progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
republicans are leftwing not right,,,,
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Harvard law professor: Twitter cannot violate the First Amendment
- Thread starter pyetro
- Start date
Inciting violence isn’t free speech.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
That is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heardrepublicans are leftwing not right,,,,Right wingers are being forced to come up with caveats to explain fascism and free speech. It sounded easy at the beginning, didn't it?what did their rules say about lying???Because I said Republicans are fascists.why??Free republic.com banned me once. Fascists!Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
yes they can,, but as per their agreement to get their license they have to give proper notice,, and as of yet they havent,,whats that got to do with equal application of the rules as per their agreement to get their license and protections???they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Because they can morph or change their rules or apply them any way they please and I agree with that.
Again, are you being FORCED to use Facebook or Twitter ???
In China you have no choice. You cannot start your own free Social Media Platform in China. In the USA you can (or at least you could)
Are you saying you want to be more like China?
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
only because youre an ignorant moron that doesnt understand the founding of this country,,,That is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heardrepublicans are leftwing not right,,,,Right wingers are being forced to come up with caveats to explain fascism and free speech. It sounded easy at the beginning, didn't it?what did their rules say about lying???Because I said Republicans are fascists.why??Free republic.com banned me once. Fascists!Yes, they have the legal right. It just shows what fascists they are.A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
republican are for more power than granted by the constitution,, so they are leftwing authoritarians,,, just not as far left as democrats,,,
its OK to say they are right of dems but not rightwing,,,
- May 20, 2009
- 145,020
- 67,643
- 2,330
Bake my cakeA basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
The communication companies can be dealt with the same way Ma Bell was dealt with and the railroads.
LOL
That was back when there was still some honesty in the Federal Government.
Those days are LONG gone.
yes they can,, but as per their agreement to get their license they have to give proper notice,, and as of yet they havent,,whats that got to do with equal application of the rules as per their agreement to get their license and protections???they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Because they can morph or change their rules or apply them any way they please and I agree with that.
Again, are you being FORCED to use Facebook or Twitter ???
In China you have no choice. You cannot start your own free Social Media Platform in China. In the USA you can (or at least you could)
Are you saying you want to be more like China?
And with the new administration, they will be allowed to do anything and everything they want.
They KNOW that and it's why they're already banning Trump.
The Shit we're gonna see over the next two years will be jaw dropping.
But as I keep saying....FIRST....they have to take away all the guns (and they will)
The road to Confiscation will undeniably begin on January 21st.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
twitter was about dead before trump,, and with this their days are numbered,,yes they can,, but as per their agreement to get their license they have to give proper notice,, and as of yet they havent,,whats that got to do with equal application of the rules as per their agreement to get their license and protections???they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Because they can morph or change their rules or apply them any way they please and I agree with that.
Again, are you being FORCED to use Facebook or Twitter ???
In China you have no choice. You cannot start your own free Social Media Platform in China. In the USA you can (or at least you could)
Are you saying you want to be more like China?
And with the new administration, they will be allowed to do anything and everything they want.
They KNOW that and it's why they're already banning Trump.
The Shit we're gonna see over the next two years will be jaw dropping.
But as I keep saying....FIRST....they have to take away all the guns (and they will)
twitter was about dead before trump,, and with this their days are numbered,,yes they can,, but as per their agreement to get their license they have to give proper notice,, and as of yet they havent,,whats that got to do with equal application of the rules as per their agreement to get their license and protections???they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Because they can morph or change their rules or apply them any way they please and I agree with that.
Again, are you being FORCED to use Facebook or Twitter ???
In China you have no choice. You cannot start your own free Social Media Platform in China. In the USA you can (or at least you could)
Are you saying you want to be more like China?
And with the new administration, they will be allowed to do anything and everything they want.
They KNOW that and it's why they're already banning Trump.
The Shit we're gonna see over the next two years will be jaw dropping.
But as I keep saying....FIRST....they have to take away all the guns (and they will)
The Left LOVES Twitter
They will continue supporting it
More importantly, the Establishment will support Twitter as a propaganda platform.
it's not going anywhere anytime soon.
Crepitus
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2018
- 73,494
- 65,299
- 3,615
- Banned
- #31
No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
they will start eating each other when theirs no one left to eat,,,twitter was about dead before trump,, and with this their days are numbered,,yes they can,, but as per their agreement to get their license they have to give proper notice,, and as of yet they havent,,whats that got to do with equal application of the rules as per their agreement to get their license and protections???they should be required to apply their rules equally across the board,,Twitter and Facebook should be able to block anyone and everyone they desire.
However, it reveals their intolerance of opposing viewpoints to do so.
I disagree.
You are not required to use facebook OR Twitter.
It's not their fault that you didn't create or patronize a competing service.
Because they can morph or change their rules or apply them any way they please and I agree with that.
Again, are you being FORCED to use Facebook or Twitter ???
In China you have no choice. You cannot start your own free Social Media Platform in China. In the USA you can (or at least you could)
Are you saying you want to be more like China?
And with the new administration, they will be allowed to do anything and everything they want.
They KNOW that and it's why they're already banning Trump.
The Shit we're gonna see over the next two years will be jaw dropping.
But as I keep saying....FIRST....they have to take away all the guns (and they will)
The Left LOVES Twitter
They will continue supporting it
More importantly, the Establishment will support Twitter as a propaganda platform.
it's not going anywhere anytime soon.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
who incited a riot???I am not surprised these right wingers don't know that it's illegal to incite a riot.
Inciting a riot isn't free speech.
Especially a riot that resulted in 5 deaths and a lot of damage to our capitol.
got a link??
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
Crepitus
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2018
- 73,494
- 65,299
- 3,615
- Banned
- #36
Sorry kid, facts are facts. Like it or don't, they don't care.it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
so you think a few hundred unarmed hot heads were intent on over throwing the government???Sorry kid, facts are facts. Like it or don't, they don't care.it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
that takes a special kind of stupid
Crepitus
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2018
- 73,494
- 65,299
- 3,615
- Banned
- #38
There were thousands, and not all were unarmed.so you think a few hundred unarmed hot heads were intent on over throwing the government???Sorry kid, facts are facts. Like it or don't, they don't care.it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
that takes a special kind of stupid
Check some real media for the list of arrests.
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 61,203
- 37,222
- 2,615
whats the arrests got to do with it??? they deserve that for being stupid,,There were thousands, and not all were unarmed.so you think a few hundred unarmed hot heads were intent on over throwing the government???Sorry kid, facts are facts. Like it or don't, they don't care.it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
that takes a special kind of stupid
Check some real media for the list of arrests.
so you still think their intent was to overthrow the government???
if so that takes a special kind of stupid,,,
OH you got a link to those armed guys???
I just googled it and got nothing,,,
Crepitus
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2018
- 73,494
- 65,299
- 3,615
- Banned
- #40
You didn't.whats the arrests got to do with it??? they deserve that for being stupid,,There were thousands, and not all were unarmed.so you think a few hundred unarmed hot heads were intent on over throwing the government???Sorry kid, facts are facts. Like it or don't, they don't care.it takes a special kind of stupid to think or suggest that was an insurgence,,,No, they just don't like people using their platform to plan insurgency.its more about free speech than the 1st amendment,, most people dont know the difference,,,A basic lesson about free speech from Laurence Tribe:
[/URL]To begin with, the First Amendment applies to the government — not to private actors like Twitter. So, when the company adds warnings to tweets or even — going a step further for users other than Trump — removes tweets, it can’t possibly violate the First Amendment, because it simply isn’t a governmental entity. You can love or hate how Twitter is regulating its own private platform — but you can’t call it a First Amendment violation.
the issue with twiiter is they dont apply their rules equally and base it on political leanings favoring one side over the other,,
that takes a special kind of stupid
Check some real media for the list of arrests.
so you still think their intent was to overthrow the government???
if so that takes a special kind of stupid,,,
OH you got a link to those armed guys???
I just googled it and got nothing,,,
Similar threads
- Replies
- 122
- Views
- 3K
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 949
- Replies
- 54
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 29
- Views
- 9K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 23
- Replies
- 149
- Views
- 706
- Replies
- 110
- Views
- 260
- Replies
- 11
- Views
- 30
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8159
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 474
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-