Yep people who disagree but expect to get result will have a different mindset than an yes man and maybe make something more lasting and a bit more fair. I don't want a legislation that will switch things up I want one that will protect freedom of speech for both sides. Let the better ideas win not censor one side and let the feeble minded thinking their idiocy is the best idea
There are multiple commissioners on the FCC, as described in that article. Disagreement between two doesn't mean the order is DOA without changing the whole commission.
We've all heard the "publisher vs. platform" argument before, but that really is what this comes down to. Twitter's argument that "we're a private company so we can do what we want" does not hold up - and will not hold up in court - for a couple of reasons.
Book and magazine publishers are private companies, too. They pick and choose what gets to appear on their pages. In return for having the freedom to do this, they can also be hauled into court if they allow things to appear that can be shown to be libelous. Publishers can, will, and have been sued into oblivion for libel. "We're a private company" does not protect any of them.
The phone company is a platform. They let anyone use their service and say whatever they want. In return for this freedom that they provide their customers, the phone company is immune from lawsuit over anything their customers say.
The trouble is that social media is uncharted territory. Right from the start, all of them decided they were a new combination of both publisher and platform. That is, "We get to control what people say on our pages because we're a private company," but also "we cannot be sued because we're just providing a service."
They cannot have it both ways. Except that they do. That's what people are so upset about.
Removing posts from a Twitter or FB account is one thing. They might be able to argue that as a publisher, they are allowed to do that. Okay. Remember, though, that publishers are open to lawsuit if they allow libelous statements to stand.
But they all shot themselves in the foot when this "fact checking" stuff started.
When they literally slap a label on someone's post that calls it "false," "unverified," "questionable," or whatever - with that person clearly identified by name and photo - they are publicly calling that person a liar, or ignorant, or both.
That's libel.
That's why Trump waited until yesterday to move on this, because that's when Twitter gave him exactly what he was looking for. When Twitter slapped one of those "fact check/not true" labels on his post about mail-in voting, they were very publicly calling him a liar.
That's libel.
Doesn't matter whether he actually is a liar or not. That's for a court to decide, not Twitter. Twitter doesn't get to go around labeling anyone as a liar, or ignorant, or criminal whenever they feel like it and have no consequences from this.
But Twitter very publicly called the President of the United States ignorant and a liar and they did it in front of the whole world. They can't take it back now and I would not be surprised if they have to defend it in court.
They are all going to have to decide whether they're publisher or platform. They cannot go on being some hybrid where they get the best of both worlds and can label anybody any way they want with no consequences. It will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court, and it will be interesting.
If they are traded on the stock exchange, they are not a private company. They are publicly owned at that point. If they want to be a private company, then they should buy back all their stocks and give up that investor money. It's that simple.
Shut your mouth bigot! I have got into so many arguments about the whole "private" company thing, their rational makes zero sense. End of the day all these dipshits can come up with it ohh its not govt owned so its "private". Yea tell that to the stock market and the 10000s of owners of the stock.
Well, we all know the left just ignores facts. And they think their opinions are facts. Just look at what Twitter linked to as a "fact" check. A CNN opinion piece. These people are just garbage and aren't even worth arguing with anymore.
MIT Study; "As with all forms of voter fraud, documented instances of fraud related to VBM are rare. However, even many scholars who argue that fraud is generally rare agree that fraud with VBM voting seems to be more frequent than with in-person voting. "--https://electionlab.mit.edu/research/voting-mail-and-absentee-voting
Trump should just say fuck it, I'll fly AF1 down to Florida and cast my vote in person. Just to shut the leftist cunts up and take away their talking point.
MIT has been selling bullshit "experts" to agree with whatever you want for decades. Remember when MIT computer science "experts" said Linux was definetly ripped off from SCO?
They manipulate the data, There is more in person voter fraud because there is far more in person voting and they still have communities like Broward County and Palm Beach County with experienced vote fraud experts.
But there is a larger percentage of Voter Fraud with the Mail In ballots. There have been half a dozen convictions just in the last couple of weeks.
Jack realized today that he fucked up and removed the Trump check, said their fact checking was incorrect. Too late Dorsey, we've seen this game too many times.
Right on the money. It's not about the "fact" (opinion) checking. That Jack and the left thinks that shows they're even dumber than previously thought. It's that Twitter and a ton of these Silicon Valley social media companies apply their rules inconsistently and basically only to their political opponents.
Remove your silly PC opinion checks, leftists, it matters not. Most of us on the right here only care about fairness. You can have your irrational, censorious rules... you just need to apply them EQUALLY.
I just sent that idiot Yoyoel a direct message. Watch me get banned from that POS site now for having a different opinion from the Hitler loving administrators of Twitter.
Voter fraud is real, we have seen SEVERAL cases in the past few weeks alone. Both Republicans and democrats have tried it, and I think it's safe to say for every 1 that is caught there's 100 that aren't. There should be bipartisan support to curb these incidents.
A. There are political operatives working for campaigns at a relatively low level of politics who know the ins and outs of bribing, and solicited bribes for stuffing the ballot box for relatively little cash (there exists a demand side economy).
B. The Judge felt fine taking the bribes for such low amounts suggesting that either there is low risk/its common to do this, or he was a mixture somehow of desperate and stupid.
Very troubling.
And the way media portrays this question is retarded too. Like, they word it as if there is no risk of fraud/fraud wouldn’t increase when their sources indicate it’s not expected for the rate of fraud to increase but as that rate gets applied to more elections the total amount of fraud absolutely goes up - it’s just a question of how much exactly
Obviously mail-in ballots is the dems' sore spot, else they wouldn't have started tagging him on specifically those posts. He's gonna hammer em on exactly that, going forward. It's gonna be gr8!
I mentioned on another thread that I have an original TWTR login from 2007. I never used it for exactly your reasons.
However, as SM has evolved, and Trump has shown the way, I think I'm going to enter the fray.
Forget reasoned debate, measured response or the need to defend a POV. Rather, just attack using the same leftists tactics to create as much noise as possible.
The ludicrous thing is that even if there WEREN'T demonstrable examples, it doesn't take a genius to see how mail-in-voting would be ripe for fraud. The media handwaving away as if it's ridiculous the concerned objections that something could go wrong at any of the half-dozen insecure points between the ballots being mailed out to everyone's residential addresses through the postal service and making their way back to election offices to be counted is mind-numbingly retarded. There's a reason ballot boxes are locked and watched at polling locations. Mail-in-voting would be like leaving the ballot box unguarded and unlocked in someone's house over the weekend with the front door propped open and just trusting that no one tampers with it, then multiplied by several million.
I love it. Every time I read a Trump tweet, I’m reminded that any other Republican would turn tail and run from any of these farcical challenges raised by the Marxist Left. Thank the LORD for PDJT!
and then when trump leaves office, what's going to happen to online censorship? you can call for white genocide on twitter. but if you take that same tweet and replace it with jew or black, you get banned in 2 seconds.
Did you get the email from them this morning? Got my hopes up, but Trumps profile on there only has 28k followers. I don't see him trading 70 mill for 28k, even know a lot would come over. I don't see him moving off twitter. And if he does, I could SWEAR I remember Parscale saying it would be Parler.
It wasnt even a fact check, it was an argument about political policy. The sun is 93 million miles from earth is a fact check You could have a "fact check" anytime a politician says anything when you take this to its logical conclusion. It speaks to the larger premise that they're dishonest, no onenis the arbiter of the truth when it comes to political ideology. There are references to mail voting being vulnerable to more fraud and it's not as if you need fact check to understand how it could be susceptible to many issues compared to voting in person. Also the sources of the fact checks, CNN? Wapo? Reporters who reported that trump colluded with Putin to steal the election are now fact checking about election integrity?
Dude, When I first clicked on that fact check link, I was fully expecting to see something written up by a judge, or lawyers at least. SOME sort of authority on it. When I started scrolling down through the talking points, and then got to the REPORTERS, claiming facts, I started grinning. By the time I got tired of it I was laughing. I knew Trump was going to shove that back up their ass, but I didn't think it would be this. They'll be eligible for law suits now, from the people they've censored.
Its really telling that the thing that pushed Twitter over the edge and got themselves in big trouble is a tweet about mail in voter fraud by the President. Their handlers clearly told them to nix anything about voter fraud as that's clearly what the gameplan is for this upcoming election.
Double checked that "DONALD J TRUMP" was what I had selected.
You know what, I used to vote mixed ticket. I felt that it was about finding the best person to the job. Now it's about Good versus Evil and that makes me so sad.
Did you all see that faggot bald reporter asking his question today at the briefing like three times in a row? "But it's wIdElY-kNoWn that there's nO dIrEcT evidence of any fraud by mail-in ballots.."
This is the tweet everyone needed to see.
I hope he starts retweeting cases of voter fraud using mail-in ballots, and various other cases involving absentee voters.
Will twitter take the BAIT and EDIT his comment again???
EXECUTIVE ORDER INCOMING!!!!
if they don't edit it then they are admitting it's true by not fact checking it
before Trump can use his new executive order he's going to have to overhaul the FCC and hire new people..
https://media.thedonald.win/thedonald/post/wQCcqK6B.jpeg
Grenell is currently free...
So the head of Twitter’s “fact check” Dept has history of tweets lacking integrity. 🤔
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8361349/amp/Head-Twitters-fact-checking-history-anti-Trump-tweets.html#click=https://t.co/CMhq3UpGQk
I have such a crush on that man and his love of transparency.
I'm OK with people that disagree, but if they actively work to subvert the MAGA agenda, I want them gone.
Pai is based.
having yes man is how you get your agenda passed. what kind of idiot would put people who hate him to enforce his agenda??
that's like Steve Jobs hiring a bunch of people from Microsoft and still on Microsoft payroll
ONLY if they are disagreements in good faith, which they rarely are, not with the uniparty snakes.
Yep people who disagree but expect to get result will have a different mindset than an yes man and maybe make something more lasting and a bit more fair. I don't want a legislation that will switch things up I want one that will protect freedom of speech for both sides. Let the better ideas win not censor one side and let the feeble minded thinking their idiocy is the best idea
Wow, they sure came to that conclusion fast! The 30 day countdown hasn't even started yet!
There are 5 commissioners and the article says two of them disagree on the draft. This isn't any kind of final determination.
The swamp will fight for their surveillance/propaganda branches with all they have.
There are multiple commissioners on the FCC, as described in that article. Disagreement between two doesn't mean the order is DOA without changing the whole commission.
Yup a perfect Trump hammer! No matter which option Twitter chooses they lose!!
Why would you bait the President and a ceo- he is ready for war at this point
Fact Check: According to CNN, these are not the droids you're looking for.
I love that he's fighting so hard on this, that this is the hill he's taking a stand on. He knows how important it is and how badly Dems cheat.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/21/ex-philly-election-official-pleads-guilty-to-voter-fraud/
Not 'mail fraud' but vote fraud, stuffing ballot boxes for Democrats
Already being done! Search his account for "tranny" among other terms.
SPEZ: also "fag"!
We've all heard the "publisher vs. platform" argument before, but that really is what this comes down to. Twitter's argument that "we're a private company so we can do what we want" does not hold up - and will not hold up in court - for a couple of reasons.
Book and magazine publishers are private companies, too. They pick and choose what gets to appear on their pages. In return for having the freedom to do this, they can also be hauled into court if they allow things to appear that can be shown to be libelous. Publishers can, will, and have been sued into oblivion for libel. "We're a private company" does not protect any of them.
The phone company is a platform. They let anyone use their service and say whatever they want. In return for this freedom that they provide their customers, the phone company is immune from lawsuit over anything their customers say.
The trouble is that social media is uncharted territory. Right from the start, all of them decided they were a new combination of both publisher and platform. That is, "We get to control what people say on our pages because we're a private company," but also "we cannot be sued because we're just providing a service."
They cannot have it both ways. Except that they do. That's what people are so upset about.
Removing posts from a Twitter or FB account is one thing. They might be able to argue that as a publisher, they are allowed to do that. Okay. Remember, though, that publishers are open to lawsuit if they allow libelous statements to stand.
But they all shot themselves in the foot when this "fact checking" stuff started.
When they literally slap a label on someone's post that calls it "false," "unverified," "questionable," or whatever - with that person clearly identified by name and photo - they are publicly calling that person a liar, or ignorant, or both.
That's libel.
That's why Trump waited until yesterday to move on this, because that's when Twitter gave him exactly what he was looking for. When Twitter slapped one of those "fact check/not true" labels on his post about mail-in voting, they were very publicly calling him a liar.
That's libel.
Doesn't matter whether he actually is a liar or not. That's for a court to decide, not Twitter. Twitter doesn't get to go around labeling anyone as a liar, or ignorant, or criminal whenever they feel like it and have no consequences from this.
But Twitter very publicly called the President of the United States ignorant and a liar and they did it in front of the whole world. They can't take it back now and I would not be surprised if they have to defend it in court.
They are all going to have to decide whether they're publisher or platform. They cannot go on being some hybrid where they get the best of both worlds and can label anybody any way they want with no consequences. It will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court, and it will be interesting.
"Publishers can, will, and have been sued into oblivion for libel."
EGG ZAK LEE
Why is that racist Trump supporter hassling that poor innocent Native American gentleman?
CHOOOOOOOOOO
POTUS should throw your ass into the Supreme Court, so you can throw the book at these tech bastards.
haha, thanks - he can call me up for service any time!
Plus their "fact check" wasn't factual.
Yeah, it included opinion pieces. They royally fucked up.
If they are traded on the stock exchange, they are not a private company. They are publicly owned at that point. If they want to be a private company, then they should buy back all their stocks and give up that investor money. It's that simple.
Excellent point.
Shut your mouth bigot! I have got into so many arguments about the whole "private" company thing, their rational makes zero sense. End of the day all these dipshits can come up with it ohh its not govt owned so its "private". Yea tell that to the stock market and the 10000s of owners of the stock.
Well, we all know the left just ignores facts. And they think their opinions are facts. Just look at what Twitter linked to as a "fact" check. A CNN opinion piece. These people are just garbage and aren't even worth arguing with anymore.
Don't play into their fetish. Why do you think they sought out content review roles to begin with.
You were downvoted to zero. The cry baby lefties are in here.
We live in their head rent freeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Uh no that's just not a good comment.
K, Mom
Ok pedo.
MIT Study; "As with all forms of voter fraud, documented instances of fraud related to VBM are rare. However, even many scholars who argue that fraud is generally rare agree that fraud with VBM voting seems to be more frequent than with in-person voting. "--https://electionlab.mit.edu/research/voting-mail-and-absentee-voting
But that's not real mail in voting ~some blue haired
"If the President can vote by mail, then so can I." - I can't count how many times I've seen that argument in the last week.
"If the President can fly on AirForce 1, so can you?"
Trump should just say fuck it, I'll fly AF1 down to Florida and cast my vote in person. Just to shut the leftist cunts up and take away their talking point.
https://imgur.com/a/5vJPhWM
MIT has been selling bullshit "experts" to agree with whatever you want for decades. Remember when MIT computer science "experts" said Linux was definetly ripped off from SCO?
You must be as old as I am to know SCO!
Young or old, we all must pay SCO for the right to use a computer!
Get off my lawn!
I never thought I'd become the guy who gets pissed off about someone on my lawn or parking in front of my house.
crumples PBR can on my front porch
You mean, apart from the parts in the codebase that were copy/pasted along with the original copyright notices? :D
But if we can kill just one fraudulent vote...
They manipulate the data, There is more in person voter fraud because there is far more in person voting and they still have communities like Broward County and Palm Beach County with experienced vote fraud experts.
But there is a larger percentage of Voter Fraud with the Mail In ballots. There have been half a dozen convictions just in the last couple of weeks.
Just because the Fake News ignores cases of voter fraud doesn't mean they don't exist!
Jack realized today that he fucked up and removed the Trump check, said their fact checking was incorrect. Too late Dorsey, we've seen this game too many times.
They're still there
Right on the money. It's not about the "fact" (opinion) checking. That Jack and the left thinks that shows they're even dumber than previously thought. It's that Twitter and a ton of these Silicon Valley social media companies apply their rules inconsistently and basically only to their political opponents.
Remove your silly PC opinion checks, leftists, it matters not. Most of us on the right here only care about fairness. You can have your irrational, censorious rules... you just need to apply them EQUALLY.
Wow! He actually tagged him. He rarely does that.
"Dear diary: Today the President of the United States of America referenced me directly in a tweet..."
Accurate.
Jim Acosta is somewhere crying out of jealousy. And Eminem too.
I just sent that idiot Yoyoel a direct message. Watch me get banned from that POS site now for having a different opinion from the Hitler loving administrators of Twitter.
Did you tell him to go fuck himself?
In a sense. Here's the direct message to him:
Trump called you out for your falseness. You are a biased loser. Do your job and stop censoring free speech, Hitler.
Perfect, F for your account
The rule that I use: if the left wants it, then it must be bad for free people.
This rule has never failed me.
Works for me.
Been f5ing all day just waiting for that EO. Patiently waiting.
,
Yessir I have seen the draft. I just want to see him tweet the EO and lock it in.
And then ENFORCE it.
I hope he's trying to make Twitter add another fact check just to tweak them.
Voter fraud is real, we have seen SEVERAL cases in the past few weeks alone. Both Republicans and democrats have tried it, and I think it's safe to say for every 1 that is caught there's 100 that aren't. There should be bipartisan support to curb these incidents.
The case with the PA judge is telling.
A. There are political operatives working for campaigns at a relatively low level of politics who know the ins and outs of bribing, and solicited bribes for stuffing the ballot box for relatively little cash (there exists a demand side economy). B. The Judge felt fine taking the bribes for such low amounts suggesting that either there is low risk/its common to do this, or he was a mixture somehow of desperate and stupid.
Very troubling.
And the way media portrays this question is retarded too. Like, they word it as if there is no risk of fraud/fraud wouldn’t increase when their sources indicate it’s not expected for the rate of fraud to increase but as that rate gets applied to more elections the total amount of fraud absolutely goes up - it’s just a question of how much exactly
It's crazy I have a lefty friend in Ireland who laughs at the US when I tell him we don't have voter ID. He thinks it's silly we don't.
Obviously mail-in ballots is the dems' sore spot, else they wouldn't have started tagging him on specifically those posts. He's gonna hammer em on exactly that, going forward. It's gonna be gr8!
I mentioned on another thread that I have an original TWTR login from 2007. I never used it for exactly your reasons.
However, as SM has evolved, and Trump has shown the way, I think I'm going to enter the fray.
Forget reasoned debate, measured response or the need to defend a POV. Rather, just attack using the same leftists tactics to create as much noise as possible.
I like to go there and get the liberals to screw up and implode on their own talking points. Not much else going on there, though.
The ludicrous thing is that even if there WEREN'T demonstrable examples, it doesn't take a genius to see how mail-in-voting would be ripe for fraud. The media handwaving away as if it's ridiculous the concerned objections that something could go wrong at any of the half-dozen insecure points between the ballots being mailed out to everyone's residential addresses through the postal service and making their way back to election offices to be counted is mind-numbingly retarded. There's a reason ballot boxes are locked and watched at polling locations. Mail-in-voting would be like leaving the ballot box unguarded and unlocked in someone's house over the weekend with the front door propped open and just trusting that no one tampers with it, then multiplied by several million.
"We can't make murder illegal until someone murders."
They caved. Said "Oops" again. Nobody buys it. You made your choice Jack.
Twitter took the bait and are going to pay for it, as well as FB, Reddit, et al.
The MSM are truly the enemy of the people.
I love it. Every time I read a Trump tweet, I’m reminded that any other Republican would turn tail and run from any of these farcical challenges raised by the Marxist Left. Thank the LORD for PDJT!
Fact check them Trump!
Twitter has angered VSGEOTUS
Twitter basically handed him their own heads on a silver platter. Enjoy the show.
and then when trump leaves office, what's going to happen to online censorship? you can call for white genocide on twitter. but if you take that same tweet and replace it with jew or black, you get banned in 2 seconds.
Fact check this you fucking losers.
Tell that to your haterz!!
This is the scene from Braveheart where Gibson is asked where he’s going and answers “to pick a fight.”
Will they take the 2nd bait? Tune in later today for the next episode on TheDonald.win
Twitter isn't trying to make the case for anything. Twitter is silencing Americans, at the behest of a hostile foreign power, and that is it.
but they just keep saying "no evidence!!" no matter how much evidence there is. Its the same thing over and over with media.
They just figure if they repeat the lie enough people will believe it
Did you get the email from them this morning? Got my hopes up, but Trumps profile on there only has 28k followers. I don't see him trading 70 mill for 28k, even know a lot would come over. I don't see him moving off twitter. And if he does, I could SWEAR I remember Parscale saying it would be Parler.
@yoyoel gets a shout out lmao!
It wasnt even a fact check, it was an argument about political policy. The sun is 93 million miles from earth is a fact check You could have a "fact check" anytime a politician says anything when you take this to its logical conclusion. It speaks to the larger premise that they're dishonest, no onenis the arbiter of the truth when it comes to political ideology. There are references to mail voting being vulnerable to more fraud and it's not as if you need fact check to understand how it could be susceptible to many issues compared to voting in person. Also the sources of the fact checks, CNN? Wapo? Reporters who reported that trump colluded with Putin to steal the election are now fact checking about election integrity?
Dude, When I first clicked on that fact check link, I was fully expecting to see something written up by a judge, or lawyers at least. SOME sort of authority on it. When I started scrolling down through the talking points, and then got to the REPORTERS, claiming facts, I started grinning. By the time I got tired of it I was laughing. I knew Trump was going to shove that back up their ass, but I didn't think it would be this. They'll be eligible for law suits now, from the people they've censored.
BOOM! YO-YOEL!
RELEASE THE KRAKEN!!!
(The Nadler anti-paper ballot video.)
Its really telling that the thing that pushed Twitter over the edge and got themselves in big trouble is a tweet about mail in voter fraud by the President. Their handlers clearly told them to nix anything about voter fraud as that's clearly what the gameplan is for this upcoming election.
Like #1000, checking in.
if it gets passed, we do the same. we can play their game. fk it!
Twitter and Facebook should hear the warning from the people who defend the wall.
Lawsuits Are Coming.
Bring on the Executive Order.
Trump gonna get banned from Twitter. Just watch.
I dare 'em. https://twitter.com/dusty1207/status/1265305053268791296
I voted today.
Double checked that "DONALD J TRUMP" was what I had selected.
You know what, I used to vote mixed ticket. I felt that it was about finding the best person to the job. Now it's about Good versus Evil and that makes me so sad.
The Voting ladies said turnout was good!
Did you all see that faggot bald reporter asking his question today at the briefing like three times in a row? "But it's wIdElY-kNoWn that there's nO dIrEcT evidence of any fraud by mail-in ballots.."
I couldn't do K-Mac's job. I'd get too many penalties for roughing the reporters.