I Fear For Justice Thomas’ Life

[Rigby5]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

oh, okay, yes that is accurate. Since we really have no clue the exact numbers, the facts that there is a population that is silent is rather large. It's an attention getter and it works.

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

The silent majority is a myth but is used to reinforce false beliefs, even up to people using the silent majority to support their false belief that Trump won the election.

The number of people are not relevant to rights issues.
The majority does not have the authority to violate the rights of even a single person, much less a minority.
The only legal justification for any censorship is when it otherwise would harm the rights of others, like slander or libel.
And even then, I would prefer it left alone, but then you sue for damages by defamation, after the fact.

 

[Rigby5]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

The silent majority likely is mainstream and the media likely isn't, but rights are not determined by majority rule.
Rights are supposed to be inherent and protected by the courts, regardless of the desires of the majority.

 

[Turtlesoup]

The Left has been known to stop at nothing.

The left didn't cause a riot at the Capitol, Chinese Bot.

the hell they didn't--------corrupt swamp got protested on and then implanted antifa and BLM thugs to cause trouble so their propaganda machine and nitwitted trolls, synth, could play head games.

 

[colfax_m]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

oh, okay, yes that is accurate. Since we really have no clue the exact numbers, the facts that there is a population that is silent is rather large. It's an attention getter and it works.

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

The silent majority is a myth but is used to reinforce false beliefs, even up to people using the silent majority to support their false belief that Trump won the election.

The number of people are not relevant to rights issues.
The majority does not have the authority to violate the rights of even a single person, much less a minority.
The only legal justification for any censorship is when it otherwise would harm the rights of others, like slander or libel.
And even then, I would prefer it left alone, but then you sue for damages by defamation, after the fact.

Not really talking about rights here. Talking about who is correct.

Claiming many people agree with you, at least in democratic nations, tends to lead to people being correct.

 

[Rigby5]

a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights

But if ya wanna try that fruit you're free to have at it

These days we likely would attribute inherent rights to human DNA genome instead of God, but the result is the same.
Rights can't be dictated by majority rule because the majority is always selfish and will forget that once they set the precedent of abusing the rights of one, then the rights of all become less secure.
So Thomas is correct on this one, that arbitrary censorship of political beliefs or expression, likely is illegal.
More so with the Internet, which is a government provided service that then is required by law to allow fair and equal use.
Companies like FaceBook and Twitter only use the government internet, they do not created or support it, and do not have the authority to violate its fair use regulations they agreed to when allowed to open to the public for business.

 

[Rigby5]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

oh, okay, yes that is accurate. Since we really have no clue the exact numbers, the facts that there is a population that is silent is rather large. It's an attention getter and it works.

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

The silent majority is a myth but is used to reinforce false beliefs, even up to people using the silent majority to support their false belief that Trump won the election.

The number of people are not relevant to rights issues.
The majority does not have the authority to violate the rights of even a single person, much less a minority.
The only legal justification for any censorship is when it otherwise would harm the rights of others, like slander or libel.
And even then, I would prefer it left alone, but then you sue for damages by defamation, after the fact.

Not really talking about rights here. Talking about who is correct.

Claiming many people agree with you, at least in democratic nations, tends to lead to people being correct.

I disagree that the number of people who agree makes any difference.
The vast majority were in favor of Prohibition, the war in Vietnam, the invasion of Iraq, the war on drugs, 3 strikes laws, etc., but that does not make them right.
The point of a democratic republic, vs a simple democracy, is that you do not decide based on majority rule.
The majority is often totally wrong.

This particular thread is about censorship, and that is clearly incredibly dangerous, so has to be illegal.
And it actually really is illegal.
FaceBook and Twitter are supposed to by law follow the FCC regulations for fair use, which does not allow political censorship, as these companies have done then illegally.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Left has been known to stop at nothing.

The left didn't cause a riot at the Capitol, Chinese Bot.

Of course they did......no one else had as much practice at it.



1.After witnessing a decade of Democrat authorized and inspired riots, how believable is it that the Right is responsible for the Capitol mayhem?





2. The Far Left relies on a dumbed down, history-challenged public….that’s the reason for government schooling. Remediation begins with terms like ‘agent provocateur,’ and ‘false flag operation.’ And nobody does it better than the Left.











3. “The Reichstag fire (German: Reichstagsbrand, listen (help·info)) was an arson attack on the Reichstag building, home of the German parliament in Berlin, on Monday 27 February 1933, precisely four weeks after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany. The day after the fire, the Reichstag Fire Decree was passed. The Nazi Party used the fire as a pretext to claim that communists were plotting against the German government, which made the fire pivotal in the establishment of Nazi Germany.” Reichstag fire - Wikipedia







4. “Hitler, however, insisted that the Communist Party, which was a considerable force within the Reichstag, had set the fire, and pressed German President Paul von Hindenburg to approve of an emergency law suspending civil liberties. Communist leaders, including the Communist members of the Reichstag, were hunted down and arrested.



Without their presence in the Reichstag, the National Socialists and their coalition partners had a majority. That enabled the Nazis to pass a further law, the Enabling Act, on March 23, 1933, giving Hitler dictatorial powers and removing any obstacle to his absolute supremacy.” The Left Is Enjoying Its Reichstag Fire Moment







5. ‘Leftist Antifa Among Mob Storming US Capitol’



– Facial recognition experts and backers of American President Donald J. Trump said members of the hardline leftist Antifa movement infiltrated protestors who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.



Several witnesses and reports monitored by Worthy News suggested radical leftist vandals broke into the building housing the U.S. Congress while most Trump supporters were loud but peaceful.” https://www.worthynews.com/55452-leftist-antifa-among-mob-storming-us-capitol







There is no disputing that the Democrats have had far more practice at riots than the Right.

Biden voters are well practiced.

===================================

6. Did you find stories in the media excoriating the dozens of anti-America riots by Biden voters?



Here they are in June, attacking the White House….practicing for the Capitol.






========================================================

7. “No one can point to any statement from President Trump calling upon his supporters to storm the Capitol, much less to stage a coup against the U.S. government, but it doesn’t matter anymore. The establishment media and the social media giants are insisting that he incited the attack on the Capitol and was trying to install himself as a dictator by means of a guy with a buffalo horn hat and some other dopes and wingnuts, and if you don’t believe it, you’re a racist, bigoted, MAGA-hat-wearing fascist who deserves to be silenced along with the president, and soon will be. But it’s clear who the real fascists are, and they are exploiting their Reichstag Fire moment to the fullest.” The Left Is Enjoying Its Reichstag Fire Moment







The NYTimes provided proof that it wasn't Trump supporters:



“About 20 minutes before Trump’s speech ends, some people in the Capitol crowd harass officers posted at the barricades and start to get physical. Others follow suit, until they violently overwhelm the police and breach the building’s outer perimeter.” How a Presidential Rally Turned Into a Capitol Rampage


Two facts that the past several years have established:

• Nothing the media claims turns out to be true.
• There could hardly be better instigators of violence, than those Biden voters who have been well practiced in ‘the art.’

With those facts in mind......who was responsible for the Capitol violence?

8. “Video Reveals Trump Supporters Tried to Stop the Violence
Violence by Antifa on the south side where Trump supporters were told to March to. Supporters stopped the breakage but he started again later. MSM keeps saying it’s Trump http://supporters.it’s not.






Video Reveals Trump Supporters Tried to Stop the Violence | Conservative Insider

conservativeinsider.org

=========================================================

9. 9. "The National Socialists used the Reichstag fire to destroy all political opposition in Germany and assert total control over the lives of every German citizen. They used it to give themselves official, pseudo-legal permission to break every moral law and ethical code ever known to mankind, and ultimately to murder tens of millions of people, including six million Jews (the particular target of their hatred), and lay waste to the entire European continent.



The American Left of today has followed the Nazis’ Reichstag Fire playbook to a T thus far. What is to prevent them from attempting to implement the whole thing? The one thing saving us from woke totalitarianism at this point may be the fact that the sinister authoritarians of the Democratic Party, the social media corporations, and the establishment media may already have overreached. America in 2020, even after fifty years of woke indoctrination in our schools, is not like Germany of 1933. We have a strong tradition of freedom, notably the freedom of speech. In attempting to impose their totalitarian woke straitjacket upon the American people, the Left is going to encounter considerably more opposition than the Nazis did in Germany, where the Weimar Republic was the nation’s first attempt at representative government and never enjoyed great support among the people."

The Left Is Enjoying Its Reichstag Fire Moment
The American Left of today has followed the Nazis’ Reichstag Fire playbook to a T so far. What can prevent them from doing the whole thing?

pjmedia.com

=====================================================

10. “Analysis concludes Antifa provoked shooting of Ashli Babbitt at Capitol
'The ones who were agitating the crowd were not Trump supporters'

An analysis of videos of the death of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt at the U.S. Capitol indicates Antifa activists provoked the fatal gunshot from a police officer. Japanese investigator Misako Ganaha explained in a video interview with Epoch Times reporter Joshua Philipp on his “Crossroads” program that she analyzed two lengthy videos, affording two different angles of the incident near the House chamber…. just prior to the shooting, two men who had been agitating the crowd broke the glass on a set of doors.

… the same Marxist “agitate and divide” tactics employed by leftists in her home country…. part of the tactic, she said, is for someone in collaboration with the agitators to serve as a “witness” to mainstream media, which tells the story “without analyzing.” Media simply repeats what the witness says, explained Ganaha, “so the world does not know the truth.” Analysis concludes Antifa provoked shooting of Ashli Babbitt at Capitol

======================================================

11. “BLM instigator of Capitol riots, John Earle Sullivan, arrested

The Utah Black Lives Matter "activist" has been bragging about his involvement in instigating the Capitol riots. Now, he's been arrested.

The deadly riots at the Capitol last week that have sparked Big Tech cancelations and prompted another impeachment of President Trump were instigated in part by Black Lives Matter and Antifa “activists,” according to multiple media reports. One of the highest profile suspects, John Earle Sullivan from Utah, has been arrested.”

This story will be buried by mainstream media and suppressed by Big Tech. The arrest of John Earle Sullivan, a known Black Lives Matter leader and provocateur, belies the accepted narrative that Trump-supporters alone caused the riots.” BLM instigator of Capitol riots, John Earle Sullivan, arrested

=============================================================

12. “Democrats Cling Desperately to Trump Hatred
The Democrats are not going to be able to hide much longer behind their Trump hatred. But it’s really all they’ve got.

With nearly airtight totalitarian uniformity, the American media robotically repeat that there is no possible argument to be made that the 2020 presidential election produced an unjust result.

…Trump has been condemned for his remarks to hundreds of thousands of his supporters in Washington on January 6, and it is now a political commandment that he is responsible for the ensuing illegal forced entry and fatal violence at the United States Capitol.
He actually told his supporters that they should “peacefully and patriotically make your voices be heard” when they proceeded on to the Capitol;…


They have made Donald Trump the leader of all who object to government-restricted freedom of expression, corrupt election practices, and the transformation of America into a socialist commune. At the moment of Joe Biden’s ultimate triumph, he and his ramshackle coalition of contending (and in some cases disreputable) interests are exposed in their ghastly infirmity. The totalitarian woke media will not be able to disguise this macabre farce for long.” Democrats Cling Desperately to Trump Hatred - American Greatness
13. “James, brother of accused leftist provocateur John Sullivan, claims 226 Antifa members started Capitol riots
John Sullivan was arrested yesterday in connection with instigating the Capitol riots on January 6th. A video of him and CNN photojournalist Jade Sacker emerged this week that shows them giddy following the murder of Trump-supporter Ashli Babbitt. Now, Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani is wondering why a text message from James Sullivan was not revealed during the President’s second impeachment hearings in Congress.

According to the text, James Sullivan makes a very bold claim: “I’m currently working with the FBI to expose and place total blame on John and the 226 members of antifa that instigated the Capitol ‘riot’ I was able to get my agent out of trouble along with three other uthan’s.”

…every day brings more evidence that Antifa and other left-wing “activists” incited the crowd to commit crimes. Videos of Antifa members secretly embedded with the Trump-supporters appear to reinforce these claims.

This all jibes with the credible conspiracy theory that Democrats or other interested parties planned this “false flag” attack in order to push for impeachment.” James, brother of accused leftist provocateur John Sullivan, claims 226 Antifa members started Capitol riots

======================================================

14. “Verified twitter user Amuse breaks everything down in further detail in a series of tweets.

"To make this clear. CNN was embedded with BLM/Antifa pretending to be Trump supporters taping them incite a riot. This is freaking huge. If CNN is allowed to maintain its press access anywhere in DC there needs to be a serious overhaul of our entire system," he tweeted.

Here's another one, who showed up with furs, and also got himself arrested. According to the New York Post:

Aaron Mostofsky was busted Tuesday at his brother’s house in Brooklyn by federal agents on multiple charges, including theft of government property for allegedly stealing a police riot shield and bulletproof vest, the source said.

Mostofsky, who is the son of Shlomo Mostofsky, a Supreme Court judge and a prominent figure in the Orthodox Jewish community, was photographed with both items.

Video circulating on Twitter following Mostofsky’s arrest shows FBI agents swarming the home and carting out what appeared to be the fur pelts and walking stick he had on him during the insurrection.

His politics? According to this report, registered Democrat.”



Rush to judgment on Trump? Multiple leftists arrested for Capitol riot

And Zero Hedge.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

oh, okay, yes that is accurate. Since we really have no clue the exact numbers, the facts that there is a population that is silent is rather large. It's an attention getter and it works.

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

The silent majority is a myth but is used to reinforce false beliefs, even up to people using the silent majority to support their false belief that Trump won the election.

The number of people are not relevant to rights issues.
The majority does not have the authority to violate the rights of even a single person, much less a minority.
The only legal justification for any censorship is when it otherwise would harm the rights of others, like slander or libel.
And even then, I would prefer it left alone, but then you sue for damages by defamation, after the fact.

Not really talking about rights here. Talking about who is correct.

Claiming many people agree with you, at least in democratic nations, tends to lead to people being correct.

I disagree that the number of people who agree makes any difference.
The vast majority were in favor of Prohibition, the war in Vietnam, the invasion of Iraq, the war on drugs, 3 strikes laws, etc., but that does not make them right.
The point of a democratic republic, vs a simple democracy, is that you do not decide based on majority rule.
The majority is often totally wrong.

This particular thread is about censorship, and that is clearly incredibly dangerous, so has to be illegal.
And it actually really is illegal.
FaceBook and Twitter are supposed to by law follow the FCC regulations for fair use, which does not allow political censorship, as these companies have done then illegally.

Let's not forget that only one party is responsible for censorship and opposition to free speech.

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. Understand….Justice Thomas is not a Liberal….so his plan is not about using government to solve the problem.

Conservatives like Justice Thomas do not want to regulate or break up the Tech companies in order to increase government power. No, the argument is the inalienable rights argument, the invaluable importance of freedom of all sorts, particularly speech.



We've all heard 'These are private companies.....let the other side create their own.'

Thomas rejects the free-market competition as what will limit the tyranny of Big Tech. He states that the very size and power of Big Tech limits ‘substantial barriers to entry’ by would-be competitors:

“Nor did Thomas buy free-market absolutists’ argument about competition limiting Big Tech tyranny. He pointed to the “substantial barriers to entry” facing newcomers. The fate of Parler proves the justice’s point. When the Twitter alternative offered a censorship-free platform, Big Tech colluded to crush it.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



No….Thomas argues that it is the natural rights of citizens that demands an end to the tyranny.

 

[jc456]

The right has gone batshit insane

Just the noisiest ones. Unfortunately they all have the thought that they’re mainstream. I’d rather not reinforce that belief.

no one on the right would ever make such a statement. news outlets have been bought out since 2001, any objective news outlet is deemed incompetent. it is funny to watch the mainstream demofks constantly bitch about Fox news, now Newsmax and OAN. hilarious. Then the demofks project their shit as it is us on the right. yep, totally understood by us.

The right call it the silent majority. They think they’re mainstream and that the media isn’t.

I know you idiots better than you do.

The silent majority likely is mainstream and the media likely isn't, but rights are not determined by majority rule.
Rights are supposed to be inherent and protected by the courts, regardless of the desires of the majority.

No one has a right to remove another’s right. Period. No matter who you align with. Demoturds always trying to take other’s rights. That’s a fact. Never seen a conservative do that. Evah!

 

[colfax_m]

Let's not forget that only one party is responsible for censorship and opposition to free speech.

 

[colfax_m]

FaceBook and Twitter are supposed to by law follow the FCC regulations for fair use, which does not allow political censorship, as these companies have done then illegally.

Of course the law allows for platforms to take down content. Fair use is a reference to copyright law.

 

[PoliticalChic]

11. Liberals regularly bow to caselaw, even over the Constitution itself.


If that is the case, Justice Thomas gives precedent to restrictions on Big Tech, written April 5th.



“If part of the problem is private, concentrated control over online content and platforms available to the public, then part of the solution may be found in doctrines that limit the right of a private company to exclude. Historically, at least two legal doctrines limited a company’s right to exclude.


 First, our legal system and its British predecessor have long subjected certain businesses, known as common carriers, to special regulations, including a general requirement to serve all comers.

Candeub, Bargaining for Free Speech: Common Carriage, Network Neutrality, and Section 230, 22 Yale J. L. & Tech. 391, 398–403 (2020) (Candeub); see also Burdick, The Origin of the Peculiar Duties of Public Service Companies, Pt. 1, 11 Colum. L. Rev. 514 (1911). Justifications for these regulations have varied.

Some scholars have argued that common-carrier regulations are justified only when a carrier possesses substantial market power. Candeub 404. Others have said that no substantial market power is needed so long as the company holds itself out as open to the public. Ibid.; see also Ingate v. Christie, 3 Car. & K. 61, 63, 175 Eng. Rep. 463, 464 (N. P. 1850) (“[A] person [who] holds himself out to carry goods for everyone as a business . . . is a common carrier”).

And this Court long ago suggested that regulations like those placed on common carriers may be justified, even for industries not historically recognized as common carriers, when “a business, by circumstances and its nature, . . . rise from private to be of public concern.” See German Alliance Ins. Co. v. Lewis, 233 U. S. 389, 411 (1914)…”

BIDEN v. KNIGHT FIRST AMENDMENT INSTITUTE AT COLUMBIA UNIV.

www.law.cornell.edu

The Democrats and their allies need be exposed and punished.

 

[Tax Man]

The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!

Thomas is a dunce!

 

[PoliticalChic]

12. And another reason to prevent these internet giants from excluding those with an alternative perspective:

“…this Court long ago suggested that regulations like those placed on common carriers may be justified, even for industries not historically recognized as common carriers, when “a business, by circumstances and its nature, . . . rise from private to be of public concern.” At that point, a company’s “property is but its instrument, the means of rendering the service which has become of public interest.”

…whatever may be said of other industries, there is clear historical precedent for regulating transportation and communications networks in a similar manner as traditional common carriers. Telegraphs, for example, because they “resemble[d] railroad companies and other common carriers,” were “bound to serve all customers alike, without discrimination.”
Read Clarence Thomas's Roadmap To Reining In Social Media Giants



Here we get to the Republican’s lily-livered refusal to restrict section 230!

“In exchange for regulating transportation and communication industries, governments—both State and Federal—have sometimes given common carriers special government favors. For example, governments have tied restrictions on a carrier’s ability to reject clients to “immunity from certain types of suits” or to regulations that make it more difficult for other companies to compete with the carrier (such as franchise licenses). By giving these companies special privileges, governments place them into a category distinct from other companies and closer to some functions, like the postal service, that the State has traditionally undertaken…..governments have limited a company’s right to exclude when that company is a public accommodation. This concept—related to common-carrier law—applies to companies that hold themselves out to the public but do not “carry” freight, passengers, or communications. It also applies regardless of the company’s market power.”

Read Clarence Thomas's Roadmap To Reining In Social Media Giants

"Unprecedented, however, is the concentrated control of so much speech in the hands of a few private parties," wrote Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

thefederalist.com

This is a clear shot across the bow to the Democrat Fascists and their allies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

13. In order to steal the election, the Wehrmacht......er, Democrats
a. named every death in America on the imaginary Wuhan Hoax
b. unleashed hordes of thieves, rioters, arsonists, assaulters...and made certain they went unpunished
c. established illegal voting
d. censored the truth about the Biden Cartel's being bought by our enemies

Ignoring the dangers to himself and his loved ones, Justice Thomas has spoken out about both the illegality of the election, and, in this thread, about the censorship imposed by Big Tech.


Justice Thomas: they should be denied the right to exclude, to silence opposing voices.

“In many ways, digital platforms that hold themselves out to the public resemble traditional common carriers,” he wrote. “Though digital instead of physical, they are at bottom communications networks, and they ‘carry’ information from one user to another. A traditional telephone company laid physical wires to create a network connecting people. Digital platforms lay information infrastructure that can be controlled in much the same way. And unlike newspapers, digital platforms hold themselves out as organizations that focus on distributing the speech of the broader public. Federal law dictates that companies cannot ‘be treated as the publisher or speaker’ of information that they merely distribute.” Justice Clarence Thomas Suggests SCOTUS Will 'Soon Have No Choice' But to Rein in Ability of 'Dominant Digital Platforms' to Moderate Speech Online



Section 230 shields them from being sued for content.....this must be changed if they desire federal protections.

Would any common carrier be allowed to exclude individuals based on ideology? Of course not. And internet companies do not create content of their own….they simply carry content from one person to another.



“Thomas’s views appear to align closely with the GOP’s recent broadsides against the Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which many on the right (Trump among them) have sought to repeal. Indeed, many on the right praised his concurrence on Monday.” Ibid.

 

[jc456]

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

we don't need any stupid polling to prove anything. pols are jokes. so actually you can't prove otherwise. there's that.

 

[jc456]

Let's not forget that only one party is responsible for censorship and opposition to free speech.

who denied them that right? looks like they did it. so what is it you're trying to claim?

people didn't agree with them and backed away from the NFL. that's all anyone did. more evidence you think we're supposed to just agree with you demofks. we don't. never have. you are evil fks.

A bunch of black men making millions kneeling because they were oppressed into those millions. Can't make it up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It’s a way to inflate your own righteousness by pretending that more people agree with you than they actually do.

we don't need any stupid polling to prove anything. pols are jokes. so actually you can't prove otherwise. there's that.

"... pols are jokes."








October 25, 2016...NYTimes gave Hillary 93% chance of winning the election.
2016 Election Forecast: Who Will Be President?



“Survey finds Hillary Clinton has ‘more than 99% chance’ of winning election over Donald Trump”

The man who predicted 49 out of 50 states in 2012 has said who will win on Tuesday

The Princeton Election Consortium found Ms Clinton has a projected 312 electoral votes across the country and only 270 are needed to win

www.independent.co.uk

 

[colfax_m]

we don't need any stupid polling to prove anything.

You don’t because you just like to believe whatever you want, whatever is easiest, whatever makes you feel safe.