JD Vance on free speech

[pknopp]

60 minutes edited their interview to make Kamala look better, not for any time constraints.

By taking a side they made an in kind contribution to the campaign.

60 minutes can take sides. Nothing excludes them from doing that.

 

[martybegan]

60 minutes can take sides. Nothing excludes them from doing that.

That would be them campaigning for Harris, and there are rules about that.

They can make an editorial saying they choose her, when they take actions like editing to make her look better without saying as such, that's campaigning, and that's Harris getting it for free.

 

[Marener]

60 minutes edited their interview to make Kamala look better, not for any time constraints.

By taking a side they made an in kind contribution to the campaign.

That’s still fucking stupid. Even if you could prove this (which is unlikely), it still isn’t an in kind contribution.

Speech is not and never can be an in kind contribution.

When a newspaper endorses a candidate, they’re taking a side. Is that an in kind contribution? When someone on Fox News praises Trump, is that a contribution?

No. That’s speech. Dope.

 

[martybegan]

That’s still fucking stupid. Even if you could prove this (which is unlikely), it still isn’t an in kind contribution.

Speech is not and never can be an in kind contribution.

When a newspaper endorses a candidate, they’re taking a side. Is that an in kind contribution? When someone on Fox News praises Trump, is that a contribution?

No. That’s speech. Dope.

It would be a matter of fact for a judge or jury to decide.

What Are In-Kind Contributions?

An in-kind contribution is any non-monetary donation, such as a service or a good. If someone lends their digital marketing skills to your nonprofit free of charge, this is an in-kind contribution. Someone gifting your organization with an art piece or a bundle of computer hardware is also contributing in-kind. These donations often have monetary values you can assess and record on your tax forms — though not all types can be priced.

60 minutes provided the service of editing the interview to make Harris look good.

It wasn't speech, it was a service.

Harris was the one speaking.

 

[pknopp]

That would be them campaigning for Harris, and there are rules about that.

No it wouldn't. NBC giving Harris 60 free campaign ads and not Trump would be. A program can be as biased as they wish.

They can make an editorial saying they choose her, when they take actions like editing to make her look better without saying as such, that's campaigning, and that's Harris getting it for free.

That's deceitful. That's it.

 

[martybegan]

No it wouldn't. NBC giving Harris 60 free campaign ads and not Trump would be. A program can be as biased as they wish.




That's deceitful. That's it.

They provided a service, editing the interview to make Harris look better. Not for time constraints.

That would be a matter of fact for a jury or judge to decide.

 

[Thinker101]

60 minutes can take sides. Nothing excludes them from doing that.

They sure can, it'll only cost them $20 BILLION.

 

[Marener]

It would be a matter of fact for a judge or jury to decide.

What Are In-Kind Contributions?



60 minutes provided the service of editing the interview to make Harris look good.

It wasn't speech, it was a service.

Harris was the one speaking.

Again, editorial decisions aren’t services. They’re not acts. They’re speech according to SCOTUS.

They didn’t offer Harris services. They edited their own program because that’s what they do to produce the show.

 

[Marener]

They sure can, it'll only cost them $20 BILLION.

So free speech isn’t a thing anymore?

 

[Stann]

No Vance fan but telling someone to shut up is also free speech.

It sounds more Ike trying to stifle free speech to me.

 

[pknopp]

They provided a service, editing the interview to make Harris look better. Not for time constraints.

That would be a matter of fact for a jury or judge to decide.

So they lied. Has nothing to do with campaign laws (though I might argue it should)

 

[pknopp]

It sounds more Ike trying to stifle free speech to me.

Shut up is free speech also.

 

[martybegan]

Again, editorial decisions aren’t services. They’re not acts. They’re speech according to SCOTUS.

They didn’t offer Harris services. They edited their own program because that’s what they do to produce the show.

This was a service, and it's blatantly obvious when you see the edited and non edited versions.

 

[martybegan]

So they lied. Has nothing to do with campaign laws (though I might argue it should)

Lying isn't the issue, providing a service to the Harris campaign is the issue.

 

[Rawley]

That’s still fucking stupid. Even if you could prove this (which is unlikely), it still isn’t an in kind contribution.

Speech is not and never can be an in kind contribution.

When a newspaper endorses a candidate, they’re taking a side. Is that an in kind contribution? When someone on Fox News praises Trump, is that a contribution?

No. That’s speech. Dope.

If recall, you guys were arguing that suppressing speech (paying lying whores to keep their mouths shut) was a campaign contribution.

you can't have it both ways.

 

[pknopp]

Lying isn't the issue, providing a service to the Harris campaign is the issue.

Programs can do that. Should Fox News have been shut down/arrested/whatever it is you are arguing for, when they ran with THEY ARE EATING DOGS which was a lie to boost Trump also.

 

[pknopp]

If recall, you guys were arguing that suppressing speech (paying lying whores to keep their mouths shut) was a campaign contribution.

you can't have it both ways.

No, the argument was that paying out funds without disclosing it was illegal.

 

[martybegan]

Programs can do that. Should Fox News have been shut down/arrested/whatever it is you are arguing for, when they ran with THEY ARE EATING DOGS which was a lie to boost Trump also.

They reported what was being said.

This was 60 minutes deliberately cleaning up Harris' interview to make her look better.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Elon is pro censorship, so how is it I see this on Twitter?

 

[The Irish Ram]

“Less than three generations, we went from one fascist to another,” Malinak say

That's true and incredible...