GOP working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal liability protections

Denizen

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
4,836
Reaction score
1,038
Points
190

I suppose the First Amendment only limits The Congress to obey the First Amendment, and once again Donald Trump believes he is above the law, even when that law it not statutory, but number one in the Bill of Rights. What next, locking up those who criticize him with no regards to the 4th, 5th and 6th articles in the Bill of Rights?
So when the media spreads lies about him it's okay, but it's not okay for him to go after them?
Quoting Dopey Donald Trump verbatim is spreading lies.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,811
Reaction score
13,709
Points
2,220
Here's what started this war:


Jack had to cover for his boy, Joe so he started tagging content as "manipulated" but all Trump et al did was show the clip. They didn't alter the video. But, some of the left's own medicine sure goes down hard, don't it?

Welcome to being on the shit-end of creative editing process, commies. Eat your own shit and LIKE IT!!!

.
Wow but it's OK for NBC to cut off Barr and go on a faux rampage.
Too many what-abouts, there, chief. And NBC isn't social media.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
15,649
Reaction score
2,013
Points
290
"Sen. Josh (R-Mo.) and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Wednesday separately announced they were both working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal protections that ensure the company is not held liable for what is posted on its platform.

Both Hawley and Gaetz argued that Twitter’s decision to flag the tweets called its legal liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act into question. Section 230 protects social media platforms from facing lawsuits over what users post.

Hawley sent a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday questioning why the platform should be given Section 230 protections and tweeted that he would soon introduce legislation to end “government giveaways” under the legal shield.

“If @Twitter wants to editorialize & comment on users’ posts, it should be divested of its special status under federal law (Section 230) & forced to play by same rules as all other publishers”



IMO subsidies and / or government protections should not be given to companies that engage in trampling on Freedom of Speech. Yes, Twitter (and Facebook) is a privately owned and run company and can operate as they see fit ... but they can do so without tax dollars or protections from a government that supports and defends the Constitution which affords the right of Freedom of Speech to all Americans.









.
That is going nowhere. Free speech rights apply to the government not private entities. Twitter receives no subsidies. Not a dime of taxpayer money goes to Twitter. That is a phony argument. A court decision last week made it clear that free speech rights do not apply to private companies.
 

SmokeALib

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
Messages
8,445
Reaction score
2,212
Points
290
Location
Kansas City, Missouri
Obama twists the law into a pretzel to authorize the FBI to spy on President Trump and his family. Democrats say "COOL!" President Trump signs an EO to call out obviously partisan social media platforms for selective harassment and censorship and Democrats squeal like stuck pigs.
Well that's a lie.




No, it's a fact. obummer tried to turn us into a third world shithole. And if Trump had lost none of obummers crimes would have been discovered.
Doubling down on your lie does not make it true.
He isn't lying, too bad Obama will never go to jail over this. But his corrupt administration getting exposed will all we will get. But you dumbasses will still polish his knob.
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
Spot on!
Full of lies, Trump works for all Americans. Democrats work only for themselves. Biden is proof. Work for goverment all of his life, and his entire family is multi millionaires.
View attachment 342209
Hatred comes from loving this country and protecting it from the thieves who steal from it.
That's exactly why Biden shouldn't be president. He has sold us out to China.
View attachment 342215View attachment 342215
You're an idiot.
And you're looking for an argument you never had.
Nothing to argue about Biden and most of Washington has sold us out. Even republicans like Graham. They all need to be fired, and Trump is the man to do it.
Trump is a criminal who is enriching himself. He sold us out and we already proved it.
He sold you leftists out. Nobody really cares about that.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
61,811
Reaction score
13,709
Points
2,220

jknowgood

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
35,241
Reaction score
6,947
Points
1,130
Location
South carolina

I suppose the First Amendment only limits The Congress to obey the First Amendment, and once again Donald Trump believes he is above the law, even when that law it not statutory, but number one in the Bill of Rights. What next, locking up those who criticize him with no regards to the 4th, 5th and 6th articles in the Bill of Rights?
So when the media spreads lies about him it's okay, but it's not okay for him to go after them?
Quoting Dopey Donald Trump verbatim is spreading lies.
Please show the quote of him personally telling people to fill a syringe with bleach and inject it into their veins or just shut up.
 

Crepitus

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
34,504
Reaction score
5,286
Points
1,140
Obama twists the law into a pretzel to authorize the FBI to spy on President Trump and his family. Democrats say "COOL!" President Trump signs an EO to call out obviously partisan social media platforms for selective harassment and censorship and Democrats squeal like stuck pigs.
Well that's a lie.




No, it's a fact. obummer tried to turn us into a third world shithole. And if Trump had lost none of obummers crimes would have been discovered.
Doubling down on your lie does not make it true.
He isn't lying, too bad Obama will never go to jail over this. But his corrupt administration getting exposed will all we will get. But you dumbasses will still polish his knob.
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
Spot on!
Full of lies, Trump works for all Americans. Democrats work only for themselves. Biden is proof. Work for goverment all of his life, and his entire family is multi millionaires.
View attachment 342209
Well that's a lie.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
23,028
Reaction score
5,739
Points
290
Location
Tejas
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
He is an authoritarian, but don't sit there and pretend the opposition is NOT worse.

.
 

jknowgood

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
35,241
Reaction score
6,947
Points
1,130
Location
South carolina
Obama twists the law into a pretzel to authorize the FBI to spy on President Trump and his family. Democrats say "COOL!" President Trump signs an EO to call out obviously partisan social media platforms for selective harassment and censorship and Democrats squeal like stuck pigs.
Well that's a lie.




No, it's a fact. obummer tried to turn us into a third world shithole. And if Trump had lost none of obummers crimes would have been discovered.
Doubling down on your lie does not make it true.
He isn't lying, too bad Obama will never go to jail over this. But his corrupt administration getting exposed will all we will get. But you dumbasses will still polish his knob.
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
Spot on!
Full of lies, Trump works for all Americans. Democrats work only for themselves. Biden is proof. Work for goverment all of his life, and his entire family is multi millionaires.
View attachment 342209
Well that's a lie.
They are millionaires. Not bad for a politician and a vice president.
 

Rye Catcher

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
2,660
Reaction score
1,047
Points
180

I suppose the First Amendment only limits The Congress to obey the First Amendment, and once again Donald Trump believes he is above the law, even when that law it not statutory, but number one in the Bill of Rights. What next, locking up those who criticize him with no regards to the 4th, 5th and 6th articles in the Bill of Rights?
So when the media spreads lies about him it's okay, but it's not okay for him to go after them?
When the lame street media went after Obama, the First Lady famously said, "when they go low, we go high". Nobody can go as low as dumb donald, the most vindictive turd to ever float in a punch bowl.
 

Rye Catcher

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
2,660
Reaction score
1,047
Points
180
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
He is an authoritarian, but don't sit there and pretend the opposition is NOT worse.

.
LOL, he is much more than just an authoritarian, he's a megalomaniac who really believes laws are for others, and he is above the law.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
23,028
Reaction score
5,739
Points
290
Location
Tejas
Trump is a reckless, irresponsible authoritarian who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.

And Trump’s enablers are just as authoritarian and have the same contempt for the rule of law, our democratic institutions, and the Constitution.
He is an authoritarian, but don't sit there and pretend the opposition is NOT worse.

.
LOL, he is much more than just an authoritarian, he's a megalomaniac who really believes laws are for others, and he is above the law.
and, yet, has no monopoly on such an attitude. Need examples?

.
 

Denizen

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
4,836
Reaction score
1,038
Points
190

I suppose the First Amendment only limits The Congress to obey the First Amendment, and once again Donald Trump believes he is above the law, even when that law it not statutory, but number one in the Bill of Rights. What next, locking up those who criticize him with no regards to the 4th, 5th and 6th articles in the Bill of Rights?
So when the media spreads lies about him it's okay, but it's not okay for him to go after them?
Quoting Dopey Donald Trump verbatim is spreading lies.
Please show the quote of him personally telling people to fill a syringe with bleach and inject it into their veins or just shut up.
I refuse to provide justification for your stupidity.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
124,230
Reaction score
18,361
Points
2,180
"Sen. Josh (R-Mo.) and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Wednesday separately announced they were both working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal protections that ensure the company is not held liable for what is posted on its platform.

Both Hawley and Gaetz argued that Twitter’s decision to flag the tweets called its legal liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act into question. Section 230 protects social media platforms from facing lawsuits over what users post.

Hawley sent a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday questioning why the platform should be given Section 230 protections and tweeted that he would soon introduce legislation to end “government giveaways” under the legal shield.

“If @Twitter wants to editorialize & comment on users’ posts, it should be divested of its special status under federal law (Section 230) & forced to play by same rules as all other publishers”



IMO subsidies and / or government protections should not be given to companies that engage in trampling on Freedom of Speech. Yes, Twitter (and Facebook) is a privately owned and run company and can operate as they see fit ... but they can do so without tax dollars or protections from a government that supports and defends the Constitution which affords the right of Freedom of Speech to all Americans.









.
That is going nowhere. Free speech rights apply to the government not private entities. Twitter receives no subsidies. Not a dime of taxpayer money goes to Twitter. That is a phony argument. A court decision last week made it clear that free speech rights do not apply to private companies.
Twitter gets protection from lawsuits under reg 230 because it promotes itself as a common carrier. It just proved it's not a common carrier, so it should be stripped of its protection.
 

sakinago

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
4,676
Reaction score
988
Points
185
"Sen. Josh (R-Mo.) and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Wednesday separately announced they were both working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal protections that ensure the company is not held liable for what is posted on its platform.

Both Hawley and Gaetz argued that Twitter’s decision to flag the tweets called its legal liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act into question. Section 230 protects social media platforms from facing lawsuits over what users post.

Hawley sent a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday questioning why the platform should be given Section 230 protections and tweeted that he would soon introduce legislation to end “government giveaways” under the legal shield.

“If @Twitter wants to editorialize & comment on users’ posts, it should be divested of its special status under federal law (Section 230) & forced to play by same rules as all other publishers”



IMO subsidies and / or government protections should not be given to companies that engage in trampling on Freedom of Speech. Yes, Twitter (and Facebook) is a privately owned and run company and can operate as they see fit ... but they can do so without tax dollars or protections from a government that supports and defends the Constitution which affords the right of Freedom of Speech to all Americans.









.
That is going nowhere. Free speech rights apply to the government not private entities. Twitter receives no subsidies. Not a dime of taxpayer money goes to Twitter. That is a phony argument. A court decision last week made it clear that free speech rights do not apply to private companies.
Yes they do apply to private companies that offer more antiquated forms of platforms. Say your place of business has a community cork board. Your business is not allowed to pick and choose what can be posted onto that cork board, as long as whatever posted is legal. That would be a violation of first amendment rights.
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
53,537
Reaction score
12,312
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
Isn't that a little strong....I mean, your calling out Twitter "like they thugs they are"?
I don't think so. Suppression of free speech, refusing to allow the fair and equal exchange of ideas because they don't fit 'your' agenda?

Nah, I'm good with 'thugs'. :p
Did Twitter REMOVE Trump' s 'free speech'?

NO!

Under trump' s free speech, Twitter expressed THEIR Free Speech....


It is Trump who wants to SQUASH Twitter' s Free Speech response...!!!!!!!! :)


And he's got you lemmings fighting for him, to shut Twitter up! To take their free speech away! And to abuse his govt power, to do it!

Holy Smokes!

You just can't make this crap up....! :rolleyes:
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
53,537
Reaction score
12,312
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
so, is it okay for the govt to tell the USMB Moderators and site owners what rules they make for this site or to hold USMB owners libel for what their posters, post?
They won't since this forum is a PLATFORM, Mods delete when certain debate rules are violated. I had THREE postings deleted (Reported them) yesterday because it violated the forum rule of attacking family members (No Attacks on family members) , my wife in this case, he was very insulting and completely off topic.
Moderators can delete or ban or permaban any message or members they want on USMB, at their discretion....it does not have to break the rules....

..............................................

Did Trump's tweet, violate twitter's rules, as they claim??
But they aren't publishing inside, against your comments. They react to rule breaking nothing more.

You ignored post 95 that explains why Twitter made a huge mistake in their reaction to one of his NON Rule breaking comments.
HAVENT READ 95 YET, but the news reported that the tweet of trump's did break their rules?

my problem is why haven't they corrected or added information to ALL of his fake news and lies? Or ban him for his lies and threats before?
Because they would have to act accordingly for all the other twitter users who provide misleading information. That is about 99% of all twitter users. Twitter would no longer exist as a company.
why do they have to act fairly?

It's a Forum, who says Twitter mods can't express what they want, when they want on their own forum?

Can we get govt to shut this USMB Forum down because we don't like what actions USMB Moderators take?

No!

So, what is all this whining and snow flaking all about?? Eh?

Distraction?
Free campaigning getting the news to cover his whining and govt abuse of power instead of his covid failures? Instead of 100000 deaths in just 2 months being discussed?

And y'all praise him? What has this Trump world come to? Your hatred for America is great.... :(
 

Dragonlady

Designing Woman
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
23,766
Reaction score
6,612
Points
290
Location
Niagara Escarpment
"Sen. Josh (R-Mo.) and Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Wednesday separately announced they were both working on legislation to strip Twitter of federal protections that ensure the company is not held liable for what is posted on its platform.

Both Hawley and Gaetz argued that Twitter’s decision to flag the tweets called its legal liability protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act into question. Section 230 protects social media platforms from facing lawsuits over what users post.

Hawley sent a letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on Wednesday questioning why the platform should be given Section 230 protections and tweeted that he would soon introduce legislation to end “government giveaways” under the legal shield.

“If @Twitter wants to editorialize & comment on users’ posts, it should be divested of its special status under federal law (Section 230) & forced to play by same rules as all other publishers”


IMO subsidies and / or government protections should not be given to companies that engage in trampling on Freedom of Speech. Yes, Twitter (and Facebook) is a privately owned and run company and can operate as they see fit ... but they can do so without tax dollars or protections from a government that supports and defends the Constitution which affords the right of Freedom of Speech to all Americans.


Hey Stupid. Gaetz can't do jack shit and neither can Trump. Democrats control the House, and you can't pass legislation without them.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
51,401
Reaction score
8,507
Points
2,040
Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.
Like what LGBTQRSTUVs do with bakeries? Intimidate them like the thugs they are?
This has nothing to do with that
So legislation has nothing to do with other legislation built off the same premise?
Lol ok
The rationale for public accommodation laws does not apply to social media websites.

This is not the same premise.
The argument is Twitter owns this site to Twitter can do what the fuck they want.

That argument doesn't also apply to other businesses wanting to do what they want?

Just like every other commie leftist out there, you have played both sides of the issue. How perfect.
.
Every business retains the right to toss out people based on a multitude of factors, especially individual behavior. That’s no different than what Twitter is doing. People have attempted to sue Twitter on grounds of title 2 of the Civil Rights Act and I believe they’ve always failed.
The only reason you support twitter in this is you know they only seem to gun for views you disagree with.

Fucking fascist.
If your side wasn't posting so many lies and so much hate they wouldn't be getting banned.

Follow the rules.
Yes, because progressive losers like you never post "hateful" or "lying" tweets.

Fuck off.
Twitter removes an enormous amount of tweets for being hateful. No one removed Trump’s lying tweet. They just posted a link below it stating why they thought it wasn’t true. What’s ironic is that you’re all outraged that Twitter is using their freedom of expression to reply to Trump’s tweet.

Fascist.
They claim to be an open forum, accepting all viewpoints, and yet the only viewpoints they seem to delete with any consistency are those from the right.

If they want to take a side, they should have to say it, in writing. If they want to be a forum for open exchange they shouldn't be banning people for content based on their politics.
Twitter has never stated there are no limits to what you can post. You’re either lying or just making shut up.
Being an open forum and having no limits on what you can post are two different things, and you know that.

Twitter's own missions statement:

Twitter's purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.
As their statement says, moderation is essential to keeping the platform viable.

That’s precisely why they wrote section 230 in the first place. That’s why these websites even exist.
"Moderation".

So that's how you explain content based bans and filtering.
Uh, yes. That’s exactly what it means. If someone posts something with content that is unacceptable, the moderators remove it. It’s how it works on this forum too.
And of course, to you, unacceptable means "anything I disagree with politically"

Just admit it, you favor banning speech of people you don't like.
Twitter has a ton of speech on it that I disagree with. I have no desire to see it banned.

Have you ever seen a platform with the lack of moderation that you desire? They’re cesspools of racism, anti-semitism and generally fringe nonsense. No one wants that.
Bullshit.

You are a censoring lying twat. FOAD.
And you’re a fascist thug. Nice to meet you.

Twitter has no obligation to pay to propagate idiots speech.
What am i doing to stop you from spreading your idiocy?

Twitter claims to be a discussion forum, and then takes sides in the discussion.

You don't care because it takes your side, filth.
You’re supporting a government action for force Twitter to support your dear leader.
Right now government action gives them immunity from liability because they claim people's posts are not "their content".

They then claim the right to moderate content based on whatever they feel like because it is 'their site", and thus their content.

They want the best of both worlds, and they should have to choose. Claim all content as theirs, moderate as they see fit, and then be liable for whatever they let through, or keep their protections as "not their content" and not moderate based on political, cultural, or moral viewpoints of their own.
That’s exactly the point of section 230 as I’ve been trying to tell you.

You don’t want to take away their ability to moderate. You really don’t want that. Go to an unmoderated forum. It’s garbage. It’s an absolute cesspool.
Section 230 was to prevent something like someone tweeting "I am going to blow up a bridge" and then twitter being sued because they didn't do anything about it.

It wasn't designed for Twitter to take sides in political debates and still claim the content isn't theirs.
That doesn’t make any sense. Why would the goal be to allow internet companies immunity from reporting specific identifiable threats?

You don’t really know what you’re talking about.
It's to stop someone from suing twitter for the threat made by another person.

Tweeter: "I am going to kill X"
20 min later, person X is killed by said tweeter.

230 stops the victim's family from suing twitter because they didn't call the cops.
You really think that the government wrote legislation that permitted internet companies to ignore individual specific threats?

That makes absolutely no sense.
It's exactly why they wrote it. Why do you think they wrote it?
Prodigy was sued for defamation by a bank because a poster on their message board accuses that bank of fraud. Prodigy was liable for that defamation.

What made Prodigy liable? They had moderators who removed posts that were insulting, off topic or harassment.

So it created a perverse incentive. The only way to avoid liability for the posts is to allow people to post basically whatever they wanted. It stopped anyone from trying to keep their Internet forums civil and that’s not what anyone wants.
Progressives are the kings of "this is why we can't have nice things". Section 230 works when only used to weed out criminal or completely vulgar postings. But now you want to use it to silence opponents.

Thus it has to go. All on you, none on us.
Alright then. Show me what has been censored.

Certainly not President Snowflake. No one took down his idiotic tweets even when they do constitute harassment.
You Can’t Say That on Twitter | National Review
So the complaint is that you can’t use twitter to express your discrimination of transgendered individuals which is against the terms of service?
How is it against the terms of service to say a man is a man and a woman is a woman?

Sorry, but all you are doing is messing with the paint job and the fender, the DNA stays the same.

See? This is the issue, your side decides a viewpoint is ist/ic and thus verboten.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
51,401
Reaction score
8,507
Points
2,040
Gaetz is virtue signaling. His little hissy fit has no chance at doing anything.

Second, if his bill did pass, the result would be the immediate removal of Trump from the platform.

The sole intention of this episode is to intimidate Twitter like the thugs they are.
Like what LGBTQRSTUVs do with bakeries? Intimidate them like the thugs they are?
This has nothing to do with that
So legislation has nothing to do with other legislation built off the same premise?
Lol ok
The rationale for public accommodation laws does not apply to social media websites.

This is not the same premise.
The argument is Twitter owns this site to Twitter can do what the fuck they want.

That argument doesn't also apply to other businesses wanting to do what they want?

Just like every other commie leftist out there, you have played both sides of the issue. How perfect.
.
Every business retains the right to toss out people based on a multitude of factors, especially individual behavior. That’s no different than what Twitter is doing. People have attempted to sue Twitter on grounds of title 2 of the Civil Rights Act and I believe they’ve always failed.
The only reason you support twitter in this is you know they only seem to gun for views you disagree with.

Fucking fascist.
If your side wasn't posting so many lies and so much hate they wouldn't be getting banned.

Follow the rules.
Yes, because progressive losers like you never post "hateful" or "lying" tweets.

Fuck off.
Twitter removes an enormous amount of tweets for being hateful. No one removed Trump’s lying tweet. They just posted a link below it stating why they thought it wasn’t true. What’s ironic is that you’re all outraged that Twitter is using their freedom of expression to reply to Trump’s tweet.

Fascist.
They claim to be an open forum, accepting all viewpoints, and yet the only viewpoints they seem to delete with any consistency are those from the right.

If they want to take a side, they should have to say it, in writing. If they want to be a forum for open exchange they shouldn't be banning people for content based on their politics.
They delete things from the right because they are lies, not because they disagree.
So they delete all lies from Twitter equally?

And lies are not "opinions I don't like"
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top