Why are we debating whether to remove, or keep Section 230 for everyone? We should be calling the CCP-backed social media giants out by name: Twitter, Facebook, Google, YouTube, etc.
With their ever-increasing censorship of "objectionable content", they've lost their Section 230 privileges, not the rest of us: Parler, Rumble, Gab, Minds, MeWe, Telegram, BitChute, etc.
If an amendment is required, it should describe the specific corporations that are losing Section 230 while excluding everyone else. Then, we should replace "otherwise objectionable content" in Section 230 with "otherwise illegal content". It's our duty to ensure that unconstitutional "hate speech" laws and other laws aren't enacted in the meantime.
Portion of Russell Ramsland Jr. affidavit
One question comes to mind: How many machines were in the 4 referenced Detroit locations? Here's some quick math.
2000 max # of ballots/hour/machine estimated. 2 hours + (38 mins / 60 mins) = 2.6334 hours. 2000 * 2.6334 ≈ 5267 max # of ballots/machine.
94867 calculated as max # of processable ballots. 94867 / 5267 ≈ 18 min # of machines required for all 4 locations, based on the given data.
384733 counted ballots / 94867 ≈ 4.0555 times more machines required in total. 18 * 4.0555 ≈ 73 min # of machines required for all 4 locations, based on the given data.
73 / 4 locations = 18.25 min # of machines per location to process 384733 ballots in 2.6334 hours, assuming 2000 ballots per hour per machine, or 5267 ballots per machine within 2 hours and 38 mins.
Only thing left to do is find out how many Dominion machines were in these 4 locations, and compare them to: 5267 * ?? actual # of machines = 384733.
Assuming they know the total # of machines that were in the 4 Detroit locations in total (likely 18 machines), they should include how many Dominion machines were actually in Detroit, if they haven't already. Godspeed.