Elon Musk has enraged the Left

[otto105]

Are you retarded?
Did you expect gasoline for free?
A gallon would still have been around $1.70.

Post pandemic economic growth and with russian aggression YOU think gas under the former 1-term fuckup would be $1.70/GL????

Boi, the fuckup couldn't keep unemployment below 7% or get GDP above 2.9%.

 

[Indeependent]

Of course they were low. We were in lockdown, people weren't buying gas and so the market had a glut.

You are familiar with supply and demand right?

You are amazingly stupid.
A lockdown causes a scarcity of sales and prices to increase.
Did you graduate High School?!

 

[Catsnmeters]

1) geez there is a thread on this website discussing it and length and i literally just posted on it

Well pardon me if I don't keep up to date on every thread here.

Do you have a link or not?

2) sorry the scotus has upheld limits on campaign fin to a campaign. its not first violation. It would only be a crime, if it was done for a campaign…like for example if xiden campaign asked.

Show me the law where it distinguishes being being in a campaign or not. So we we surrender our rights when we run for office?

3) do they? i am referring to the ones by Missouri and La, where an fbi agent just testified they meet weekly with tweeter to discuss censoring information. there is literally an active thread on it on this website

So what? It's not illegal. Trump had every right to send the FBI there to make requests.

If you want me to comment further, I need a link.

4) don’t blame you, and yes i would image that would be embarrassing and if you had a campaign hurt it, you’d want that silenced…which in that case could be a crime if the in kind political campaign contribution wasn’t properly recorded or above what legally is a allow. We would to investigate something like that. Remember what happened to Michael Cohen?

It is not a crime to request Twitter not posting something. Not if I do it. Not if you do it. Not if Trump does it as president and not if Biden does it as part of a campaign.

Stop repeating the same BS over and over.

5) nothing? you mean besides agents admitting to the meetings? i never said there were threats. I agree it was likely a symbiotic relationship

OMG. You are like a broken record who is creating posts in a vacuum.

IT IS NOT ILLEGAL FOR THE FBI MEET AND OR TO ASK TWITTER TO NOT PIST SOMETHING.

If you disagree then link the law.

Otherwise I a done going over this again and again.

6) if the fbi collided with the tweeter to censor speech it was illegal…

No it is not. Colluding isn't even a crime lol. You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Indeependent]

Well pardon me if I don't keep up to date on every thread here.

Do you have a link or not?



Show me the law where it distinguishes being being in a campaign or not. So we we surrender our rights when we run for office?



So what? It's not illegal. Trump had every right to send the FBI there to make requests.

If you want me to comment further, I need a link.



It is not a crime to request Twitter not posting something. Not if I do it. Not if you do it. Not if Trump does it as president and not if Biden does it as part of a campaign.

Stop repeating the same BS over and over.



OMG. You are like a broken record who is creating posts in a vacuum.

IT IS NOT ILLEGAL FOR THE FBI MEET AND OR TO ASK TWITTER TO NOT PIST SOMETHING.

If you disagree then link the law.

Otherwise I a done going over this again and again.


No it is not. Colluding isn't even a crime lol. You have no idea what you are talking about.

From which University did you receive your law degree?

 

[otto105]

You are amazingly stupid.
A lockdown causes a scarcity of sales and prices to increase.
Did you graduate High School?!

Completely and stupidity wrong.

People stop buying a product and it's price will crash. Gasoline doesn't have an unlimited lifetime, it degrades over time. They had to sell it cheap to move it.

 

[Catsnmeters]

You are amazingly stupid.
A lockdown causes a scarcity of sales and prices to increase.
Did you graduate High School?!

A lockdown where people were not driving...so they weren't buying gas...so gas begain piling up with nobody to buy it. That is why the prices were so low. High supply, low demand.

"Gasoline prices dropped because crude oil prices have crashed recently. Demand declined as people around the world stay home to avoid spreading the coronavirus;..."

 

[Indeependent]

A lockdown where people were not driving...so they weren't buying gas...so gas begain piling up with nobody to buy it. That is why the prices were so low. High supply, low demand.

"Gasoline prices dropped because crude oil prices have crashed recently. Demand declined as people around the world stay home to avoid spreading the coronavirus;..."

I drive to work everyday.
The prices didn’t have to go down because they never went up.

 

[struth]

Well pardon me if I don't keep up to date on every thread here.

Do you have a link or not?



Show me the law where it distinguishes being being in a campaign or not. So we we surrender our rights when we run for office?



So what? It's not illegal. Trump had every right to send the FBI there to make requests.

If you want me to comment further, I need a link.



It is not a crime to request Twitter not posting something. Not if I do it. Not if you do it. Not if Trump does it as president and not if Biden does it as part of a campaign.

Stop repeating the same BS over and over.



OMG. You are like a broken record who is creating posts in a vacuum.

IT IS NOT ILLEGAL FOR THE FBI MEET AND OR TO ASK TWITTER TO NOT PIST SOMETHING.

If you disagree then link the law.

Otherwise I a done going over this again and again.


No it is not. Colluding isn't even a crime lol. You have no idea what you are talking about.

No, i am on my phone…but it’s a 22 page thread on the Polltics forum that is active

are you going to continue to deny there are campaign finance laws? trump didn’t request hunter bidens story be censored…frankly tweeter was no fan of trump…they banned

i don’t like repeating myself, but you seem rather hard headed ans we continue in circles cause you continue to ignore reality

I have provided the State Actor Doctrine.

I never said it was a crime. Illegal acts don’t have to be crimes. When the Govt and State actors violate the constitution irs illegal…but not a crime

 

[Indeependent]

No, i am on my phone…but it’s a 22 page thread on the Polltics forum that is active

are you going to continue to deny there are campaign finance laws? trump didn’t request hunter bidens story be censored…frankly tweeter was no fan of trump…they banned

i don’t like repeating myself, but you seem rather hard headed ans we continue in circles cause you continue to ignore reality

I have provided the State Actor Doctrine.

I never said it was a crime. Illegal acts don’t have to be crimes. When the Govt and State actors violate the constitution irs illegal…but not a crime

Cats is an attorney.

 

[struth]

Cats is an attorney.

doesn’t seem to think like one

 

[Indeependent]

doesn’t seem to think like one

Doesn’t seem to think at all.
Just an old fart Lib.

 

[otto105]

Doesn’t seem to think at all.
Just an old fart Lib.

Posts a sycophant republic.

 

[Catsnmeters]

I drive to work everyday.
The prices didn’t have to go down because they never went up.

But they did go down because nobody was using gas.

 

[Indeependent]

But they did go down because nobody was using gas.

Do you ever leave your basement apartment?
The price never went down because the price never went up.

 

[Catsnmeters]

No, i am on my phone…but it’s a 22 page thread on the Polltics forum that is active

Good for the thread. Does that absolve you from having to prove your contentions?

are you going to continue to deny there are campaign finance laws? trump didn’t request hunter bidens story be censored…frankly tweeter was no fan of trump…they banned

You are claiming facts not in evidence. I never denied their are campaign finance laws.

i don’t like repeating myself, but you seem rather hard headed ans we continue in circles cause you continue to ignore reality

I have provided the State Actor Doctrine.

Twitter is not a state actor even if your media outlets try to tell you it is.

The courts already decided that.

"Here, Rutenburg's allegation does not and cannot satisfy these two requirements. First, Rutenburg makes no allegation that Twitter exercised any state right or privilege to restrict her access to former President Trump's Tweets. Lugar instructs that the alleged deprivation of constitutional rights must be rooted in the exercise of a state's sovereign power. 457 U.S. at 940; see also Florer v. Congregation Pidyon Shevuyim, N.A., 639 F.3d 916, 922-23 (9th Cir. 2011) (analyzing a Section 1983 claim in terms of whether the deprivation was caused by the exercise of a right or privilege "created by the State"). Instead, Rutenburg points to a supposed delegation of authority from former President Trump to operate what she contends is a public forum. See Dkt. No. 2 ¶¶ 4, 57. At best, the amended complaint merely describes how Twitter using its own technical means reportedly disabled, removed, and otherwise restricted former President Trump's Tweets and accounts. See id. ¶¶ 3, 28, 30, 32, 33, 37, 40, 42, 44, 47. None of this has any connection with the exercise of authority by a sovereign state. Thus, the amended complaint fails to allege any conduct with a nexus to a state privilege or power.

Second, Rutenburg's allegations do not demonstrate that Twitter is an entity that may fairly be said to be a state actor. It is undisputed that Twitter is a private company. See Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 14 ("Twitter is a ubiquitous social media company."); Dkt. No. 17 at 2 ("Twitter is a private company."). Federal courts have uniformly rejected attempts to treat similar social media companies as state actors under Section 1983. See, e.g., Prager Univ. v. Google LLC"

Rutenburg v. Twitter, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00548-YGR | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rutenburg v. Twitter, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00548-YGR, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

Stop getting legal opinions from Tucker and zerohedge/gateway pundit.

I never said it was a crime. Illegal acts don’t have to be crimes. When the Govt and State actors violate the constitution irs illegal…but not a crime

Ok. It's not illegal either.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Do you ever leave your basement apartment?
The price never went down because the price never went up.

So if gas prices are the same for a few months and the price then drops...that doesn't mean the price dropped?

Please help me out with you logic.

 

[struth]

Good for the thread. Does that absolve you from having to prove your contentions?



You are claiming facts not in evidence. I never denied their are campaign finance laws.



Twitter is not a state actor even if your media outlets try to tell you it is.

The courts already decided that.

"Here, Rutenburg's allegation does not and cannot satisfy these two requirements. First, Rutenburg makes no allegation that Twitter exercised any state right or privilege to restrict her access to former President Trump's Tweets. Lugar instructs that the alleged deprivation of constitutional rights must be rooted in the exercise of a state's sovereign power. 457 U.S. at 940; see also Florer v. Congregation Pidyon Shevuyim, N.A., 639 F.3d 916, 922-23 (9th Cir. 2011) (analyzing a Section 1983 claim in terms of whether the deprivation was caused by the exercise of a right or privilege "created by the State"). Instead, Rutenburg points to a supposed delegation of authority from former President Trump to operate what she contends is a public forum. See Dkt. No. 2 ¶¶ 4, 57. At best, the amended complaint merely describes how Twitter using its own technical means reportedly disabled, removed, and otherwise restricted former President Trump's Tweets and accounts. See id. ¶¶ 3, 28, 30, 32, 33, 37, 40, 42, 44, 47. None of this has any connection with the exercise of authority by a sovereign state. Thus, the amended complaint fails to allege any conduct with a nexus to a state privilege or power.

Second, Rutenburg's allegations do not demonstrate that Twitter is an entity that may fairly be said to be a state actor. It is undisputed that Twitter is a private company. See Dkt. No. 2 ¶ 14 ("Twitter is a ubiquitous social media company."); Dkt. No. 17 at 2 ("Twitter is a private company."). Federal courts have uniformly rejected attempts to treat similar social media companies as state actors under Section 1983. See, e.g., Prager Univ. v. Google LLC"

Rutenburg v. Twitter, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00548-YGR | Casetext Search + Citator

Read Rutenburg v. Twitter, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00548-YGR, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

Stop getting legal opinions from Tucker and zerohedge/gateway pundit.




Ok. It's not illegal either.

1) yes, i proved it and told you were to find it
2) you’ve certainly suggested they don’t exist and it’s perfectly legal for a campaign to get in kind campaign. benefits via censoring negative news that would hurt their campaign
3) normally they aren’t…no media outlet told me they were.
4) that case has nothing to do with the other acts being alleged. The state actor doctrine doesn’t require the entity to always be a state actor…
5) tucker? what? you are citing some case that has nothing to do with these allegations. that was a completely different action
6) of course it’s illegal for the state to violate people’s rights
…geez

 

[Indeependent]

So if gas prices are the same for a few months and the price then drops...that doesn't mean the price dropped?

Please help me out with you logic.

You are so stupid I’m about to put you on Ignore.
The price of gasoline never went up under Trump, even during COVID.
The price skyrocketed under Biden when Zelensky mentioned Ukraine and Biden did not scold Zelensky.

 

[otto105]

1) yes, i proved it and told you were to find it
2) you’ve certainly suggested they don’t exist and it’s perfectly legal for a campaign to get in kind campaign. benefits via censoring negative news that would hurt their campaign
3) normally they aren’t…no media outlet told me they were.
4) that case has nothing to do with the other acts being alleged. The state actor doctrine doesn’t require the entity to always be a state actor…
5) tucker? what? you are citing some case that has nothing to do with these allegations. that was a completely different action
6) of course it’s illegal for the state to violate people’s rights
…geez

6) Yeah, but it took a long time to get to derek chauvin.

 

[Catsnmeters]

1) yes, i proved it and told you were to find it

Sorry. I am not going to hunt down threads to prove your point for you.

2) you’ve certainly suggested they don’t exist and it’s perfectly legal for a campaign to get in kind campaign. benefits via censoring negative news that would hurt their campaign

I never suggested it. As a matter of fact I have specifically said there are finance laws, I simply assert that telling Twitter to not post something does not violate them.

3) normally they aren’t…no media outlet told me they were.

Ok. So your opinion is wrong...although I suspect you didn't just come up with this line of thought on your own.

4) that case has nothing to do with the other acts being alleged. The state actor doctrine doesn’t require the entity to always be a state actor…

It shows that Twitter is not a state actor.

5) tucker? what? you are citing some case that has nothing to do with these allegations. that was a completely different action
6) of course it’s illegal for the state to violate people’s rights
…geez

Since Twitter is not a state actor, turn it doesn't matter.

Link the law that was broke by asking Twitter to not post something or we are done.

Don't ask me to look through another thread because it ain't going to happen.