Almost 140 serious injuries to Capitol Cops

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

 

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

That's bullshit. They're not allowing members to spread fake news on their site. Good for them for cleaning up their act. And that rule applies to Liberals as well as conservatives.

"fake news", the mantra of the SJW cuck who wants to silence opposing opinions instead of countering them.

Lazy fuck.

LOLOL

They've been countered. The election wasn't stolen. Anything along those lines that it was is fake news. There is nothing compelling private sites like this one, or any other, to have to let their platforms be used by lunatics who persist with their attempts to spread disinformation.

 

[Faun]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

 

[sealybobo]

A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.

No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.

You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.

No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.

Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.

an unarmed woman was a threat....

You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.

It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.

He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.

What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.

And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.

Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.

By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.

Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.

She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.

Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.

You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.

For those on the right who want to say it was ANTIFA who did the violence at the riot

Capitol Defendant Bragged About Brawling With Cops On Pro-Trump Forum
Jose Padilla, who the feds say fought with police during the Capitol attack, said on the online forum TheDonald that God was on his side.


A Donald Trump fan caught on camera brawling with police officers during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was charged by the feds this week after he bragged about his conduct on a Trump fan site and pushed back on the online conspiracy theory that undercover “antifa” members were behind the violence.
Jose Padilla faces several charges, including felony counts of obstruction of law enforcement during a civil disorder and assault on a law enforcement officer with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Federal officials say he pushed up against the police line while wearing a scuba mask and shoved officers trying to stop the pro-Trump mob from storming the Capitol. He also helped rioters use a giant metal-framed Trump sign as a battering ram against officers on the police line, and threw a flagpole at officers trying to keep the mob out of the building.


“There’s a lot of memes and posts flying around saying that the people who were fighting last night were all Antifa provacateurs etc. I just want to say that as a first hand observer of every point of last night, that it was not Antifa. They were Patriots who were trying to Restore the Republic after being attacked by the cops, who struck first,” Padilla wrote on Facebook, according to the feds. “Even those who broke the windows next to the doorway to the Capitol were Patriots trying to find a way to turn the Flanks of the cops.”
On the online forum TheDonald.win, Padilla wrote about his involvement in the attack, saying that he “pushed the rails,” “pushed the stairs,” and “pushed the doorway.”
“I was beaten unconscious twice, sprayed more times than I care to count, received strikes from batons that should have been lethal (Multiple temple and carotid strikes) except that God was on my side,” Padilla wrote, the feds say.

Padilla also worked to correct the record about online rumors that “Antifa” was somehow responsible for the pro-Trump mob’s efforts.
“Honestly, the guy breaking the windows weren’t Antifa,” he wrote. “They were Patriots trying to find a new way in so we could flank the cops who were holding the doorway.”

IDIOT. But at least he truly believes he was right doing what he did. He still believes the election was stolen. Only one problem. It wasn't.

The case against Padilla was unsealed at about the same time that Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) used his time at a hearing on the Capitol attack to float a conspiracy theory that “agents provocateurs” and “fake Trump protesters” were responsible for the attack.

'It Was Not Antifa': Capitol Defendant Bragged About Brawling With Cops On Pro-Trump Forum

Jose Padilla, who the feds say fought with police during the Capitol attack, said on the online forum TheDonald that God was on his side.

www.huffpost.com

 

[sealybobo]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

That's bullshit. They're not allowing members to spread fake news on their site. Good for them for cleaning up their act. And that rule applies to Liberals as well as conservatives.

"fake news", the mantra of the SJW cuck who wants to silence opposing opinions instead of countering them.

Lazy fuck.

LOLOL

They've been countered. The election wasn't stolen. Anything along those lines that it was is fake news. There is nothing compelling private sites like this one, or any other, to have to let their platforms be used by lunatics who persist with their attempts to spread disinformation.

What's funny is Trump supporters are getting mad at other Trump supporters who are trying to put the blame on the riots on ANTIFA. They don't want ANTIFA getting credit for what they did. LOL.

 

[colfax_m]

You run to the government only viewpoint because right now the silencing is being done to people you despise.

Yes, because large corporations silencing some people IS PERFECTLY FUCKING FINE.

You are a dullard and a horrible person

They aren't silenced. They're just butthurt.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

That's bullshit. They're not allowing members to spread fake news on their site. Good for them for cleaning up their act. And that rule applies to Liberals as well as conservatives.

"fake news", the mantra of the SJW cuck who wants to silence opposing opinions instead of countering them.

Lazy fuck.

LOLOL

They've been countered. The election wasn't stolen. Anything along those lines that it was is fake news. There is nothing compelling private sites like this one, or any other, to have to let their platforms be used by lunatics who persist with their attempts to spread disinformation.

No countering, just ignoring.

 

[martybegan]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

When corporations take over government function, such as creating a commons, they can be regulated like the government.

 

[martybegan]

A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.

No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.

You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.

No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.

Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.

an unarmed woman was a threat....

You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.

It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.

He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.

What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.

And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.

Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.

By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.

Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.

She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.

Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.

You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.

For those on the right who want to say it was ANTIFA who did the violence at the riot

Capitol Defendant Bragged About Brawling With Cops On Pro-Trump Forum
Jose Padilla, who the feds say fought with police during the Capitol attack, said on the online forum TheDonald that God was on his side.


A Donald Trump fan caught on camera brawling with police officers during the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was charged by the feds this week after he bragged about his conduct on a Trump fan site and pushed back on the online conspiracy theory that undercover “antifa” members were behind the violence.
Jose Padilla faces several charges, including felony counts of obstruction of law enforcement during a civil disorder and assault on a law enforcement officer with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Federal officials say he pushed up against the police line while wearing a scuba mask and shoved officers trying to stop the pro-Trump mob from storming the Capitol. He also helped rioters use a giant metal-framed Trump sign as a battering ram against officers on the police line, and threw a flagpole at officers trying to keep the mob out of the building.


“There’s a lot of memes and posts flying around saying that the people who were fighting last night were all Antifa provacateurs etc. I just want to say that as a first hand observer of every point of last night, that it was not Antifa. They were Patriots who were trying to Restore the Republic after being attacked by the cops, who struck first,” Padilla wrote on Facebook, according to the feds. “Even those who broke the windows next to the doorway to the Capitol were Patriots trying to find a way to turn the Flanks of the cops.”
On the online forum TheDonald.win, Padilla wrote about his involvement in the attack, saying that he “pushed the rails,” “pushed the stairs,” and “pushed the doorway.”
“I was beaten unconscious twice, sprayed more times than I care to count, received strikes from batons that should have been lethal (Multiple temple and carotid strikes) except that God was on my side,” Padilla wrote, the feds say.

Padilla also worked to correct the record about online rumors that “Antifa” was somehow responsible for the pro-Trump mob’s efforts.
“Honestly, the guy breaking the windows weren’t Antifa,” he wrote. “They were Patriots trying to find a new way in so we could flank the cops who were holding the doorway.”

IDIOT. But at least he truly believes he was right doing what he did. He still believes the election was stolen. Only one problem. It wasn't.

The case against Padilla was unsealed at about the same time that Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) used his time at a hearing on the Capitol attack to float a conspiracy theory that “agents provocateurs” and “fake Trump protesters” were responsible for the attack.

'It Was Not Antifa': Capitol Defendant Bragged About Brawling With Cops On Pro-Trump Forum

Jose Padilla, who the feds say fought with police during the Capitol attack, said on the online forum TheDonald that God was on his side.

www.huffpost.com

The actual thing they are saying that lefty types were agent provocateurs. Lets see the backgrounds of those actually being prosecuted when the dust settles.

 

[martybegan]

You run to the government only viewpoint because right now the silencing is being done to people you despise.

Yes, because large corporations silencing some people IS PERFECTLY FUCKING FINE.

You are a dullard and a horrible person

They aren't silenced. They're just butthurt.

They are silenced, and you cheer on like the good little book burner you are.

 

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

LOL

Suuure, perv. Uh-huh.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

LOL

Suuure, perv. Uh-huh.

Perv accusations coming from a side that wants men pissing in women's rest rooms?


Trololololol.

 

[Faun]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

When corporations take over government function, such as creating a commons, they can be regulated like the government.

WTF is wrong with you? A chat website like this is not a government function.

 

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

LOL

Suuure, perv. Uh-huh.

Perv accusations coming from a side that wants men pissing in women's rest rooms?


Trololololol.

Perv accusations for a perv.

 

[martybegan]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

When corporations take over government function, such as creating a commons, they can be regulated like the government.

WTF is wrong with you? A chat website like this is not a government function.

This website isn't what I am talking about. Places like twitter and facebook have created a new digital commons.

 

[martybegan]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

LOL

Suuure, perv. Uh-huh.

Perv accusations coming from a side that wants men pissing in women's rest rooms?


Trololololol.

Perv accusations for a perv.

I notice you don't have an actual response, girl-hater.

 

[Faun]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

When corporations take over government function, such as creating a commons, they can be regulated like the government.

WTF is wrong with you? A chat website like this is not a government function.

This website isn't what I am talking about. Places like twitter and facebook have created a new digital commons.

This place is a chat forum just like Twitter. You're fucked in the head to promote these sites as government functions. You surrender your argument when you try to argue such absurdities.

 

[Faun]

Talk about someone losing their shit. lol

Nope. It's just me giving you a dose of reality, snowflake.

No one gives a shit what you want. You think this is about fairness, but it's just about you idiots wanting something for free.

And you idiots just embracing censorship because it suits your pathetic need to be the only voice allowed.

Eh Comrade?

It’s not censorship. It’s people deciding that they won’t want to help you assholes in your endeavor to make sure everyone is as disconnected from reality as you are.

It's censorship, just not government censorship, so that makes it OK in your book.

The corporations do the lefts dirty work and you get a hard on over it.

LOL

You're an idiot, Marty. Why do you post on this website if you're against websites who censor posts? You do know the moderators here can delete your posts and even ban you if you violate their rules for posting, don't you?

This website isn't the new commons used to discuss ideas and mold impressions of public viewpoints.

Try again, you Stasi Cum bucket.

Neither is Twitter, ya dumbfuck.

I say it is. You just don't care because the only people they silence are those you disagree with.

LOLOL

Who cares what you say? You're fucked in the head.

Says the SJW soi boi cuck who pees sitting down.

LOL

Your surrender is accepted and your sick perverted fantasies are noted and laughed at.

No surrender, no mercy.

LOL

Suuure, perv. Uh-huh.

Perv accusations coming from a side that wants men pissing in women's rest rooms?


Trololololol.

Perv accusations for a perv.

I notice you don't have an actual response, girl-hater.

LOLOL

Imbecile, your posts speak for you.

 

[martybegan]

How is allowing MORE speech fucking over political opponents?

They already claim via 230 that they are not publishers, and the content on the site isn't "theirs".

You're not "allowing" anything, you're forcing other people to facilitate it.

Doesn't matter if they're considered publishers for legal purposes, if they don't want to do it, they shouldn't have to.

So I guess you are OK with a baker not baking a cake for a same sex wedding?

The baker's defiance was their claim that their First Amendment religious rights would have been eradicated by baking that cake. Specifically, what Constitutional rights are being violated by not letting you post fake news on someone else's website?

When corporations take over government function, such as creating a commons, they can be regulated like the government.

WTF is wrong with you? A chat website like this is not a government function.

This website isn't what I am talking about. Places like twitter and facebook have created a new digital commons.

This place is a chat forum just like Twitter. You're fucked in the head to promote these sites as government functions. You surrender your argument when you try to argue such absurdities.

This chat forum isn't used by people to proclaim their viewpoints are in the majority, nor does it create trends and set standards for political and other conversation.