Joe Biden IS Gutting Our First Amendment (Free Speech)

[Nostra]

Show me where they said we are t willing Facebook who to ban.

Watch the video of Circle Back Girl.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Bullshit. There is plenty of conservative speech on my FaceBook. Much of it I consider over the line. But I have friends I do not agree with, but they are still my friends.

This is about posting outright lies.

Outright lies are fine on Facebook. They just have to fit the Narrative of the left. Facebook has a political agenda.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Bastard!

Imagine trying to get the truth out to people?

Seig Heil. The ONLY truth is what the Reich says.

Uber Alles Democrat

 

[protectionist]

Limiting your speech on a private platform is not violating your free speech. Just like not allowing you to post everything you want here is not a violation of your free speech.

The disagrees are piling up for this post. Stopping speech anywhere, anytime, anyhow, is violating free speech. Better believe it.

 

[protectionist]

Right wingers are so simple minded. They don’t even understand the basic concept of free speech. Any right wingers willing to let me put up a sign in their yard saying “Republicans are racist simpletons”? No? What about my free speech?

So you equate Massive social medias like Twitter and Facebook with a single person's front yard, huh ? Nice try. Left wingers are simple minded enough to do things like this. Ho hum.

Here's a tip for you from my former college physics teacher. "Qualitative measures exist by virtue of Quantitative measures." Think about it.

 

[protectionist]

I seem to be the least worried about it. Are you worried about?? My life is an open book. I like the military monitoring me and they should everyone.

The thread is about censoring ("remove violative posts"), not monitoring.

 

[gipper]

So you equate Massive social medias like Twitter and Facebook with a single person's front yard, huh ? Nice try. Left wingers are simple minded enough to do things like this. Ho hum.

Here's a tip for you from my former college physics teacher. "Qualitative measures exist by virtue of Quantitative measures." Think about it.

When a president can be denied his first amendment rights, no matter how dumb that president is, the right to free speech for all Americans is under assault.

 

[gipper]

I seem to be the least worried about it. Are you worried about?? My life is an open book. I like the military monitoring me and they should everyone.

Surely you’re aware of this…“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”

 

[protectionist]

Tell me are you going to blow up a building or stage an insurrection?

Ask Antifa or BLM.

 

[protectionist]

No, it isn't. If you come in my house demanding to be able to talk about what a great president Trump was, my throwing you out is not curtailing your free speech.

And the feds are not in control of the content of FaceBook, Twitter or any other social media.

Another candidate for >> "Qualitative measures exist by virtue of Quantitative measures."

As for your statement > "the feds are not in control of the content of FaceBook, Twitter or any other social media.", the depends on ones definition of the word "control". Anything that can affect the outcome of something to a significant degree, controls it. that's precisely what is happening here.

 

[protectionist]

DNC isn't monitoring private messaging, and Biden isn't involved​

In an email to USA TODAY, a spokesperson for the DNC said the claim was false on several counts. Senior spokesperson Lucas Acosta said the committee is not monitoring private texts, and the Biden administration is not part of the initiative.

"Of course the DNC has no ability to access or read people’s private text messages, and we are not working with any government agency, including the White House, to try to see personal text messages," he wrote.

Rather, Acosta said, "when the DNC's counter disinformation program receives complaints or reports of fraudulent broadcast SMSs that we believe violate the text aggregators’ terms of service, we notify the broadcast text platform to help combat this troubling trend.”

Fact check: Biden doesn't want to monitor private texts for vaccine misinformation

-----------------------------------
someone needs to complain.

So the DNC is in disagreement with Jen Psaki. I'll go with the Psaki version.

 

[protectionist]

The Bastard!

Imagine trying to get the truth out to people?

Imagine trying to get what a president would like you to believe is the truth, out to people. We don't have to imagine. That's what's happening.

 

[protectionist]

With how the white house is bumbling their words to explain this they are making Trump's lawsuit a shoe in......no judge in their right mind can allow the government to use a business monopoly to do its anti constitution dirty work....next they will have Google employees kick in your doors and take your guns....

Problem is: Democrat judges are not "in their right mind". They are in their Democrat mind, and are just as deranged by it, as any other Democrat.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Right wingers are so simple minded. They don’t even understand the basic concept of free speech. Any right wingers willing to let me put up a sign in their yard saying “Republicans are racist simpletons”? No? What about my free speech?

meanwhile back at the ranch, you're completely out of context and is HIGHLY, I say HIGHLY ironic: "Right wingers are so simple minded."

 

[protectionist]

Seriously man, are you mentally retarded? You post a quote saying they want to flag disinformation and you translate that to them flagging people they don’t like. If you can’t present your argument with accurate information then how is anybody supposed to take you seriously?!

LOL. I didn't "translate" anything. Anybody that doesn't know that the Bidens are flagging people they don't like, and messages they don't like, and calling it "misinformation", must be living in a cave.

 

[protectionist]

The government threatens social media with new regulations. That is coercive to get them to do what they want.

Good point. And with string ramifications.

 

[gipper]

The government threatens social media with new regulations. That is coercive to get them to do what they want.

I don’t think they have to threaten much. Big Tech and big government sleep together. Can you say Fascism?

Old Joe said FB is killing people. Referring to posts on FB he considers to be lies about covid. His press secretary said the WH is monitoring speech they don’t like. There goes the first amendment and hardly a peep about it in the MSM.

 

[protectionist]

Wrong.

No Federal laws have been passed preempting speech on social media; no Federal measures have been enacted subjecting social media to punitive measures because of the speech they accommodate.

Irrelevant. There doesn't HAVE TO BE a Federal law preempting speech on social media. The Constitution's 1st amendment says "abridging the freedom of speech", and it does NOT SAY that social media would/could be exempt. This aspect of the Constitution applies to ANY organization or individual. All, barring specific US laws applying, are protected.

With freedom of speech being the weakest part of the Constitution, and containing certainly a litany of exceptions, still, there is nothing in the 1st amendment or any US law that governs social media, which would/could give the Biden adminstration the right to censor it. As such, these actions are tantamount to Biden

Gutting Our First Amendment (Free Speech)​

 

[protectionist]

This is a lie.

Again, no regulation has been enacted; social media are not being ‘coerced.’

The Government Speech Doctrine.

‘As an outgrowth of the government subsidy cases, such as Rust v. Sullivan, the Court has established the “government speech doctrine” that recognizes that a government entity “is entitled to say what it wishes” and to select the views that it wants to express. In this vein, when the government speaks, the government is not barred by the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment from determining the content of what it says and can engage in viewpoint discrimination. The underlying rationale for the government speech doctrine is that the government could not “function” if the government could not favor or disfavor points of view in enforcing a program. And the Supreme Court has recognized that the government speech doctrine even extends to when the government receives private assistance in helping deliver a government controlled message.’

the-government-speech-doctrine

www.law.cornell.edu

Fool: this paragaph you posted, is entirely OFF TOPIC. It is about government speech, not speech from a private entity (which IS the topic)

 

[protectionist]

Where have they shut anything down? You’re making no sense. It must be one of those days ending in “y”.

Read the OP. They are shutting down speech that they don't like. Are you home ?