Psaki reveals White House (government) is consulting with Facebook to 'flag misinformation'

[excalibur]

This will be added as part of Trump's amended complaint in his recently filed lawsuit.

And Psaki, or is that Psuki? Anyway, she doubled down on this today.

The Traitor Joe©™ maladministration is clearly fascistic. Clearly undemocratic.

 

[Vel]

This is about the government telling those private businesses who to censor and what to promote. A government that has the power to regulate those businesses out of existence or break them up if they so choose

So the same could be said about Trump threatening news media, right? Threatening NFL? Threatening Amazon?

All assaults on the first amendment. Right?

This has NOTHING to do with Trump. This is the Biden administration that has basically deputized social media platforms and made them an arm of the government.

Makes no sense. A deputy assumes powers of the state. Facebook is not given powers of the state. They retain the rights of private organizations.

Trump did far worse with explicit threats to individual speech and none of y’all little baby fascists give a shit.

If you're supporting this shit then you have zero room to call ANYONE else a fascist. This literally screams fascist and your partisanship is causing you to defend it. Must all you little bitches cry Trump whenever you're trying to defend the indefensible?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Incredible admission. Glad she's revealed what we all knew has been going on all along.

 

[Asclepias]

Government is censoring free speech.

Explain how.

He cant explain because he doesnt know what free speech is evidently.

 

[Shelzin]

That is the very definition of state action, you cocksucking dumbfuck.

The state is not controlling Facebook. Facebook is doing it voluntarily.

That does not make Facebook a state actor.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

 

[Asclepias]

That is the very definition of state action, you cocksucking dumbfuck.

The state is not controlling Facebook. Facebook is doing it voluntarily.

That does not make Facebook a state actor.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

Because a court said it was.

 

[Shelzin]

Right... But... The government SHOULD NOT have any opinion, sway, or comment on what is said on any media platform that does not violate law.

Why not?

It's everyone's job to call out outright lies. Failing to do so would be immoral. This isn't a hesaid/shesaid case. This is one side just lying outright.

Everyone acting as a private citizen? Sure... Not the government. Although admittedly I should have said that better. Officials of course can have an opinion... And the president of course is a mouth piece. However... Working with a company that is in control of information, rather than in the public forum... Slippery slope.

 

[Shelzin]

That is the very definition of state action, you cocksucking dumbfuck.

The state is not controlling Facebook. Facebook is doing it voluntarily.

That does not make Facebook a state actor.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

Because a court said it was.

Why? Why did the court say it was?

 

[Asclepias]

That is the very definition of state action, you cocksucking dumbfuck.

The state is not controlling Facebook. Facebook is doing it voluntarily.

That does not make Facebook a state actor.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

Because a court said it was.

Why? Why did the court say it was?

Majority opinion.

 

[Shelzin]

Majority opinion.

Why do they have that opinion? They have to have a basis...

Now... Please... Just concede the point, or... Ask what the answer is if you don't know it. More than a few here already know it. What's funny is... There are more lefties that know the answer than righties.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

 

[Asclepias]

Majority opinion.

Why do they have that opinion? They have to have a basis...

Now... Please... Just concede the point, or... Ask what the answer is if you don't know it. More than a few here already know it. What's funny is... There are more lefties that know the answer than righties.

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

I didnt know I had to concede a point. Sure. Whats the reason?

 

[Shelzin]

I didnt know I had to concede a point.

You don't have to do anything... I just asked you do it, or ask why...

Sure. Whats the reason?

For several reasons. First the teacher is looked upon as an authority figure over the student who is subordinate in class position. The teacher has the ability to influence a students grades, ethics and overall future. If it were permissible for a teacher to have relations with their students, it would undermine the educational system as a whole. The law looks at it not just as sex but the impact the relationship can have on both the system and the student's overall life.

It's the same with the government and the media.

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt know I had to concede a point.

You don't have to do anything... I just asked you do it, or ask why...

Sure. Whats the reason?

For several reasons. First the teacher is looked upon as an authority figure over the student who is subordinate in class position. The teacher has the ability to influence a students grades, ethics and overall future. If it were permissible for a teacher to have relations with their students, it would undermine the educational system as a whole. The law looks at it not just as sex but the impact the relationship can have on both the system and the student's overall life.

It's the same with the government and the media.

"It's the same with the government and the media"

Who told you that? The media isnt some barely adult naive child. The media knows how to sue and fight for their rights. I have to say that was a horrible analogy.

 

[Shelzin]

"It's the same with the government and the media"

Who told you that? The media isnt some barely adult naive child. The media knows how to sue and fight for their rights. I have to say that was a horrible analogy.

I don't need people to tell me things. I'm intelligent enough to think for myself. Feel free to read between the lines on that.

I don't mind if you disagree. But government controlling information is... Something China does. North Korea. More than a few people who I normally disagree with ... Just need to step up... In this... We should be united.

 

[Asclepias]

"It's the same with the government and the media"

Who told you that? The media isnt some barely adult naive child. The media knows how to sue and fight for their rights. I have to say that was a horrible analogy.

I don't need people to tell me things. I'm intelligent enough to think for myself. Feel free to read between the lines on that.

I don't mind if you disagree. But government controlling information is... Something China does. North Korea. More than a few people who I normally disagree with ... Just need to step up... In this... We should be united.

Comparing a barely legal child to the media isn't very intelligent. FB is hardly naive or innocent.

Good you don't mind. The government isn't controlling information. FB is. I dont need to step up. FB is quite capable of taking care of themselves.

 

[Shelzin]

"It's the same with the government and the media"

Who told you that? The media isnt some barely adult naive child. The media knows how to sue and fight for their rights. I have to say that was a horrible analogy.

I don't need people to tell me things. I'm intelligent enough to think for myself. Feel free to read between the lines on that.

I don't mind if you disagree. But government controlling information is... Something China does. North Korea. More than a few people who I normally disagree with ... Just need to step up... In this... We should be united.

Comparing a barely legal child to the media isn't very intelligent. FB is hardly naive or innocent.

Good you don't mind. The government isn't controlling information. FB is. I dont need to step up. FB is quite capable of taking care of themselves.

Well... Considering the audience *shrugs*

I ... Have never done this before... But I'm going to now. Actually.. I'm not. If lefties don't step up... I don't want be here.

 

[Vel]

"It's the same with the government and the media"

Who told you that? The media isnt some barely adult naive child. The media knows how to sue and fight for their rights. I have to say that was a horrible analogy.

I don't need people to tell me things. I'm intelligent enough to think for myself. Feel free to read between the lines on that.

I don't mind if you disagree. But government controlling information is... Something China does. North Korea. More than a few people who I normally disagree with ... Just need to step up... In this... We should be united.

Comparing a barely legal child to the media isn't very intelligent. FB is hardly naive or innocent.

Good you don't mind. The government isn't controlling information. FB is. I dont need to step up. FB is quite capable of taking care of themselves.

Well... Considering the audience *shrugs*

I ... Have never done this before... But I'm going to now. Actually.. I'm not. If lefties don't step up... I don't want be here.

I think you'll wait a long time if you expect today's democrats to step up. I don't recall ever seeing this level of dishonesty from so many of the boards liberals in the past as we're seeing today. They're so conditioned to supporting their partisanship that they will lay down their self respect , don the mantle of hypocrisy and proudly jump up to defend the indefensible. The following article lays things out clearly for those that are really having trouble understanding the problem.

excerpt from the article:

"The whole thing smells especially bad because the social media companies effectively destroyed the physical public square. They did this, first, by giving people the sense that their platforms were the precise equivalent of a public square: places in which people could freely share their opinions. Then, once most of America was on board, the platforms began cracking down on speech in the same way any tyrannical government does.

The social media outlets were the equivalent of hotels that used to allow Blacks and then suddenly went all Jim Crow on them. It took the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to end that pernicious problem with places of public accommodation. The First Amendment should be sufficient to end the denial of Civil Rights in which the tech tyrants — which are acting in a public capacity — are engaged. Instead, we have an administration that not only is allowing their unconstitutional wrongdoing, but is complicit in it."

The Biden administration boasts about controlling discourse on Facebook

For years, I've been telling anyone who will listen that the tight link between government and Big Tech is a hallmark of fascism: unlike fascism's socialist brother, communism, which has government take over the means of production, fascism, ...

www.americanthinker.com

 

[colfax_m]

When teachers have sex with their students... More often than not it's voluntary. What's the reason why it's illegal if they are of age of consent again?

A lot of times it isn’t. When it is, it’s because the teacher is in custody of the minor and the law specifically forbids it.

There is no law forbidding the government from having opinions on a person’s speech.

 

[Mac-7]

What's the crime OP?

#LOLGOP #TooFunny #CLASSIC

Censorship

 

[Mac-7]

Mac1958

Whats your opinion on this topic?

When you voted for him did you intend for biden to have the power to us what we can snd cannot say?