TRUMP to Sign executive order on social media, their attacks on free speech!

[LA RAM FAN]

Trump to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies | Blaze Media

'Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH'

www.theblaze.com

ITS ABOUT Time! Time
For free speech online!

Now if he would sign one that orders Facebook and YouTube to stop banning free speech,you post a video on you tube on government corruption,it’s not long before they take it down.they let people post porn there but you get information on government corruption out that they don’t like,it gets deleted.

 

[OldLady]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readers the option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

 

[Shelzin]

If you want control...you're a publishers. No more
indemnity protections...then sue every day.

Big Tech Trying to Have it Both Ways as Platform and Publisher

Google, Facebook and Twitter are private companies, so the constitutional

townhall.com

But the courts decided that, and they are the ones who need to reverse it. The President doesn't have the authority to tell a private company what to do. They have "standards" and if he doesn't like it, he doesn't have to use them. Right?

Yep... However lobbyists are there to make it to where they have it both ways... What Trump is doing is forcing the issue, so the people back it, or they don't. We'll find out who's bought based on responses, and we'll vote accordingly if they are going back in office or not... And... Politicians generally don't like that. Get the money, but don't get caught.

 

[Shelzin]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readers the option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

Actually... No... Because the page it takes you to isn't fact checking, which is what it's claiming to do.

 

[Ricky LIbtardo]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

CNN and Washington Compost are not fact checkers and the referenced articles in the attached links were to opinion articles. Opinions aren't facts for fucks sake. And there's countless examples of mail in voter fraud. Trump stated an opinion and did not cite facts so twitter has no standing whatsoever. Damn, you go with any stupid shit you're told by the echo chamber.

Since when does a strong statement like that, made by the President of the United States, not have importance? If you had said to Trump when he tweeted it, "Well, that's your opinion," what do you think he would have said to you? There is absolutely no evidence to back up his claims. You can find a judge (a Republican) stuffing a ballot box for pay recently, but let's see some of those countless examples of mail in voter fraud. I don't mean conjecture, like "30,000 more people on the voting lists than live in the city" or "1 woman receives 83 mail in ballots." THAT'S NOT VOTING. That's logistical mistakes. But the signature on a mail in ballot is matched to their signature on file before it is considered, and yes, they actually mark that name off as VOTED and don't accept duplicates.
Do you think I can just take another person's ballot, merrily check off who I like and mail it in, along with my own. That's not how it works.

You're a fool. This just happened in Patterson, New Jersey. Massive voter fraud.

"A Paterson NAACP leader said the recent city council vote-by-mail election was allegedly so flawed that the results should be thrown out and a new election ordered.


“Invalidate the election. Let’s do it again,” said Rev. Kenneth Clayton said amid reports more that 20 percent of all ballots were disqualified, some in connection with voter fraud allegations.


“These kinds of acts make people not want to vote anymore. They feel disenfranchised, disconnected that their votes don’t count, and that is not fair to people," he said."

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/newA Paterson NAACP leader said the recent city council vote-by-mail election was allegedly so flawed that the results should be thrown out and a new election ordered.“Invalidate the election. Let’s do it again,” said Rev. Kenneth Clayton said amid reports more that 20 percent of all ballots were disqualified, some in connection with voter fraud allegations.“These kinds of acts make people not want to vote anymore. They feel disenfranchised, disconnected that their votes don’t count, and that is not fair to people," he said.s/politics/nj-naacp-leader-calls-for-paterson-mail-in-vote-to-be-canceled-amid-fraud-claims/2435162/

 

[protectionist]

Actually... No... Because the page it takes you to isn't fact checking, which is what it's claiming to do.

"Fact Check" to liberals means leftist propaganda.

 

[Jitss617]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readers the option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

They didn’t post sources from sides that report the presidents
Side. Just left wing view. So again LET THE PEOPLE MAKE THE DECISION

 

[Jitss617]

Mark Zuckerberg says they take down post that talk about violence,, only if your white ,, as gangsta rap
Music makes a killing selling and showing violent videos.. racist bull shit

 

[occupied]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readers the option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

They didn’t post sources from sides that report the presidents
Side. Just left wing view. So again LET THE PEOPLE MAKE THE DECISION

What decision? Cult members never decide to doubt the cult leader. Trump still has not realized the the sheer power he has over the true believers. God help you if he figures out just how far out on a limb you would follow him.

 

[MindWars]

or more IDIOTS need to learn about " the color of law" including this board!!!!

• Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
  For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
  The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242​

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law
and when YOUU BAN someone keep that in mind cause it can come back to haunt yah lmfao.
Because the lie " their site their rights proves how far down hte latter the loser left has dragged this nation...................

 

[Missourian]

In the end he will not do anything to mess up something he is desperately addicted to, he's just seeing if they will blink. He'll gripe about it a few days and then find something else he thinks you should be absolutely, unthinkingly furious about.

I would give this an "informative" if we still had it. You could be right. And it is a good strategy. It isn't a good bet he will back down...I'd call it 50/50. Will Twitter take that risk? You can't unring a bell.

In a cost to benefit analysis...it's a no brainer. Jack loses either way and President Trump wins either way. It was a dumb position for Twitter to put themselves in. The Victor wins the battle before the first shot is fired. President Trump holds the winning hand here...IMO.

 

[Meister]

If Twitter wants to do that...then they should apply it equally towards both sides.......they don't.

Only one side lies so copiously.

Yours.

That's rich, Crep....especially coming from you.

 

[occupied]

In the end he will not do anything to mess up something he is desperately addicted to, he's just seeing if they will blink. He'll gripe about it a few days and then find something else he thinks you should be absolutely, unthinkingly furious about.

I would give this an "informative" if we still had it. You could be right. And it is a good strategy. It isn't a good bet he will back down...I'd call it 50/50. Will Twitter take that risk? You can't unring a bell.

In a cost to benefit analysis...it's a no brainer. Jack loses either way and President Trump wins either way. It was a dumb position for Twitter to put themselves in. The Victor wins the battle before the first shot is fired. President Trump holds the winning hand here.

Not really, Trump and all his followers could quit in mass and it would make little difference to the bottom line. Twitter is a business. They could get the greatest free promotion ever having a fight with Trump and ultimately bitch slapping him off their site.

 

[White 6]

Trump to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies | Blaze Media

'Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH'

www.theblaze.com

ITS ABOUT Time! Time
For free speech online!

Maybe he could just stick to the facts and not make crap up. But, no, I guess that would be too presidential and that wouldn't be any fun.

 

[Overtime Paycheck]

Twitter is a grey area. It started as a messenger service that saves all messages and allows a virtual social network which promotes populism more than anything else. Twitter became a show and is now supported with big buck advertisers. Personally I don't care much for twitter but thats what everyone uses.

What is wrong is that Twitter allegedly manipulated their network and unlawfully censored their political opponents. Maybe his order has something to do with that.

 

[rightwinger]

If you want control...you're a publishers. No more
indemnity protections...then sue every day.

It’s their site....they set the rules of behavior

Every business is subject to law.

There is no law that says you cannot call a lie a lie

 

[rightwinger]

Twitter is a grey area. It started as a messenger service that saves all messages and allows a virtual social network which promotes populism more than anything else. Twitter became a show and is now supported with big buck advertisers. Personally I don't care much for twitter but thats what everyone uses.

What is wrong is that Twitter allegedly manipulated their network and unlawfully censored their political opponents. Maybe his order has something to do with that.

Trump was not censored

His content was identified as questionable and sources of correct information was provided

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Trump to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies | Blaze Media

'Twitter is completely stifling FREE SPEECH'

www.theblaze.com

ITS ABOUT Time! Time
For free speech online!

What can he possibly do with an executive order to force social media?

I kind of think he is full of shit too.

.

 

[Jitss617]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readers the option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

They didn’t post sources from sides that report the presidents
Side. Just left wing view. So again LET THE PEOPLE MAKE THE DECISION

What decision? Cult members never decide to doubt the cult leader. Trump still has not realized the the sheer power he has over the true believers. God help you if he figures out just how far out on a limb you would follow him.

Let Americans decide, let them
Hear both sides and make a decision. Deal?

 

[OldLady]

This oughta be good. His staff, lawyers, and DOJ will be up all night trying to figure out something he can do to stop Twitter from attaching a fact check to his tweets.

How do you fact check an opinion of the consequences of a future event?

Shouldn't Twitter have disclosed they are pro-mail in ballot AND partnered with pro-mail-in ballot organizations?

Sounds less like "fact-checking" and more like putting a thumb on the scales/election interference, doesn't it?

Don't expect the biased MSM to cover that.

Oh, so you don't want a "thumb" on the scales/election interference? Then maybe the President should keep his fat mouth shut about Democratic fraud that doesn't happen.

But it is,, you have to report both sides.. be fair.. what are you afraid of? People listing? Making decisions? Awww to bad

Geezus, Jitts, try to get a tiny clue what you're talking about before you start an OP.

TWITTER DID NOT REMOVE THE PRESIDENT'S TWEET. It sits there still, in all its glory, for all to read. In FAIRNESS, twitter gave readere option of going to information on real mail in voting. Which I'm thinking sounds like BOTH SIDES. Right?

Actually... No... Because the page

it takes you to isn't fact checking, which is what it's claiming to do.

I'm not on Twitter.

Actually... No... Because the page it takes you to isn't fact checking, which is what it's claiming to do.

You'd prefer it went to Politifact? I agree that would be preferable, but perhaps Twitter didn't want to direct the President's readers to a site that what was going to give him 4 Pinocchios. Twitter didn't say "fact checking," though, it said "Get the facts on mail in voting." And it directs them to articles by WaPo and CNN and then a string of journalists that provide details. In our world, we call those "facts." I agree they are argumentative articles, defensively written, but the information presented is the other side of the story and it contains actual facts about mail in voting.

The President had his chance with the Voting Commission and it was a total bomb, never even issued a report, just unconfirmed accusations by the Republican Chairman, Kobach, who supplied evidence from New Hampshire that 5000 people who voted using out of state ID's in 2016 did NOT move to NH subsequently. And of course to a Republican that means that all 5,000 voted illegally (although it was not illegal for an out of stater to vote in NH at that time) and that they all voted for Hillary. But the story never went any farther than Kobach's conjecture. Trump even tried to withhold information from Commission MEMBERS that was being used to investigate. A court forced Trump to hand it over and is being reviewed now.