Facebook Deletes “Donald Trump is Our President” Facebook Fan Page with 3,276,000 Fans!

[Mac1958]

There is no more American, or liberal, value than freedom of expression.

This has nothing to do with the First Amendment or this law or that law. This is about a segment of our population that chooses to spit on the spirit of that critical and unique liberal value because it's more authoritarian than it is liberal.

This is a cultural problem. We should all support and advocate for freedom of expression, in virtually every context. Ideas and innovation and solutions and progress all come from getting everything out in the open. I think we all know that.

Liberalism is in the process of being replaced by illiberal leftist authoritarianism.
.

Like it or not, a company should be allowed to make decisions about their business. If FB feels a certain page will drive away more people than it will attract, then they have every right to remove it.

The ironic thing about all of this is the damn page is still there. I opened it this morning.

Yes, the company is well within its rights to do this whenever it wants.

As I said, this is about something else, though.
.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Historically the left has never been a champion of free speech. On the contrary, the left has always sought to silence speech. That's what they do.

You do realize that Facebook is a private entity and can make their own rules?

That is changing.
The internet is a means of public communication today, and is the main vehicle for such. Any company opening social media should be regulated to an extent that they must provide equal opportunity for speech etc.
Much the same way. for instance. as the Equal Housing laws were passed for property owners.

Boy that is a stretch

Regulating a Free Press is somewhere we do not want to go

?
Uh...no one is regulating free speech, actually the opposite. Keeping someone from "regulating" free speech on their own.
My point is valid, Social media is how people communicate today. Keeping it free and equal is important. LEFT or RIGHT.

Every social media site has the right to limit what is posted on it. I have been banned from a forum like this one for 1 Trump insult. That was their right.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There is no more American, or liberal, value than freedom of expression.

This has nothing to do with the First Amendment or this law or that law or Facebook or Trump. This is about a segment of our population that chooses to spit on the spirit of that critical and unique liberal value because that segment is more authoritarian than it is liberal.

This is a cultural problem. We should all support and advocate for freedom of expression, in virtually every context. Ideas and innovation and solutions and progress all come from getting everything out in the open. I think we all know that.

Liberalism is in the process of being replaced by illiberal leftist authoritarianism.
.

AMEN

Preach!!!



.

 

[Ringtone]

BILL OF RIGHTS for the Internet!

Antitrust for the NET!


No more Globalists Tech Tyrants controlling social media!


ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is enough. time has come

Capitalism at its best, eh?

Don't like it? Don't visit the site.

Except that it's not true capitalism because Facebook and Google are afforded a special protection that other publishers, indeed, that you and I, don't have as they violate the terms of that protection provided them by the people via Section 230 of the Communications Act.

Are any of you hypocrites, hysterical Trump haters or "constitutional scholars" going to address that point?

crickets chirping

 

[dblack]

Once again, Facebook attacks the 1st Amendment censoring Trump supporters.

Once again, Trumpsters display their ignorance of the Constitution and the First Amendment.

Once again, dblack engages in ignorantia affectata. Facebook advertises itself as an open public forum in terms of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which provides immunity from liability for providers of interactive computer services who publish information provided by others. Facebook routinely violates its own rules and moves the goalposts for no other reason than to censor conservative views, often defining them as indecent or offensive. Facebook actually features Antifa on its platform and has banned Patriot Prayer and other free speech advocates out of Berkeley, Seattle and Portland, for example, who oppose them.

If Facebook is going to behave as a published of leftist filth, censor conservative thought and hide behind the protections afforded a public provider under the law,. I say it's time to revoke its immunity. I say it should be treated for what it is, namely, a publisher.

Facebook is violating the spirit of constitutional law and the letter of pertinent civil law.

What say you to that?

I stand by my original point. None of that has anything to do with the First Amendment. The Trumpster claiming it does are dangerously stupid. They need to be stopped.

 

[Ringtone]

Every social media site has the right to limit what is posted on it. I have been banned from a forum like this one for 1 Trump insult. That was their right.

Once again, that is not the pont! The social media sites to which you allude are not immune to the responsibilities and consequences of a publisher to the extent that Facebook and Google's Youtube platform are! Facebook and Google are flagrantly violating the Section 230 of the Communications Act.

 

[dblack]

Every social media site has the right to limit what is posted on it. I have been banned from a forum like this one for 1 Trump insult. That was their right.

Once again, that is not the pont!

According to the idiot OP, this is a First Amendment issue. Heh...

 

[Cosmos]

BS

The First Amendment never mentions Facebook

Congress shall pass no laws regarding Facebook

This shows us what Democrats would do if they had the majority in the government.

 

[dblack]

BS

The First Amendment never mentions Facebook

Congress shall pass no laws regarding Facebook

This shows us what Democrats would do if they had the majority in the government.

?? How so. What do you think they'll do, based on "this".?

 

[toomuchtime_]

BS

The First Amendment never mentions Facebook

Congress shall pass no laws regarding Facebook

Yes, it does. It comes right after the part that guarantees a right to privacy.

 

[bodecea]

Once again, Facebook attacks the 1st Amendment censoring Trump supporters.

CRIMINAL Facebook Deletes "Donald Trump is Our President" Facebook Fan Page with 3,276,000 Fans!

It's still there. Just sayin' (trump hyphen)

 

[bodecea]

A Constitutional Amendment should be proposed to protect free speech on the internet and social media. These are the communication methods of our time. It would pass easily and stop the non sense.

Then we can post anything we want here without worrying about the TOS....cool.

 

[bodecea]

BILL OF RIGHTS for the Internet!

Antitrust for the NET!


No more Globalists Tech Tyrants controlling social media!


ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is enough. time has come

It's always fun to watch trump's cultists demonstrate again and again their ignorance of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And they do it so often.

 

[dblack]

BILL OF RIGHTS for the Internet!

Antitrust for the NET!


No more Globalists Tech Tyrants controlling social media!


ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is enough. time has come

It's always fun to watch trump's cultists demonstrate again and again their ignorance of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And they do it so often.

I don't it fun, or funny. These stupid fuckers are running our nation into the ground.

 

[bodecea]

Watch all the so-called con-servatives calling for private businesses to be taken over by the government.

 

[bodecea]

Once again, Facebook attacks the 1st Amendment censoring Trump supporters.

CRIMINAL Facebook Deletes "Donald Trump is Our President" Facebook Fan Page with 3,276,000 Fans!

left wingers fear the truth for some very good reasons, that is why they censor

LInk for you to read: The Bill of Rights (Amendments 1 - 10)

 

[WEATHER53]

All media is Very Concerned they will not have free reign again to rig the election.

 

[bodecea]

If only there was some way to start a competing social media platform. If only...

Apparently none of them are smart enough or motivated enough to do so.

 

[Ringtone]

Once again, Facebook attacks the 1st Amendment censoring Trump supporters.

Once again, Trumpsters display their ignorance of the Constitution and the First Amendment.

Once again, dblack engages in ignorantia affectata. Facebook advertises itself as an open public forum in terms of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which provides immunity from liability for providers of interactive computer services who publish information provided by others. Facebook routinely violates its own rules and moves the goalposts for no other reason than to censor conservative views, often defining them as indecent or offensive. Facebook actually features Antifa on its platform and has banned Patriot Prayer and other free speech advocates out of Berkeley, Seattle and Portland, for example, who oppose them.

If Facebook is going to behave as a published of leftist filth, censor conservative thought and hide behind the protections afforded a public provider under the law,. I say it's time to revoke its immunity. I say it should be treated for what it is, namely, a publisher.

Facebook is violating the spirit of constitutional law and the letter of pertinent civil law.

What say you to that?

I stand by my original point. None of that has anything to do with the First Amendment. The Trumpster claiming it does are dangerously stupid. They need to be stopped.

So you agree that Google and Facebook are not entitled to the special, extra-constitutional protection afforded them by the people via Section 230 of the Communications Act, right? If they are not going to abide by the law that provides that protection, then they should be made to sink or swim as a publisher sans that protection in the free market of goods, services and ideas . . . just like Trump and other real civil libertarians believe, as opposed to those affecting an air of ignorantia affectata as they pretend not to understand what the real constitutional concern is; you know, the whole reason that the protection of Section 230 was given in the first place, namely, to protect open and vigorous debate!

Right?

All I smell is hypocrisy and misplaced arguments about liberty.

By the way, what else do "Trumpters" supposedly fail to understand about the First Amendment that his opponents do?

This classical liberal is not aware of any such systemic ill among his supporters.

crickets chirping

I'm aware of the systemic assault on liberty from the political left only.

 

[bodecea]

Historically the left has never been a champion of free speech. On the contrary, the left has always sought to silence speech. That's what they do.

You do realize that Facebook is a private entity and can make their own rules?

So is a bakery.

And they both must follow PA laws.
For example, Facebook cannot kick people out for being gay or black or a certain religion.