Trump Files Lawsuit Against Big Tech Over Censorship (Poll)

[surada]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Think so? I bet they're smarter than that.

It's precisely the type of case the SCOTUS likes to weigh in on. 1st amendment vs corrupt organized censorship. That it was a POTUS who was censored wow, yeah the SCOTUS will take that case.

But they're not idiots. They'll recognize right away that this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

Big tech's corruption of 1st amendment rights oh big tech is in for a beating.

You have NO first Amendment rights on this forum either.

Take a break from trolling moron, adults are discussing a likely SCOTUS case. I think your mom is calling you run along.

I doubt the SCOTUS will elect to hear this case. The law is very clear. Trump is grandstanding again.

 

[dblack]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Think so? I bet they're smarter than that.

It's precisely the type of case the SCOTUS likes to weigh in on. 1st amendment vs corrupt organized censorship. That it was a POTUS who was censored wow, yeah the SCOTUS will take that case.

But they're not idiots. They'll recognize right away that this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

Big tech's corruption of 1st amendment rights oh big tech is in for a beating

It's funny. I was typing a reply, but then I remembered what a ******* idiot you are. So, you know, nevermind.

I'm hiding the pain. I think you demonstrated to everyone you had no intention of discussing the issue.

Nevermind.

 

[kyzr]

I'm not litigating that FB is a monopoly here on the USMB. I think it is, and you think its not. We'll see how it shakes out in court.
The monopoly issue is only one item, the 2nd issue is Section 230 protection from lawsuits. The battle-lines are already drawn on that one. See my post #52.

The idea that Facebook is a monopoly isn’t a part of Trump’s lawsuit as far as I’ve read. The anti-trust cases filed by the Trump administration against social media were recently dismissed from court. I don’t think there is any active litigation on this matter.

Trump thinks he can get the courts to declare section 230 unconstititional in his lawsuit which is absolutely absurd and his argument to support it is nonsense.

Conservatives mostly get the purpose of section 230 completely backwards. It was always intended to provide internet platforms the ability to decide for themselves what content was allowable on their sites without having to fear taking on legal liability. Repealing 230 is not what anyone really wants.

Repealing Section 230 is what Republicans want.

Repealing 230 gives us more censorship and less free speech! Why would you want that...?

Because it would level the playing field and make big tech the same as everyone else, subject to lawsuits and under the courts.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

 

[kyzr]

important censorship issue

There is no ‘censorship issue.’

Private social media editing their content as they’re at liberty to do isn’t ‘censorship.’

Censorship is when government seeks to preempt speech or publication through force of law, threatening publishers with punitive measures.

1. Killing "free speech" on social media is censorship
2. Banning conservatives isn't "editing content"
3. Big tech are monopolies, they control the media, control information, can oppress viewpoints they disagree with, so even though big tech isn't "the government" "big tech" can and does suppress free speech.

Wrong.

The doctrine of free speech concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not between or among private persons and entities, such as social media.

True, however where big tech is concerned its a matter of Section 230 protection or not. Now big tech is protected from lawsuits, if 230 is repealed big tech is like everyone else.

 

[BluesLegend]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Think so? I bet they're smarter than that.

It's precisely the type of case the SCOTUS likes to weigh in on. 1st amendment vs corrupt organized censorship. That it was a POTUS who was censored wow, yeah the SCOTUS will take that case.

But they're not idiots. They'll recognize right away that this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

Big tech's corruption of 1st amendment rights oh big tech is in for a beating.

You have NO first Amendment rights on this forum either.

Take a break from trolling moron, adults are discussing a likely SCOTUS case. I think your mom is calling you run along.

I doubt the SCOTUS will elect to hear this case. The law is very clear. Trump is grandstanding again.

Look up the definition of 'class action lawsuit' this is not just Trump vs big tech.

 

[kyzr]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

 

[dblack]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

Yep. You can. Any other misconceptions you'd like cleared up?

 

[BluesLegend]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

 

[Skylar]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

Its very unlikely. They'd have to overturn Section 230, which they've never hinted at doing. And apply 1st amendment restrictions to private companies, which they've not indicated they're interested in. And ignore contract law, as the Terms of Service grant broad leeway in curating the content of their own websites.

Worse, these issues have already been litigated again and again. 60+ similar lawsuits. And they have all, without exception, failed. 90% at the 'motion to dismiss' phase.

Its a garbage legal argument.

 

[Skylar]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

It never even mentions the changing the private status of company. Its more imaginary pseudo-legal gibberish.

 

[BluesLegend]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

Its very unlikely. They'd have to overturn Section 230, which they've never hinted at doing. And apply 1st amendment restrictions to private companies, which they've not indicated they're interested in. And ignore contract law, as the Terms of Service grant broad leeway in curating the content of their own websites.

Worse, these issues have already been litigated again and again. 60+ similar lawsuits. And they have all, without exception, failed. 90% at the 'motion to dismiss' phase.

Its a garbage legal argument.

Things are different now, big tech blatantly censored and rigged a presidential election on behalf of the Dem party. You think the SCOTUS won't take that up? They absolutely will. Common sense says its time for big tech to get a beat down.

What got Dems and their pals in trouble is what always get them in trouble, overreach.

 

[colfax_m]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Doubt it. Unless you think the POTUS has greater rights than the rest of us, this will fail just as previous lawsuits about people being booted from social media.

He doesn’t have special rights. The courts know that.

 

[BluesLegend]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Doubt it. Unless you think the POTUS has greater rights than the rest of us, this will fail just as previous lawsuits about people being booted from social media.

He doesn’t have special rights. The courts know that.

Previous cases are not this case and this is a class action lawsuit. Lets see how many more sign on shall we.

 

[kyzr]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

Yep. You can. Any other misconceptions you'd like cleared up?

Yeah, okay, they can be sued, but they have protections most companies don't have.

Section 230 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Section 230 is a section of the United States Communications Decency Act that generally provides immunity for website platforms from third-party content. At its core, Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users.
The statute in Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the removal or moderation of third-party material they deem obscene or offensive, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it is done in good faith.

 

[kyzr]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

Thanks, that's what I've been trying to say.

 

[Skylar]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

Its very unlikely. They'd have to overturn Section 230, which they've never hinted at doing. And apply 1st amendment restrictions to private companies, which they've not indicated they're interested in. And ignore contract law, as the Terms of Service grant broad leeway in curating the content of their own websites.

Worse, these issues have already been litigated again and again. 60+ similar lawsuits. And they have all, without exception, failed. 90% at the 'motion to dismiss' phase.

Its a garbage legal argument.

Things are different now, big tech blatantly censored and rigged a presidential election on behalf of the Dem party. You think the SCOTUS won't take that up? They absolutely will. Common sense says its time for big tech to get a beat down.

A nearly identical case was thrown out of court only 2 weeks ago.


"Judge Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Tuesday granted Facebook’s motion to dismiss against Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) complaint filed against Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg and its fact checkers in August 2020.

In a 45-page decision, the judge opined that CHD’s allegations — that Facebook is effectively a “state actor” on behalf of the federal government and engaged in false advertising and racketeering — failed to state legal claims."



The SCOTUS has shown no interest in the silly 'rigged presidential election' fantasy either. Every opportunity they've been given to overturn election results, they've passed on. Without exception.

The right wing echo chamber doesn't do well in actual courts. As imagination and outrage don't replace evidence and a sound legal argument.

Neither of which Trump has with this garbage legal argument. This is just more fundraising theater. The 'lawsuits' were announced at 12:01...and the fundraising messages started flooding phones and Email boxes at 12:03.

Apparently, Trump needs to repair his plane.

 

[dblack]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

Yep. You can. Any other misconceptions you'd like cleared up?

Yeah, okay, they can be sued, but they have protections most companies don't have.

Section 230 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Section 230 is a section of the United States Communications Decency Act that generally provides immunity for website platforms from third-party content. At its core, Section 230(c)(1) provides immunity from liability for providers and users of an "interactive computer service" who publish information provided by third-party users.
The statute in Section 230(c)(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the removal or moderation of third-party material they deem obscene or offensive, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it is done in good faith.

No. Most company have the same protections. If you own a restaurant, for example, you're not liable for crimes committed by your customers. That's the only "protection" 230 affords. It just makes a clear distinction between the content generated by the company, and that generated by its customers.

Again, you don't a **** about any actually arguments here. This is about Trump getting his revenge on the companies that defied him. And you, clinging to his scabby scrotum, are along for the ride. So spin up whatever excuses make it feel better - but it's embarrassingly obvious what you're up to.

 

[Skylar]

Clearly the 1st amendment prohibits the government from censoring the private press. It does not compel private industry to print the copious lies of a few lunatics, no matter how powerful they are.

Copious lies? You mean like CRT and the 1619 Project?
Here are 5 examples of the MSM (private industry) lies that unfairly hurt the Trump presidency:
1. The loser of the 2016 presidential election Hillary Clinton, along with her Democrat apologists, pushed on this narrative from the beginning. Trump was an illegitimate president due to his collusion with Russia leading up to the election, they said, an infraction so malicious he may have actually been guilty of treason and deserving of the death penalty. There have been instances of political malice between parties in our nation’s past, but never one quite like this.

2. Last week, over a year after most Americans became familiar with the medication, a new study out of New Jersey, the hardest hit state by COVID, shows that if used in conjunction with a regimen of zinc, hydroxychloroquine can give COVID patients upwards of a 200% better survival rate against COVID. Hydroxychloroquine is indeed a miracle drug.

3. We also became aware last week via a report from the Interior Department’s Inspector General that the actions by Park Police near Lafayette Square and St. John’s Church in Washington D.C. last June were not due to directives by President Trump in order to provide him with a “photo op,” as the media originally asserted. We were told that peaceful protesters were gathered near the recently burned church and the cops came and shot rubber bullets and tear gas at them just so Trump could have his picture taken in front of the church holding a bible.

4. During an appearance on 60 Minutes with Leslie Stahl in late-October, President Trump pointed to the younger Biden and correctly observed that Joe Biden was embroiled in a scandal over his son Hunter, but Stahl was defiant, insisting “He’s not. He’s not.” Oh Leslie, he is. He is.

5. The media is now trying to act surprised and put forth the façade that their misreporting on COVID’s origins was just an honest mistake. It wasn’t. The likelihood that COVID originated in China’s Wuhan Laboratory of Virology was clear from the beginning, but again, since Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo were beating this drum, they had to take the opposite position. But now that Biden has been elected and his administration is well under way, it is becoming increasing clear that COVID did indeed originate at the Wuhan lab, and was almost definitely manmade. And once again, it is obvious that the media lied to us. Did Fauci pay the Wuhan Lab for "gain of function" research on bat viruses, that killed 600,000 Americans? The MSM is covering that up.

What do any of those dubious allegations have to do with Trumpybear getting booted from the social media clubs and suing them?

So if the democrat's and their MSM lie about Trump, that's fair game, aka "free speech"

The 'MSM' isn't a company. The Media is hundreds of different companies. If you count websites, thousands.

You can't have THOUSANDS of options and claim a monopoly. The 'mono' in monopoly means 'one'. And there are thousands.

But Trump or conservatives don't have that same right to "free speech"?

You don't have a right to the use of someone else's website. Or their printing presses. Or their living room walls to spray paint your message.

You can't be stripped of a 'right' you don't possess. And the 'freedom' to seize someone else's private property and force them to promote YOUR political beliefs against their will....simply doesn't exist.

Ok, I see you're an idealist.

Or....I reject your idea that forcing someone to promote your political beliefs against their will is 'freedom'.

FB is supposed to be a "public platform", that's why they have Section 230 protection, it is NOT supposed to be "private property", that's the issue.

If FB was "private property" why would they get Section 230 legal protection?

Wrong.

Section 230 doesn't change the private status of social media.

Can you sue big tech now if they slander you? Think hard.

The SCOTUS will sink its teeth into big tech's BLATANT double standard. If they were banning and censoring on a level playing field there's likely no case. But they are clearly coordinating with Democrats in government and have become a state actor.

Thanks, that's what I've been trying to say.

Again, there's zero indication that any of legal principles involved have the interest of the SCOTUS. They've never taken the appeals of ANY of the other 60 cases filed on similar arguments. They've shown zero interest in overturning Section 230. They've shown zero interest in catering to the 'rigged election' fantasy. They've shown zero interest in overturning terms of service contract law. They've shown zero interest in applying 1st amendment restrictions to private social media companies.

Trump's 'lawsuit' is a layer cake of pseudo-legal gibberish.

This is just another grift to part gullible souls from more of their money. The 'lawsuit' was announced at 12:01. The fundraising text messages begging for cash donations started flooding phones at 12:03.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The SCOTUS will take a very dim view of social media banning a POTUS, shits about to hit the fan.

Think so? I bet they're smarter than that.

It's precisely the type of case the SCOTUS likes to weigh in on. 1st amendment vs corrupt organized censorship. That it was a POTUS who was censored wow, yeah the SCOTUS will take that case.

But they're not idiots. They'll recognize right away that this has nothing to do with the First Amendment.

Big tech's corruption of 1st amendment rights oh big tech is in for a beating.

You have NO first Amendment rights on this forum either.

Take a break from trolling moron, adults are discussing a likely SCOTUS case. I think your mom is calling you run along.

I doubt the SCOTUS will elect to hear this case. The law is very clear. Trump is grandstanding again.

Look up the definition of 'class action lawsuit' this is not just Trump vs big tech.

This bunch is just too invested in their own ignorance. They will end up explaining to themselves how the judge is wrong.