Dissent is not acceptable and will be investigated.

[Lesh]

They weren't given their due process dumbass, that's why Trump pardoned them. They were in there for almost 5 years and most people that assault cops don't get that much time.

In almost all cases those people kept changing lawyers and filing motions.

That means you wait for trial longer

 

[jknowgood]

In almost all cases those people kept changing lawyers and filing motions.

That means you wait for trial longer

Not what happened.

 

[justoffal]

Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president

U.S. President Donald Trump’s revenge campaign is continuing apace, with celebrities who backed his 2024 election opponent Kamala Harris now in his sights.

The Republican leader launched a blistering tirade against legendary rocker Bruce Springsteen last week, calling him “not a talented guy” and attacking his physical appearance, after the New Jersey icon — who endorsed Harris last year — branded the Trump administration “corrupt, incompetent and treasonous” during a concert in England.

Now Trump is demanding a “major investigation” into Harris’ lengthy list of celebrity endorsements, singling out Springsteen as well as Beyoncé, Oprah Winfrey and Bono, and claiming they were illegally compensated.
Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president

This has a Nixonian quality to it. What may develop is the equivalent of trump's enemies list in response to the exercise of free speech. Turn to page 7 of your authoritarian handbook.

From AI.....Authoritarians often restrict free speech to maintain control and suppress dissent. This can manifest in various ways, including censorship, surveillance, and legal restrictions on expression. The goal is to limit public discourse, prevent challenges to the status quo, and prevent the free exchange of ideas that could undermine their authority.

Goose.... Gander....Harry Reid.....

Don't let the genie out of the bottle and he won't bite you in the ass. Dems introduced illicit lawrfare now others have learned. I mean did you really think no one else was going to use it?

James Carville agrees with Trump on this one BTW....
Not that the endorsement of a partially senile lunatic means anything.... But even he could see the money mismanagement to the tune of millions in crooked campaigning.

 

[g5000]

They weren't given their due process dumbass, that's why Trump pardoned them.

Wrong. Those who were convicted for assaulting the police and sacking the Capitol and for sedition were all pardoned, your misdirections notwithstanding.

 

[Marener]

I've answered it, goofy. Read for comprehension, why don't you???

Is it a crime to infringe upon your critic's First Amendment rights? Please answer instead of repeatedly ignoring this question.

Twitter was a willing participant. Vijaya made sure of that. The FBI directed her actions and paid Twitter a few million for it. Pretty clear case of First Amendment rights violations by the FBI and Twitter. Again, see Berenson V Biden.

And threats are not the same as pressuring social media. I never used the word, threat to describe the FBI's pressure on Twitter, you did. It's actions I'm arguing.

Is it legal for Springsteen to be paid by the democrats for making a political speech during his concerts?

So if Twitter was a willing participant, then there was no threats to Twitter.

The only ones that kicked anyone off Twitter was Twitter. Not the government.

You don’t have a constitutional right to use twitter. Twitter can kick you off for any reason turn want.

 

[buckeye]

How did the Biden administration threaten Twitter?

Just answer the question you keep avoiding.

I've answered it, goofy. Read for comprehension, why don't you???

Is it a crime to infringe upon your critic's First Amendment rights? Please answer.

Twitter was a willing participant. Vijaya made sure of that. The FBI directed her actions and paid Twitter a few million for it.

According to Zuckerberg, FB was not initially cooperative. But the FBI made him see it their way. What do you think they told him?

 

[justoffal]

Wrong. Those who were convicted for assaulting the police and sacking the Capitol and for sedition were all pardoned, your misdirections notwithstanding.

Blanket prosecutions are a bad idea because this is exactly what happens You get blanket pardons. Neither one of them are good but one of them definitely triggers the other.

 

[Marener]

I've answered it, goofy. Read for comprehension, why don't you???

Is it a crime to infringe upon your critic's First Amendment rights? Please answer.

Twitter was a willing participant. Vijaya made sure of that. The FBI directed her actions and paid Twitter a few million for it.

According to Zuckerberg, FB was not initially cooperative. But the FBI made him see it their way. What do you think they told him?

The government can't infringe on first amendment rights, but Twitter, a private company running a website, sure can.

The government didn't pay Twitter to kick people off. Twitter was reimbursed for complying with subpoenas as the federal regulation requires. You believe lies from people like Elon Musk.

According to Zuckerberg, they made their own decisions. The government never forced anyone to do anything.

 

[buckeye]

The government can't infringe on first amendment rights, but Twitter, a private company running a website, sure can.

And we've seen that private company do the government's bidding to remove precisely named by the government posters who opposed the government. you can dance around this all you like but its a fact.

We have the evidence, clear as can be, that the govt told Twitter who to remove. Is that a hammer in your world?

And when do you start answering questions? You almost never do.

According to Zuckerberg, they made their own decisions. The government never forced anyone to do anything.

Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook restricting a story about Joe Biden's son during the 2020 election was based on FBI misinformation warnings.
The New York Post alleged leaked emails from Hunter Biden's laptop showed the then vice-president was helping his son's business dealings in Ukraine.
Facebook and Twitter restricted sharing of the article, before reversing course amid allegations of censorship.

Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

In an interview with Joe Rogan, Mark Zuckerberg says the story was flagged after an FBI warning.

www.bbc.com

The govt told them to watch out for foreign disinformation right after the NYP revealed the Hunter laptop from hell and the 51 intelligence officers lied their asses off to protect Biden.

That is certainly interfering with the poster's First Amendment rights. You may not like it, but Biden had a much bigger and heavier hammer than Trump.

If Springsteen and Oprah broke the law, shouldn't they pay the price?

Time to do more productive things.

 

[Marener]

And we've seen that private company do the government's bidding to remove precisely named by the government posters who opposed the government. you can dance around this all you like but its a fact.

We have the evidence, clear as can be, that the govt told Twitter who to remove. Is that a hammer in your world?

And when do you start answering questions? You almost never do.

The private company did so voluntarily. When you say to do their "bidding", it sounds nonvoluntary, but we both know that's not true. When you say it's a "hammer", it sounds nonvoluntary, but we both know that's not true.

It becomes a first amendment issue when the government uses their power to silence someone. That didn't happen here.

Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook restricting a story about Joe Biden's son during the 2020 election was based on FBI misinformation warnings.
The New York Post alleged leaked emails from Hunter Biden's laptop showed the then vice-president was helping his son's business dealings in Ukraine.
Facebook and Twitter restricted sharing of the article, before reversing course amid allegations of censorship.

Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship

In an interview with Joe Rogan, Mark Zuckerberg says the story was flagged after an FBI warning.

www.bbc.com

The govt told them to watch out for foreign disinformation right after the NYP revealed the Hunter laptop from hell and the 51 intelligence officers lied their asses off to protect Biden.

That is certainly interfering with the poster's First Amendment rights. You may not like it, but Biden had a much bigger and heavier hammer than Trump.

If Springsteen and Oprah broke the law, shouldn't they pay the price?

Time to do more productive things.

There are few heavier of hammers than threatening to investigate and prosecute people for free speech.

Just to be clear, I don't see how you can use the laptop story as evidence of Biden's bigger and heavier hammer. Biden wasn't even in office at the time.

 

[buckeye]

When you say it's a "hammer", it sounds nonvoluntary, but we both know that's not true.

You're wrong again. I sure don't know that. I do know the Twitter lawyer in charge of talking to the FBI and working this out is an extreme anti Trumper, so of course she didn't need convincing as you leftists really don't care about anyone's first amendment rights (besides illegals) when it comes to hurting your opposition. But I don't know everything the FBI told any of the social media platforms and neither do you.

Your emphasis on this forcing shit is nonsensical. The Biden govt went after its critics by getting them censured on social media, plain and simple. That is using a hammer on your political critics and something Trump has never done

The end.

 

[Marener]

You're wrong again. I sure don't know that. I do know the Twitter lawyer in charge of talking to the FBI and working this out is an extreme anti Trumper, so of course she didn't need convincing as you leftists really don't care about anyone's first amendment rights (besides illegals) when it comes to hurting your opposition. But I don't know everything the FBI told any of the social media platforms and neither do you.

Your emphasis on this forcing shit is nonsensical. The Biden govt went after its critics by getting them censured on social media, plain and simple. That is using a hammer on your political critics and something Trump has never done

The end.

So now you’re backing off of pretending everything was in the “Twitter files” to now admitting you don’t know.

No one was censured for being critical of Biden. That’s stupid. It was about spreading disinformation about COVID that resulted in the kind of vaccine hesitancy that got hundreds of thousands of people killed when the delta wave hit in 2021.

And yes, the force important. In fact, it’s absolutely necessary. The government, including Trump, can express opinions about what they do and don’t like and who should and shouldn’t be saying something. They do all the time. What you can’t do is use the government to force it.

 

[MisterBeale]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/114532867603994760

Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president​

“Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did,” U.S. president roars, as he also targets Beyoncé and Bono over 2024 election campaign.

Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president

“Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did,” U.S. president roars, as he also targets Beyoncé and Bono over 2024 election campaign.

www.politico.eu

 

[MisterBeale]

Yes, it’s legal for federal candidates to pay for endorsements

There’s no law against paying people to endorse a political campaign, but candidates have to publicly disclose the payment.

www.verifythis.com

 

[Zincwarrior]

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/114532867603994760

View attachment 1113222

Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president​

“Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did,” U.S. president roars, as he also targets Beyoncé and Bono over 2024 election campaign.

Scorn in the USA: Trump wants probe into celeb endorsements as Springsteen needles president

“Candidates aren’t allowed to pay for ENDORSEMENTS, which is what Kamala did,” U.S. president roars, as he also targets Beyoncé and Bono over 2024 election campaign.

www.politico.eu

snowflake.

 

[Clipper]

Weren't you guys the people that tried to introduce an office of misinformation? You people wanted to police peoples speech for Christ sake....

Spare us the hand wringing that Trump throws out an off hand comment about a POS like Springsteen...Fuck him, and you.

Is there one segment of society that the deranged orange combover fuckup hasen't threatened at one time or another? Including his own party who bailed his no good lowlife ass out of both impeachments & multiple felony indictments in multiple jurisdictions.

Btw, more people support Springsteen then that wet dream legend in his own mind asswipe that you MAGA tools worship.

 

[j-mac]

Is there one segment of society that the deranged orange combover fuckup hasen't threatened at one time or another? Including his own party who bailed his no good lowlife ass out of both impeachments & multiple felony indictments in multiple jurisdictions.

Btw, more people support Springsteen then that wet dream legend in his own mind asswipe that you MAGA tools worship.

Link?

 

[buckeye]

No one was censured for being critical of Biden.

I've told you numerous times to see Berenson V Biden. Your lackey position for democrats is noted. You value democrats more than 1st amendment rights. Got it.

On Monday, Joe Biden’s zombie presidency will officially be over1.

Berenson v Biden, my lawsuit over the effort by White House and Pfizer officials to make Twitter ban me in 2021, will go on.

And the admission from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg last week of the immense pressure his company faced that year from White House censors only strengthens our case. Time has not been kind to the hysterics who insisted they had to destroy the First Amendment to save the United States from Covid.

Yet even as the same elite media that championed social media censorship in 2021 now begins to question it, they won’t mention Berenson v Biden. I take their silence as a compliment - evidence of their embarrassment and the strength of my case.

Berenson v Biden gets stronger

Even though the media - which now admits the censorship of 2021 - is still pretending it doesn't exist

alexberenson.substack.com

 

[Marener]

I've told you numerous times to see Berenson V Biden. Your lackey position for democrats is noted. You value democrats more than 1st amendment rights. Got it.

On Monday, Joe Biden’s zombie presidency will officially be over1.

Berenson v Biden, my lawsuit over the effort by White House and Pfizer officials to make Twitter ban me in 2021, will go on.

And the admission from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg last week of the immense pressure his company faced that year from White House censors only strengthens our case. Time has not been kind to the hysterics who insisted they had to destroy the First Amendment to save the United States from Covid.

Yet even as the same elite media that championed social media censorship in 2021 now begins to question it, they won’t mention Berenson v Biden. I take their silence as a compliment - evidence of their embarrassment and the strength of my case.

Berenson v Biden gets stronger

Even though the media - which now admits the censorship of 2021 - is still pretending it doesn't exist

alexberenson.substack.com

Berenson was banned for spreading misinformation about COVID vaccines, not for being critical of Biden.

No one in the government forced any company to ban any person from any platform. Facebook, Twitter, whatever, they ban people all the time for all sorts of reasons, including violating their terms of service. It's not government censorship when the government doesn't do it and doesn't force anyone to do it.

 

[buckeye]

Berenson was banned for spreading misinformation about COVID vaccines, not for being critical of Trump.

And Biden took that quite personally, didn't he. So personally he and his good buddies that he helped make really, really rich at Pfizer had Berenson kicked off Twitter in pre Elon days.

And pretty much everything Berensen said proved to be true and what Biden and his crooked Fauci crooks were saying was dead ass wrong.

But they made a lot of cash, which was the plan to begin with, taken right out of the taxpayers pockets.