James Woods to sue over DNC for telling Twitter to ban him from Twitter

[pknopp]

Freedom of speech is for twitter to support whoever they want. He should fucking sir Fox News for not giving him a show. What a moron.

If he can prove it was done, there is a good chance he will win.

 

[Magnus]

Eh…..the point still stands. The Democrat Party instructed a private media company to censor Woods, and it hurt his career.

You’re missing the larger point in an effort to sweep what‘s been going on: the government is directing private companies to censor people. That’s a violation of the 1st Amendment.

So, you agree that you lied? That's a first. A trumptard acknowledges a lie. Good for you.

 

[Thinker101]

When they take away your language, your name and culture, call me. We’ll talk.

When these clowns canceled Twitter accounts, they did take away our language...and our name, Einstein.

 

[Nova78]

Eh…..the point still stands. The Democrat Party instructed a private media company to censor Woods, and it hurt his career.

You’re missing the larger point in an effort to sweep what‘s been going on: the government is directing private companies to censor people. That’s a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Democrats are scum.

 

[Lisa558]

So, you agree that you lied? That's a first. A trumptard acknowledges a lie. Good for you.

I didn’t lie. I skimmed too quickly and used the wrong word. What difference does it make if the Government is censoring people or banning them? It’s a violation of the 1st amendment regardless.

 

[talksalot]

Freedom of speech is for twitter to support whoever they want. He should fucking sir Fox News for not giving him a show. What a moron.

If Twitter decides, that one thing. When the DNC demands it, it's a violation of the First Amendment.

 

[Lisa558]

Democrats are scum.

I also notice they go on the personal attack to deflect from what’s happening: the government censoring people.

 

[citygator]

If he can prove it was done, there is a good chance he will win.

There is zero chance. Twitter is free to delete ban and block anyone they want. That’s free speech.

 

[Hellbilly]

When these clowns canceled Twitter accounts, they did take away our language...and our name, Einstein.

No one has taken your language. You still speak it.

 

[pknopp]

There is zero chance. Twitter is free to delete ban and block anyone they want. That’s free speech.

Yes they can. He is saying they didn't block him over what they wanted but what the DNC wanted. Now I am not saying it happened but if it did, I would not bet against him.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Why wouldn't he just sue Twitter?

the DNC has no power over Twitter; they are a private entity and so in Twitter


What this does show is why washed up celebrities find it so easy to fleece republican voters.....their cognitive skills are zero....

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Yes they can. He is saying they didn't block him over what they wanted but what the DNC wanted. Now I am not saying it happened but if it did, I would not bet against him.

he should still be suing Twitter....stop buying into this clown shit

 

[Marener]

Eh…..the point still stands. The Democrat Party instructed a private media company to censor Woods, and it hurt his career.

You’re missing the larger point in an effort to sweep what‘s been going on: the government is directing private companies to censor people. That’s a violation of the 1st Amendment.

The DNC isn’t the government. You are confused.

 

[citygator]

Yes they can. He is saying they didn't block him over what they wanted but what the DNC wanted. Now I am not saying it happened but if it did, I would not bet against him.

It doesn’t matter. The RNC or the DNC can send notes and letters to twitter all they want. Twitter makes the call. It’s a company not a government department.

 

[pknopp]

he should still be suing Twitter....stop buying into this clown shit

I'm discussing a subject. I have argued over and over and over that Twitter can allow or disallow anyone they wanted to on their site.

Now if they allowed a political party to decide that, I am not going to defend that.

I doubt he actually sues but if he does the particulars will be interesting.

 

[Magnus]

I didn’t lie. I skimmed too quickly and used the wrong word. What difference does it make if the Government is censoring people or banning them? It’s a violation of the 1st amendment regardless.

You did lie. Reverting back to trumptard form, are we? Yup, I knew it was too good to last.

As for Woods getting his panties in an uproar? Show me one site that does not have mods that censor your post. Whether you like it or not, them's the breaks. Private ownership and all that. And it's not a violation of 1st Amendment rights. Go bone up on the Constitution.

A long time ago, you didn't have to explain to a conservative about private enterprises and their freedom of speech. But not anymore. All you find now in the modern conservative party are a bunch of whiny losers who sob every time they lose an election or their posts are deleted.

 

[pknopp]

It doesn’t matter. The RNC or the DNC can send notes and letters to twitter all they want. Twitter makes the call. ta company not a government department.

He has a valid argument about being banned harming his career. The reasoning will be interesting if true and the outcome certainly not going to be determined here.

 

[citygator]

Why wouldn't he just sue Twitter?

the DNC has no power over Twitter; they are a private entity and so in Twitter


What this does show is why washed up celebrities find it so easy to fleece republican voters.....their cognitive skills are zero....

Cuz Twitter can publish or ban whoever they want just like advertisers can do business with twitter or not just like the RNC or the DNC can send communication about anything they don’t like. None of that is an issue an everyone knows it but this is all for show.

 

[pknopp]

You did lie. Reverting back to trumptard form, are we? Yup, I knew it was too good to last.

As for Woods getting his panties in an uproar? Show me one site that does not have mods that censor your post. Whether you like it or not, them's the breaks. Private ownership and all that.

A long time ago, you didn't have to explain to a conservative about private enterprises and their freedom of speech. But not anymore. All you find now in the modern conservative party are a bunch of whiny losers who sob every time they lose an election or their posts are deleted.

How long would a site like this last if one political party or the other did the moderation?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

I'm discussing a subject. I have argued over and over and over that Twitter can allow or disallow anyone they wanted to on their site.

Now if they allowed a political party to decide that, I am not going to defend that.

I doubt he actually sues but if he does the particulars will be interesting.

Parler, Truth Social, Gab, etc -- ACTUALLY CENSORS people while proclaiming themselves to be free-speech absolutists -- and they do it with a pro-right wing bend-- nobody is whining about suing Truth social because their anti-Trump content was deleted...


But when its Twitter...suddenly, its "interesting"