion dollar companies. Just saying all companies are legally responsible for everything people post on their site would be another form of tyranny. To be clear, if you get to a certain size you should be required to observe free-speech protection and special oversight and transparency. That is a much better solution than nuking every small company who can't implement mass censorship and legal teams to insulate themselves from liability. If 230 goes away, every community driven company smaller than Google, Facebook, etc. would be immediately driven to bankruptcy.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trumps NEGOTIATING. Why do you act as if the "deal" is finalized? Why do you imagine YOU know these basic things but that media/tech/communications.genius Trump doesn't? Lol.

10
prayinpede 10 points ago +11 / -1

Its a legal protection that absolves them from responsibility of posts to their site, ie threats of violence, copy right infringement, anything illegal. They are not supposed to be editorial though

4
friendofno1 4 points ago +5 / -1

And what would be the benefit and consequence of repealing it?

10
Zeriel 10 points ago +10 / -0

How about no more Big Tech censoring and publishing fake news with inpunity. They can be sued to oblivion. Do you remember why this site was made in the first place? This is pay back.

1
no_step_on_snek 1 point ago +2 / -1

Draw me a map of how repeal of section 230 gets the big tech sites sued into oblivion for censorship and fake news. I'll wait.

-1
Zeriel -1 points ago +1 / -2

No 230 means that they can't do whatever the fuck they want anymore.

It means any bullshit on their platform will come back to them and they will be sued to Oblivion because of things like defamation, libel, etc. 230 gives them Platform immunity.

They will eventually be unable to function and crumble. So the biggest enemy of the republic and the 1st amendment will be gone.

Not only that but if charged with conspiring against the government and interfering in the elections (Witch they did) then the government can sieze all of their assets as per Trump's executive order here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

In one fell swoop all the insane big tech warlords like Zuckerberg etc. will be in prison with their fellow commies.

Then smaller websites like this one can come in to take their place but none will be able to get too big qne that's a good thing. The internet will change but we need this to happen if we want a future.

In Conclusion this protects our Republic from giant mega technology corporations like Google controlling the flow of information and the MSM should be next.

6
snwbrder697 6 points ago +6 / -0

Basically you can go on Twitter and post "Orange Man Good" and some triggered lefty can sue Twitter for promoting hate speech because you like literally raped their eyes. Basically, they are spending all their income on civil defense in court.

4
prayinpede 4 points ago +4 / -0

They would be open to lawsuits

5
deleted 5 points ago +8 / -3
4
prayinpede 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah. Hopefully itd be replaced with something better

0
ThePowerOfPrayer 0 points ago +1 / -1

No, because we're not editing content here. Also, the rules are out front and center and all are held to the same standards.

If I started posting spam Trump coin links, I'd be gone with the quickness.

3
DrewBernarddog 3 points ago +3 / -0

I am as well. lets take the short bus together

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
2
NinjaPede 2 points ago +3 / -1

Basically immunity for the content on their site. However they censor, which would make them a publisher.

7
wizdom 7 points ago +7 / -0

BYE BYE NDAA

3
Diotima 3 points ago +3 / -0

Looked up 230 its part of the communications decency act of 1996.. not sure what NDAA has to do with it.

2
paganbutterchurner 2 points ago +2 / -0

Interesting so what’s trump trying to get at

3
EatDatSideOfBeef 3 points ago +3 / -0

He wants Congress to slap a rider onto the upcoming NDAA that would amend the CDA of 1996 to remove Section 230. Since the NDAA needs to pass every year to fund the military, it's a pretty popular vehicle for both sides to try and pass unrelated legislation that wouldn't get through Congress as a single issue bill.

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Tech Tyrants censorship poses a real risk to National Security. See the September 12, 2018 EO declaring a State of National Emergency which mentions propaganda.

6
NotJudging 6 points ago +6 / -0

I hope so. But 230 just allows them to be sued. If this election fraud is going to be allowed, Biden can just put it back in place before any harm is done. If Trump has any fault, it's being too patient.

-1
Anaconda -1 points ago +7 / -8

passed 86-14 already in the senate. already cleared 2/3 margin in the house too.

veto override needs 2/3 vote

-2
MsQleo -2 points ago +2 / -4

Anaconda with the facts

36
deleted 36 points ago +37 / -1
28
richmomz 28 points ago +28 / -0

It seems we don’t have any “homeland security” from our three letter agencies anyway so no big loss there. If they are so useless that they can’t even be bothered to investigate our hilariously and obviously broken election system and protect the democratic foundations of our nation then they are objectively useless.

13
mrh218 13 points ago +13 / -0

This is one of those bills that always passes and, therefore, is full of pork. If they want to pass their pet projects, they will need to do what he says.

3
GlacialSpeed 3 points ago +3 / -0

Win-Win!

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
21
deleted 21 points ago +22 / -1
10
richmomz 10 points ago +10 / -0

DADDY IS GETTING THE BELT!!

378
OrangeManAddict 378 points ago +395 / -17

DAD IS MAD. GIVE DAD HIS CROWN NOW!

158
deleted 158 points ago +158 / -0
34
Kekintosh2020 34 points ago +41 / -7

Same tribe

17
Barron2052 17 points ago +19 / -2

Swamp propaganda machine / brainwashing machine / attacking dogs disguised as media and Bigtech.

It is time to fuck them off.

15
deleted 15 points ago +19 / -4
10
deleted 10 points ago +14 / -4
2
Undo1913 2 points ago +2 / -0

I have no idea. What I do know is that everyone right or left is programmed and conditioned to shut down any conversation about this subject. We are not allowed to have the slightest curiosity without being branded as a David duke holocaust denier nazi etc.

Not all J—- are zionists and not all zionists are J—-. Ppl need to stop squealing anti-Semite! Anti-Semite! And look into this shit. It’s like the black lady Dr Linda Lee Target who testified at the Michigan hearings yesterday said something along the lines of: “These inner city folk are lazy and apathetic and are not doing their jobs. They look like me and they are failing to do what’s right. But people can’t say this because they’ll call you racist. But it’s the truth so I’m going to say it simply because it’s the truth.”

Thomas Jefferson didn’t swear upon the altar of God eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man for mainstream media to program us all into not using the J—- word in vain. When you look into central banks, media, education system, communism, CIA, world banks.... it becomes quite clear that a good chunk of (((them))) are a bigger threat to freedom and our children’s future than Islam or jihadi radicals. Even if I’m wrong, we should be allowed to have a healthy robust discussion about these and how to resolve it with our principles in tact instead of shutting down thoughts and worshipping those who are in many ways tyrannizing our minds, culture, and free speech (literally there’s speech code laws now).

But hey, downvote me so you can get that dopamine hit and pretend you stuck it to a an evil horrible person who judges everyone by groups and is a Marxist hypocrite instead of someone who judges each individually but understands stereotypes exist for a reason and becomes alarmed when (((certain))) stereotypes are absolutely not allowed to be questioned in a country where we supposedly are free and supposedly have free speech even though we are robbed silly via the 16th amendment and work all day Monday for free whether we realize it or not and are double triple and even quadruple taxed to death and in return this tax money is used to line the pockets of sellouts, traitors, globalists, and people who ship our jobs overseas and teach our kids to reject the founding principles of the country. Even being upset about these things makes me a Nazi then perhaps people should look up what a nazi actually is and perhaps you should realize communists are even WORSE than nazis and perhaps you should look into who invented (((communism))) and who is pushing the communist manifesto into the rest of the world and who sets to benefit humongous from all of this. Idk you tell me how 0.2% of a certain group of people accounts for around 1 in 10 of the world’s billionaires, the majority of the central banking chairs, the majority of the porn producers & the majority of mainstream media CEO’s/chairs/owners. Maybe they’re completely innocent and we could stand to learn from them or maybe the protocols are legit. I don’t know. But it probably wouldn’t hurt to freely talk about people who dominate the information that penetrates the minds of nearly every single one our fellow Americans. Rant over.

3
SWORDofLIBERTY 3 points ago +3 / -0

Always point this out to those who still refuse to discuss the (((real))) problem. When the muslims had their religious leaders real thoughts and the real beliefs of that horrid religion, everyone was able to eventually come to the understanding, that we simply cannot allow the religion to exist within the freedom loving United States.

So why are we taking so long to realize the same with Judaism? I'm trying to spread this video everywhere I can, but not enough people will acknowledge the consequences should be the exact same as muslims. We. Cannot. Co-Exist.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
5
knightofday 5 points ago +9 / -4

Every time. Nearly all of them.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
42
deleted 42 points ago +45 / -3
9
brassmule 9 points ago +10 / -1

Get leftist on our side with this by promising freeeeeeee healthcare instead of funding NDAA.

7
deleted 7 points ago +9 / -2
1
knightofday 1 point ago +2 / -1

The metal studded one with two rows

0
catvideos3 0 points ago +3 / -3

The President wears no crown.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
337
LiskaEman 337 points ago +342 / -5

lol, this explains why .win is loading really slowly right now. Bout damn time!

111
WeirdoSlayer 111 points ago +113 / -2

they think a 30 minute ddos attack in retaliation is effective "retribution" for not bending the knee to them.

they never acknowledge the power of the streisand effect

41
Bizz 41 points ago +43 / -2

Anytime there's a DDOS it's just a reminder to check for stickies or tune into New for a while.

7
knightofday 7 points ago +8 / -1

First thing I do haha

16
MakeAmericaWinAgain 16 points ago +17 / -1

Explains it.

7
uzi5v2 7 points ago +9 / -2

It’s funny they think lashing out will help them. If Trump sets his sights on you, you’ve already lost. At least go down with some dignity!

1
LiskaEman 1 point ago +3 / -2

Their dignity was gone longggg ago. I only hope the confused people on the bottom, so to speak, can wake up and realize what's going on.

243
MakeAmericaGreat9 243 points ago +249 / -6

Fuck around, and find out.

56
lordvon 56 points ago +58 / -2

Zuck around, get cucked

13
wizdom 13 points ago +15 / -2

Fap around

9
lordvon 9 points ago +10 / -1

Splooge out

7
Boldwithoutthebull 7 points ago +8 / -1

Toob out

1
50red 1 point ago +2 / -1

Zuck done cucked himself.

217
CJBarnacle 217 points ago +226 / -9

He should have done this three years ago.

137
Fenianlad 137 points ago +139 / -2

The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is right now.

36
el-y0y0s 36 points ago +38 / -2

The Liberty Tree.

21
Toughsky_Shitsky 21 points ago +24 / -3

Always time to water that tree.

6
deleted 6 points ago +7 / -1
4
Fenianlad 4 points ago +5 / -1

Marvelous. I’m envious I didn’t pick that one up

2
zedrexvsyrex 2 points ago +3 / -1

With the blood of tyrants.

1
svlem 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nah, it'd become corrupted. I'd rather it be with the blood and sweat of patriots. Seems more poetic.

1
zedrexvsyrex 1 point ago +1 / -0

You know what I meant by that bro lmao

1
svlem 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah kek just trying to be a wiseass

10
bigdaddy2 10 points ago +11 / -1

Wouldn’t second best be 39 years ago?

5
Fenianlad 5 points ago +6 / -1

Grrr

3
540k-Again 3 points ago +5 / -2

If you could go back in time and plant it, 40 years is usually best for most trees (if going to timetravel 39 years, might as well 40.) But if you can't, then right now is best rather than waiting for the future to do it.

...

Sect 230 isn't even constitutional in the first place. It can be stricken down, or repealed. Or it can be effectively neutralized before then...

To any WH Lurkers -- The WH Council's office can write a 1 page E.O. which effectively nullies Big Tech Censorship (and it's marxism spreading).

Need More Strict-Constitutionalist MAGA Republicans in the WH Councils office!

For the Strictly-Constitutional WIN & WIN Plan to win Electors and clean up the Elections:

https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8EhtERu/for-everyone-who-wants-djtpence-/

Keep spreading the WIN&WIN Pedes, we're making headway!

32
brassmule 32 points ago +33 / -1

We all still had hope we could fix things from inside the system.

Now we all know for sure that the system is rigged. There is only one way to fix a rigged system.

6
vacu 6 points ago +6 / -0

I think the difference is that we have a very specific and concrete reason now.

Even though we knew it was just as bad before, now the entire public knows and/or it can be easily explained to them.

-24
deleted -24 points ago +7 / -31
3
NoahGav 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think you need to learn how to read.

24
deleted 24 points ago +27 / -3
18
deleted 18 points ago +19 / -1
5
deleted 5 points ago +7 / -2
2
RussianAgent13 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ric Grennell said it would take more than 8 years.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
0
Cozette 0 points ago +1 / -1

He did. Not realizing this reveals your lack of understanding of "the game". Imho he's been gone a kingly brilliant.

1
MichelleObamasBulge 1 point ago +1 / -0

You can’t win the optics game against people who are determined to slander you no matter what. Announce that you cured cancer and they will criticize you for not curing it sooner, for not curing Alzheimer’s instead, for depriving indigenous trans people of color the opportunity to claim the achievement for themselves, etc.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
StarGirl 1 point ago +2 / -1

Leaving them there to cause havoc everyone will eventually see as undeniable is the best way to drain the swamp. Otherwise he just looks like a tyrant.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
0
MAGA_FOREVER 0 points ago +4 / -4

Well, not if he's been planning on "draining the swamp" since well before 2016. Seems like keeping these rats IN the barrel seems to be turning out to be a good move... especially when he (and WE) are about to fill that barrel up to the top with water. If he let them go early... well, many would have escaped what's coming to them.

14
paganbutterchurner 14 points ago +15 / -1

What did you do in your first hundred days of presidency? Trump should of got the Nobel prize 5 times over . But keep chirping from an armchair, with respect fellow pede

1
MichelleObamasBulge 1 point ago +1 / -0

There was plenty of time to get this done. He could have done it instead of moving the Israel embassy or making it illegal to question the allegiance of people who have dual citizenship with Israel or banning bump stocks or giving away our money so women and minorities can finally succeed at running businesses despite consistently posting losses

He had a social media summit at one point and it was basically a high school pep rally about how big tech is a meanie. Nothing whatsoever came from it

1
Cozette 1 point ago +1 / -0

Its adorable when teenagers start critiquing the adults. Just kidding. The know it all phase is annoying.

11
zooty 11 points ago +11 / -0

It's difficult to remember how different social media was even 12 months ago.

145
deleted 145 points ago +147 / -2
24
fasterth 24 points ago +26 / -2

I was wondering why destroying big tech wasn't in his second term agenda, maybe it's because he wants to do it before it even starts :)

5
giggitybooped 5 points ago +6 / -1

He got 4 years of horse shit from them. I'd imagine Daddy is fuming with his win being stolen from him compounding his anger and frustration. There's no way he doesn't want them gone so he can. That's his biggest opposition is media. It not only is against him but actively turns others against him reaching billions.

143
Kaizen 143 points ago +145 / -2

We’ve danced around this topic enough, time to grab it by the pussy.

38
MixedBlacknWhite 38 points ago +42 / -4

as a "Chad" myself, the "grab em" line was always about "taking control" and "being a man in charge" but to the weak left, they took it entirely and only literally, which it wasnt simply that.

16
EvanWithDaSpice 16 points ago +20 / -4

this comment alone tells me you're a Brad. Don't mistake yourself

8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
15
Harambe 15 points ago +18 / -3

Uh I'm not sure you're a literal chad unless you've literally grabbed a hot chick by the pussy.

When you're a Chad, they want you to do it.

1
MixedBlacknWhite 1 point ago +4 / -3

I'll tell you without a doubt.. i am a chad.

1
BustaSlug 1 point ago +2 / -1

Light skin nigga

0
MixedBlacknWhite 0 points ago +1 / -1

Alexa, play Jealous Girl by New Edition

1
MichelleObamasBulge 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh yah? Answer me this: when you’re in bed with hot Asian twins, which one do you satisfy first?

1
MixedBlacknWhite 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trick question, they bang in the kitchen.

11
deleted 11 points ago +12 / -1
4
MixedBlacknWhite 4 points ago +7 / -3

It's a little of everything.

but you're right, you can walk into a room of 10's and they flock to you

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
8
figneugent 8 points ago +8 / -0

even literally, it was just locker room talk

doesn't mean he actually grabbed anyone by the pussy

i can tell you i had a three way with jessica alba and betty white

doesn't mean that's automatically true (though it is)

5
MixedBlacknWhite 5 points ago +5 / -0

I heard Betty is a 3-hole kinda lady

4
pmyourcovfefes 4 points ago +4 / -0

She let him do it 🤷‍♀️ Her body her choice

105
gamingthisandthat 105 points ago +112 / -7

Daddy's angry - i like it when hes angry hehehehe

75
BehindBrowardLines 75 points ago +78 / -3

YOU CAN DOOOOO ITTTTTT!!

9
ReeeeeeFundthePolice 9 points ago +11 / -2

ALL NIGHT LONG!!

2
TheWinningNeverStops 2 points ago +3 / -1

God I love that movie!

Water boy is sandlers best movie change my mind.

1
gutterbacon 1 point ago +1 / -0

uncut gems is pretty good.

1
TheWinningNeverStops 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yeah uncut is pretty good

74
deleted 74 points ago +76 / -2
1
trailerman168233 1 point ago +6 / -5

And you too

9
trailerman168233 9 points ago +11 / -2

Sorry. Wrong thread.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +4 / -6
64
TwitterIsTrash 64 points ago +69 / -5

He wouldn’t even be talking or thinking about future bills if he “lost”. He’s got this.

28
AndrewCuomosEmmy 28 points ago +30 / -2

He isn't acting remotely like someone who knows that they only have 50 days left in office, and it isn't because he's stupid. Firing squads, Pentagon shakeup, 1000 military aircraft in the skies today, he knows that he will win a second term.

5
1776rightnow 5 points ago +12 / -7

You can't rule out that he's trying to cause as much damage as possible before cheatin joe gets sworn in.

17
deleted 17 points ago +19 / -2
-9
1776rightnow -9 points ago +5 / -14

He won't use the insurrection act, he'll go and try to win in 2024. He didn't use it when half the country burned this summer

12
IntrepidBurger 12 points ago +13 / -1

Because that wasn't the end of the line. You don't invoke something like that until you've exhausted all other options.

There is no 2024. If they win by cheating they will destroy Trump and his family. There will never be a fair election again.

-3
1776rightnow -3 points ago +2 / -5

I know its now or ever, I think his advisors are telling him he can just run again (Kushner). I hope he crosses the Rubicon, but it seems very unlikely.

2
50red 2 points ago +3 / -1

Let's not play the game of what Trump is being told right now. Leave that to CNN.

2
IntrepidBurger 2 points ago +4 / -2

Kushner isn't stupid. He knows the political backstabbing in politics. He's worked with much viler regimes. There is zero chance he's advising Trump to just try again.

No one on Team Trump is thinking of 2024.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
AndrewCuomosEmmy 1 point ago +2 / -1

That's fair, but Biden could undo basically everything that I mentioned above, so then it would be redundant and pointless. Now to mention that he isn't anywhere near dumb enough to give the modern Democratic Party firing squads.

2
Crockett 2 points ago +2 / -0

He isn't acting remotely like someone who knows that they only have 50 days left in office,

Of course you know the left will claim the opposite.

"He's flailing! He's desperate! He's lashing out at phantoms, and hurting the country in the process! Maybe we should remove him even earlier than January!"

1
AndrewCuomosEmmy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well that's the left, when was the last time they were right about anything pertaining to Trump?

0
50red 0 points ago +1 / -1

1000 military aircraft in the skies today

As opposed to a regular day?

2
AndrewCuomosEmmy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wanna say the regular number was around 250 on a regular day. Looking for the tweet that was tracking them.

-9
bighomiebeenchillin -9 points ago +10 / -19

yeah but nigga how tho like wtf is da move from here? we only got two weeks till da niggas at da college vote for biden... whats finna happen within da next two weeks? where tf are da supremes are them niggas even tryna hear da mfin case? like what’s da plan nigga !??

4
AndrewCuomosEmmy 4 points ago +5 / -1

SCOTUS are now starting to take our cases in PA. We'll see at least one flip by Saturday and the rest will fall like dominos.

-9
bighomiebeenchillin -9 points ago +5 / -14

isnt this da first case da supremes finna hear tho? are there any others gettin tossed up to those niggas why tf aint da supremes been droppin rulings on these niggas already tho !?? nigga they da JUDGE brah just declare some shit n say da fraud states = auto win for trump. shit could be settled in 15 mins brah tf are those niggas doin smh they supposed to be da equal power branch to da congress and da prez. declare that shit invalid and give donald da w

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
50red 1 point ago +2 / -1

Are you really a Hillary's diaper? If so do an AMA.

1
AndrewCuomosEmmy 1 point ago +2 / -1

Not sure of the Constitutionality of awarding all fraud ridden states to Trump. And there was at least one other Trump case that went up to SCOTUS a few days ago. I'm pretty sure we got a favorable ruling in AZ today, PA and AZ put us at 263. From there, Nevada will probably flip, and Georgia as well. WI and MI I think could stay blue, but i don't think they'll matter in the end.

1
Ridiculousposter 1 point ago +1 / -0

I dont speak BLM, can someone translate?

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
56
muricagr8 56 points ago +57 / -1

One man vs. the world. He will win. Stand by our president!

7
trailerman168233 7 points ago +8 / -1

With you.

5
Election_Quotes 5 points ago +6 / -1

One man and God is a majority

49
deleted 49 points ago +50 / -1
42
deleted 42 points ago +45 / -3
46
populist_nationalist 46 points ago +46 / -0

That will be the fault of those who send him a bill without repealing 230.

2
Diotima 2 points ago +5 / -3

Section 230 is codified as part of the Telecommunications Decency Act 1996... not the NDAA. The NDAA is used to appropriate funding for defense programs.

12
populist_nationalist 12 points ago +12 / -0

Big Tech is a national security threat now if that makes a difference.

10
BiglyMagaMamma 10 points ago +10 / -0

I read this as him wanting to forever pull section 239 from the NDAA

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
8
BidenHunter 8 points ago +8 / -0

What's the use of a military if there is no Republic for them to defend 🤔

I guarantee, people who are willing to sacrifice their lives for this country are willing to deal with a delay in military funding. Is the republic worth saving or not?

-4
Allyourbase -4 points ago +1 / -5

So China wins a war on us no funding

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
3
lordvon 3 points ago +3 / -0

Which I think is why 230 will probably be removed / changed?

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
6
lordvon 6 points ago +6 / -0

The president made the first move and set the playing field. I think it would be hard for anyone to refuse to work with trump all to protect twatter

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
3
uzi5v2 3 points ago +3 / -0

They can’t be that stupid. Trying to impeach him now would surly wake even more normies up. If they’re that confident they won why not just wait out the next month of his presidency. All trying to impeach him would show is that they’re weak and he has all the power.

3
NoahGav 3 points ago +4 / -1

Color resolution or Color revolution?

2
wizdom 2 points ago +3 / -1

Trust they'll be funded by E.O. or high water

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
ADAM_SCHITT 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm sure they have enough money laying around until it eventually gets passed.

40
TheDTOMDon 40 points ago +40 / -0

Start by arresting Zuckerberg & Jack Dorsey, they are compromised foreign controlled actors helping to subvert our democracy.

Scatter them to the wind with the three letter agencies Mr President, you have our support.

8
Maga2020Maga2020 8 points ago +8 / -0

Zuck's ccp wife has nothing to do with Zuck attempting to destroy America (wait a minute....).

36
patriotvetPA 36 points ago +38 / -2

We need this man!

32
SCP0073 32 points ago +33 / -1

Good. Veto it.

30
Finalfight 30 points ago +33 / -3

As a tech guy this is great and terrible at the same time. We all must sacrifice and fight so lets go revoke that shit

12
deleted 12 points ago +12 / -0
-3
MAGA_Master -3 points ago +1 / -4

I don’t think 230 has anything to do with that. You can’t delete every liberal or conservative comment, and have publisher status because you are editing free speech.

4
no_step_on_snek 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's exactly what 230 has to do with. All this rhetoric about "platform or publisher" has people confused. And unfortunately, when people are confused they still talk like they know what they're talking about, so misinformation spreads rapidly.

Section 230 of the communications decency act establishes that websites that host user generated content are not liable for what their users share on their website, provided the host makes a good faith effort to remove illegal content. This means TD.win is not liable if some rando commie posts CP on the site as an attack. Remove 230 and the commies have an easy way to get this site taken down. And parler. And Bitchute. And gab, and rumble, and your own private little message board site you're trying to start. If you remove 230 you wind up with only the biggest companies will be able to afford the moderation and legal teams to protect themselves, which means you and I won't be able to post a meme anywhere but Twitter and Facebook. By the way, repealing section 230 does not outlaw internet censorship.

0
svlem 0 points ago +1 / -1

That's literally now how it works... every website is liable for what's written by people in them, including us. So if a couple of discord trannies start making 'chant's of jewish genocide, racial slurs, etc. We'll get fucking sued into oblivion, and so will other sites without the tools to moderate that behaviour.

2
Johneboy46464 2 points ago +3 / -1

Great and Terrible at the same time in what sense? Ive been trying to undersrand 230 since trump mentioned it back in the day...

Eli5... No... 6. Eli6. If you dont mind!

17
EvanWithDaSpice 17 points ago +17 / -0

long story short, social media companies enjoy liability protections because they are a public square. They aren't held to editorial standards that could expose them to libel/slander/content suits because they can't control what users post therefore it is seen as a public good basically. Now that they are censoring and editing content, specifically conservatives, and most specifically the president, the protection should be lifted. This opens the door for libel, slander, child porn, and many other lawsuits due to the revocation of their protection which basically renders it a useless entity.

9
uzi5v2 9 points ago +9 / -0

They would get sued into bankruptcy overnight and would become a footnote in history books.

5
Maga2020Maga2020 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes we would have 3-6 months of shutdowns on website due to the fear of liability, including this very site.

But Congress would step up quickly to write new legislation that would make it crystal clear as to how you gain liability protection.

It can be done but right now social media giants get the best of both worlds, the edit and censor like publishers while getting the protection of a platform.

One tweak they would need to add is fan based or lets saw a site focused on hunting. The Hunting website could censor/delete posts regarding PETA and not be forced to become publishers.

What can't happen is a site claiming to be a public forum like twtter and allow them to ban conservatives. If twitter declared they were a SJW site then by all means they can ban who they want but even then they started as an open forum so they might be stuck as being open (they abused being 'open' to gain massive followings, had they been declared SJW from day one it would have never grown).

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
no_step_on_snek 0 points ago +1 / -1

Twitter has declared themselves an SJW site. Read their terms of use.

If Twitter branded themselves as "only for communists" tomorrow do you think there would be a mass exodus? Nope, people are addicted to followers.

I think you're right about the "they'd be forced to make a new law" thing, but the plan could backfire. It could just force the US out as a place for innovation in the networking space. We could wind up having to use foreign sites just to publish our thoughts, subject to their laws. I don't know about you but I'd rather be able to talk about the Holocaust or criticize Islam and maybe have to go to a smaller website, I'd rather be subject to the rules of websites which I can switch between than the laws of foreign governments.

Or the government could decide to write some fucked up law that regulates what we say online, not just protecting us from censorship. Or the government could write a law firmly entrenching the big tech sites as institutions online even more. Or the government could write a law that opens you or I up to lawsuits if we decide to make a website and try to keep it topic specific. What happens with a "free speech" law online if we try to deport commies on this website?

I just don't see a real solution to this other than "if you make the website you decide what people can say on it" which is what we have now. And I'd definitely rather have to pick a different website to have conversations on than be able to say whatever on twitter but not be able to run my own website and risk lawsuits. I think the solution to this big tech censorship stuff is to just not use big tech, which is what I personally do.

2
Eu-is-socialist 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes . But along with them every other site that allows user content. Including THIS. But what is even more likely to happen is the big sites will employ much stricter filters and A WHOLE LOT OF MODERATORS . and the smaller sites will be completely dead . Because who the fuck would want to start a site with such liabilities hanging over your head.

4
al-phabitz89 4 points ago +4 / -0

So, won’t this in theory just mean they would increase censorship across the board now? Since they would be liable for everything posted?

2
EvanWithDaSpice 2 points ago +4 / -2

you say this as if there is anything to lose. let me remind you the president of the US and leader of the free world is being censored on every post and conservatives are banned and censored from all forms of social media every single day.. at least there would be legal recourse for their blatant partisanship

3
no_step_on_snek 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm saying whatever I want online right now. We have this site and others like it to lose. If the president made an account on this site right now he would never be censored on the internet again.

If section 230 gets repealed some commie is going to come on this site and spam it with CP or links to download the black panther movie and then the next day this site will be gone. Where will we have left? Why, the only websites with the money for legal teams, lobbyists and moderation capacity, twitter and Facebook.

Repeal of section 230 is a trojan horse. The solution is to not use websites that don't let you say what you want.

0
Eu-is-socialist 0 points ago +1 / -1

Or to modify section 230 so that when you censor legal content you loose protection.

0
no_step_on_snek 0 points ago +1 / -1

OK so then what happens when this site gets sued for deporting a commie troll?

2
AmannamedRJ 2 points ago +2 / -0

I dont like this explanation.

Social media wasnt a thing in the 90s. its a 2000s phenomenon.

We need to fix 230. How to fix? simple? Freedom of speech aside from blatantly illegal materials (Child pornography, Doxing offenders etc) and minor discretionary restrictions (Gore, porn, Doxes, etc) Its a platform. If you start trying to editorialize the words of elected officials? You are now a Publisher.

I personally think there should be a new category called "Private Bulletin Board (PBB - pronounced "pub")" which gives some protections for immediate infringements (like with the platform) but has more stringent specifications like a publisher. Basically an inbetween. Also make copyright takedowns harder on full Platforms and easier on PBBs and Publishers. There legal liabilities protected. you chose your class of service.

Thats the most fair to most companies I think.
-Also internet bill of rights NOW.

1
ProdigalPlaneswalker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Social media wasnt a thing in the 90s.

Make Usenet Great Again

0
no_step_on_snek 0 points ago +2 / -2

So then what happens when I click that deport button when some commie shill comes on this website and says bullshit? We have to give them free speech here? How does that work?

If you think about this topic for 5 minutes a little bit you'll see that you simply cannot tell websites what sort of content they have to host. There is no legal solution to this problem. The solution is social in nature, a personal choice: don't use censorious platforms or big tech. The solution to the problem on a larger scope is based in a free market: people will move to places where they can have real conversations. Big tech will die due to this censorship on their own. There is no need for a law, only for another account on another website.

1
AmannamedRJ 1 point ago +1 / -0

Did you even read what I wrote or nahh? You just went off?

Under what I wrote TDW is a PBB (pub). A private user forum with strict rules.. In fact most highly specialized forums are PBBs.

But besides the point, nothing here is about "legality" it's about status as a publisher or a platform. Ok a website doesnt want to hose certain content? thats their prerogative, just don't go expecting specialized protections for it

1
no_step_on_snek 1 point ago +1 / -0

So you want the government to draw, in crayon, exactly every type of content every type of site can and cannot moderate?

What if I want to host anything anyone on my website wants to say, except criticism of myself? Am I a platform or a publisher or a pbb or whatever? Am I allowed to moderate furry hentai?

0
AmannamedRJ 0 points ago +1 / -1

Classing LOLberterian. You're completely missing the point, chomping at the bit to scream "MUH GOVERNMENT OVERREACH"

This has zero to do with the legality of the content Rather it's a tool to see where the burden of responsibility, and other liabilities lie and it exists not just for your protection but the protection of the consumer as it is to them to know their rights regarding your service.

It's really no different than calling yourself a For-profit versus non-profit. Are you a publisher? Then liabilities for illegal content lie on you. Are you a platform? Ok, people posting illegal content to your site do not ping liabilities to you, and the offender is liable to be sued.


You get caught up in this "am I allowed to..." and the strict answer is: you're allowed to do whatever the fuck you want to, just know it changes where liabilities are. Under your example you're closer to a PBB as "Criticism of myself" isn't exactly discretionary. As I said in my examples, pornography is discretionary so in my example were you to moderate out user's pornographic posts you'd still be considered a platform.

2
no_step_on_snek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah but it opens us up to the same lawsuits. It opens every single interactive website anyone has made or anyone is thinking of making to potential lawsuits.

1
Johneboy46464 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank you! Trying to research it back in the day had be confused. You summed it up!

4
fasterth 4 points ago +6 / -2

The bill protects everyone, even us, from stuff posted to your site's servers.

Before 230: random dude posts cp on your site, YOU are in trouble.

After 230: random dude posts cp on your site, you're protected.

So the idea was to protect you and giving you the chance to delete illegal things from your site without getting in trouble at all, but they wrote it in such a way that allowed them to also delete "otherwise questionable content", which they've taken it upon themselves to mean "we'll remove anything we don't like, even presidential tweets".

Eliminating it entirely will destroy all social media, but at this point, it's for the better because it will destroy big tech in the process (this move would be the equivalent of going full scorched earth against them).

(pd: that said, I'm not sure if text-only speech is allowed without 230. if it was, we wouldn't have to take this site down)

(pd2: the better move would be to reform it, but traitors in congress are completely bought by big tech, or to have the FCC clarify it, but Ajit Pai is pozzed too, he pulled an AG BARR on us saying he'll do it and then didn't do jack shit)

1
deleted 1 point ago +4 / -3
-1
ThePowerOfPrayer -1 points ago +1 / -2

Are we putting warnings on posts? Do we have clear rules and expectations and hold all people who join to the same rules?

If so, it wouldn't apply to us.

2
no_step_on_snek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Draw me a picture of how that works exactly.

1
Eu-is-socialist 1 point ago +1 / -0

it's for the better because it will destroy big tech in the process (this move would be the equivalent of going full scorched earth against them).

Want to bet this won't affect them one bit ? They already have the best tools in the world at their disposal . They will not let anything questionable on their sites.

The only ones who will be affected by the complete removal will be the smaller sites. Who don't have either the money or the legal teams to fight any of this.

The solution isn't complete removal. Just modify it so that if they censor legal content ... they loose their protection.

0
ProdigalPlaneswalker 0 points ago +1 / -1

I'm not sure if text-only speech is allowed without 230

Usenet existed before 230

4
Jjones23 4 points ago +4 / -0

Basically, the argument is this: section 230 carved out special protections for these internet platforms. Mainly that they would be immune from liability if someone on their platform commits defamation, for instance. This is different than, say, The NY Times where if they print slanderous material they can be sued for it. This was all premised on a “good faith” clause in their ability to, basically, rid their cites of the worst kinds of shit. Like child porn, for instance.

It’s obvious, in the 90’s, no one could have predicted what these websites have become.

But now, the argument is, these companies are no longer acting like a platform (like a phone company) but a publisher (like NYT). That they are censoring content specific material and basically becoming like a publisher, and therefore shouldn’t be given special protections. I happen to agree, I think we must stop what is in front of us.

The problem is, as written, most of these websites won’t allow comments at all on their websites. It’s a different problem for congress to handle.

2
Crockett 2 points ago +2 / -0

The intention of 230 is actually valuable. It's effectively the same protection that a shopping mall has for the speech of people walking around in it. You can't sue the mall for another customer slandering you while you're walking around. Shopping malls act as public spaces. They kind of have to be, to fulfill their function as a place of free congregation, plus the malls have neither the interest nor capacity to monitor and control the speech of all people in the mall. A Town Square can still be a Town Square even if it's privately owned.

Once upon a time, it made sense to offer this protection as a platform to websites, because they were platforms. But two things have happened since then.

First, they have become more essential to public discourse. They have become public services. The law can compel you to grant access to someone to use a private road, if it is the only reasonable way for them to access their property. Certainly Twitter and Facebook have become places for public discourse that everyone with first amendment rights has the right to speak in. Twitter is the printing press of today.

Secondly, these companies have begun to exert editorial control over users' content. They have rules about what can and can't be said, and how things must be said, and assert full, sole, unaccountable authority to censor, suppress, and manipulate any user content they wish. And they have the technology to do so at a mass scale.

So on two fronts, the justification for Section 230 as it applies to social media has been completely undermined. But the principle is still important. Imagine an internet where a leftist could come on .win, anonymously post some libel or something, then sue the website and have the whole site taken down. For that matter, imagine a world where a restaurant can get sued by a customer that overhears another customer saying something offensive.

As for the vagueness of 230, it's partially by design. Obviously websites need some right to moderate content on their site. A) for spam, B) for illegal material, and C) because they get to determine what their platform is about. But C goes out the window once the platform positions itself as an integral layer of social, marketing, informational, and political infrastructure of the whole world. Twitter is not the equivalent of a knitting forum that doesn't want to let people talk about about scuba diving. By becoming more important and more public, they've lost their "private space" status, and they've lost their "acting in good faith" presumption by acting in bad faith.

So what to do about 230? You could argue it's an enforcement issue, and that on its face, editorializing user content makes you a publisher not a platform, therefore liable under current law. But we really need some rewording, clarification, or rewriting of the law itself, to make it explicit what differentiates platform and publisher, and what protections and privileges come with each of those statuses. Strict removal of the section would open the gates for a ton of litigation. (And that's not a bad way for this kind of statue to form, by the way. What would happen is a bunch of suits are filed, cases work their way to higher courts, and important courts, probably SCOTUS eventually, would decide what statutes work for properly separating platform and publisher. A lot of lawyers would get rich along the way, however).

It's wise of Trump to demand complete removal up front, though. It's a classic Trump tactic to ask for more than you want. Then people will freak out and say "Whoa whoa! Let's not be hasty. How about we just modify it so everyone's happy without getting a million lawyers involved?" rather than them just saying "Meh, no."

0
wethepepe 0 points ago +2 / -2

im guessing: monopolies are great when you're in them.

getting rid of 230 will probably destroy their monopoly, is my guess

2
no_step_on_snek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Getting rid of 230 entrenches their monopoly. Every single website on the internet that allows comments is protected by 230. That includes this site. Without 230, some brigade decides to post Micky mouse fanfic on our website and the next thing we are getting sued by Disney into the ground. The only companies that can survive that environment are the ones with big legal teams. Do I need to name those sites for you?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
no_step_on_snek 2 points ago +2 / -0

You want this site gone? Parler gone? Bitchute gone? You think multi billion dollar sites with huge legal teams and AI that can moderate their content before anyone even sees it need 230 protection? Do you honestly believe that repealing the law that protects us on the internet will hurt the big tech sites at all?

2
Eu-is-socialist 2 points ago +2 / -0

DO you think he cares. Most people don't understand even what they themselves write.

1
Eu-is-socialist 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would prefer if they changed it.

Censure anything legal and you are a publisher and no 230 protection for you.

If it's completely removed the tech giants will be unstoppable. No way a startup could ever compete .

29
OccasionalDr.Cortex 29 points ago +32 / -3

Ho lee fuk

8
Strike_Eagle784 8 points ago +10 / -2

Wi Tu Lo

7
Kobes_Helicopter 7 points ago +7 / -0

Bang Ding Ow

3
Strike_Eagle784 3 points ago +3 / -0

Somehow made funnier by your username, kek.

4
live_free 4 points ago +6 / -2

Fuk Yoo Jak

4
Gurren_Laggan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wee Guo Loo

-Big Mike's Dick

-1
wizdom -1 points ago +1 / -2

Cum of Som Yung Guy

2
_deleted_ 2 points ago +2 / -0

Som ting wong

26
rob0Pede 26 points ago +26 / -0

Get the buckets ready boys!! We gon’ swimming in salt!

24
Qualityproduct 24 points ago +24 / -0

Why does it seem he's baiting with the desk thing? So eloquent.

3
ProdigalPlaneswalker 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's a reminder that he is still President.

18
AmericaFirstMAGA88 18 points ago +18 / -0

Good.

Next Up: Insurrection Act & Martial Law

We have no choice; we must stop the commie coup

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
18
Mishabird 18 points ago +18 / -0

I just hope he isn’t backstabbed by Senate Republicans. Too many of them are at the big tech trough.

1
TheWinningNeverStops 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they do that's more people to add to the list.

14
Patriotfire1990 14 points ago +14 / -0

Big privileges given to big tech

14
Mooma 14 points ago +14 / -0

Hi @jack time to shave that beard, no facial hair in federal prison. (Unless you have the beard because you're a muslim @jackass)

5
undef 5 points ago +5 / -0

Send him to Gitmo.

Drop him out of the helicopter along the way.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
Fenianlad 1 point ago +1 / -0

He’s going to need the protection

13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
4
KajensAngel 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes.

-29
deleted -29 points ago +3 / -32
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
5
pepepede_69 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yikes

2
FearDaNazgulz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its from an influx of pedes

2
fasterth 2 points ago +2 / -0

deport

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
11
SethRichsgoldwatch 11 points ago +12 / -1

Fastest sticky in the west

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
9
2A_Conservative 9 points ago +10 / -1

Can he do that before Jan20 or after Jan20 ?

34
webthing 34 points ago +36 / -2

Doesn't matter Trump won.

Did you watch the testimony from Michigan today.

Trump won Michigan by a lot!

6
friendofno1 6 points ago +7 / -1

It’s almost like nobody is paying attention. Folks, we have a great big beautiful win. Fabulous win. The best win.

5
tragician 5 points ago +5 / -0

yeah except my entire extended family who supports trump and only gets their trump news from fox and the mainstream press thinks trumps fucked and think im a conspiracy theorist.

0
friendofno1 0 points ago +1 / -1

What family? .win is your family. :)

-10
bighomiebeenchillin -10 points ago +4 / -14

ok but da results got certified for biden tho... da college niggas vote in two weeks. like wtf is da move from here? where are da supremes !??

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
9
Pat_Mac 9 points ago +9 / -0

Heres the --->shit/fan<---

2
friendofno1 2 points ago +3 / -1

And if you direct your focus up to the ceiling here, and look really closely, you’ll notice the spot just where the fecal matter makes contact with the fan blades, right along the edges here.

9
RevDrEBuzzMiller 9 points ago +9 / -0

They had a HUGE hand in this farce.

NUKE THEM FROM ORBIT

1
WhoMurderedSethRich 1 point ago +1 / -0

*YUGE

8
bubadmt 8 points ago +8 / -0

When is the NDAA set to be voted on?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
8
Trumpnado_warning 8 points ago +8 / -0

HOT!

8
deleted 8 points ago +9 / -1
8
Ben45 8 points ago +8 / -0

TERMINATE IT

8
USMC1775Nov10 8 points ago +8 / -0

Fuk yeah! Hold the line! No optics, no focus groups, no fuks just so what is right for the country! MAGA 2020

7
undef 7 points ago +7 / -0

About fucking time. Take the gloves off.

7
rocco_saint 7 points ago +7 / -0

Ok guys. ELI5 and be patient with me please. But I thought Section 230 was in some ways a good thing in that at it's base it was implemented to protect platforms like us td.win? It's only the fact that loopholes in the policy were being exploited by big tech to censor us. My assumption is that GEOTUS knows this and taken an extreme stance in the hopes of having those loopholes closed. But if pressed and the veto happens couldn't this end up backfiring for us in the end?

The concern I'm getting at is the elimination of Section 230 would remove protection from all platforms. And unfortunately for us the left has a bigger warchest for lawfare and the backing of government to lay siege against patriotic platforms like ours.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
6
45-2020 6 points ago +7 / -1

Section 230 needs to be clarified, I have no problem with an Internet Service Provider having 'immunity' for providing a service that is open to everyone. When groups like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube choose to suppress some content (i.e. Breitbart, InfoWars) and promote others (i.e. CNN) they're clearly acting as publishers and should not have legal protections for their content.

1
no_step_on_snek 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are we acting as publishers here on this site when we deport commie shills?

0
CaptainChrisPBacon 0 points ago +2 / -2

No more Immunity.

5
salvecitizen 5 points ago +6 / -1

Let's shut down the CCP!

5
SteamyHams 5 points ago +5 / -0

We’re in the endgame now And we win here

4
Scungette 4 points ago +4 / -0

I went to this tweet and when I pressed “like” Twitter generated a message asking me if I wanted to like it. “Are you sure?” Very hostile, a veiled threat. Or what? Twitter is keeping track and will block my account? Oooh, I’m shaking! Lol. What the hell?

4
BiglyMagaMamma 4 points ago +4 / -0

GEOTUS unleashed. VETO 230 first, insurrection act second. My body is ready!

4
RedPillLegendMAGA 4 points ago +5 / -1

Abolish230

4
Carbum 4 points ago +4 / -0

So it begins..

3
nickybops 3 points ago +3 / -0

My dick is hard as fuck

3
CuzMerica 3 points ago +3 / -0

It’s on!

1
MajColNightRider 1 point ago +1 / -0

Like Donkey-Kong!

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
3
XxxRDTPRNxxX 3 points ago +3 / -0

Honestly, If he had made this a priority early in his presidency we might not have to stop the steal right now.

3
Leadforpeds 3 points ago +3 / -0

CENSORCUCKS BTFO FOREVER