Why is it ok to censor or deplatform Republicans for "misinformation" yet the democrats are NEVER held to the same standard?

[Meister]

Dumbass.

View attachment 820377

Inside Job?

 

[BluesLegend]

yet the democrats are NEVER held to the same standard?​

Because (D) stands for Different set of rules for Dems.

 

[BluesLegend]

Democrats CONVICT their opponents in the media they control. The Constitution and your rights mean nothing to them. America, do you see how despicable and corrupt Democrats truly are?

 

[Billo_Really]

From Al Gore to Hillary to Stacey Abrams to the non stop story telling of Biden. Then you have the entire deep state that lied about Russian Collusion and the laptop being Russian misinformation. And let's not leave out the very media that censors & deplatforms the GOP running around confirming lies (aka misinformation) or flat out tells lies like Vivek being a 911 conspiracy nut by chopping up his statements then combining them in a way to make it look like he is.

Lies, misinformation & all manner of shenanigans are done constantly by everyone yet the only ones ever deemed guilty of it and punished are righties.

The left do their best to cancel and censor individuals while the right only hold businesses accountable via boycotts. And oddly enough it used to be the left that was anti corporation. Now they goto any length to defend them.

How do YOU lefties square this misapplication of logic and morality?

Because there isn't one! When lefties say something is wrong, we explain what that wrong is in detail and we provide citations to back up our premise.

You, on the other hand, just name drop and provide stupid retorts like, "...if you can't see that, then you are a moron!" Well, dude, that's not evidence!

What about Gore, Hillary and Stacey? What is your point regarding them? They all conceded their elections! Trump didn't!

 

[BluesLegend]

Raise a hand if you plan to NOT or STOP voting for lying lawless asshole Democrats...

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Protesting and expressing disapproval of your elected representatives is a constitutional right.

Even if you're a Democrat.

Physical attacks are not.

Again, even if you are a Democrat.

Since you avoided the question I'll ask it again.

Are you claiming that if a group of angry people surrounded you and began chanting at you, you wouldn't be in fear?

 

[WEATHER53]

Since you avoided the question I'll ask it again.

Are you claiming that if a group of angry people surrounded you and began chanting at you, you wouldn't be in fear?

And I will ask what is the relevancy to what you are discussing?

 

[MinTrut]

Because it's FACT.

Fantasy.

The entirety of the left, which includes liberals,

No.

Liberals and the left are at complete odds.

The left is THE most censored group on social media, andthey’re censored by liberals.

have been co opted by radicals.

Not remotely.

Neither group has.

The left is a tiny and powerless group, and liberals are deranged criminal conservative warmongering capitalists.

 

[MinTrut]

We do you all have the same Trump Avatar now?

It’s incredibly annoying/confusing.

 

[MinTrut]

He is going to die in prison. Will you visit his grave? His kids will charge a fee to see His Holiness I am sure.

He won’t even spend a day in jail.

 

[WEATHER53]

He won’t even spend a day in jail.

They are garish people hoping that he dies so they feel that they will feel better. They won’t. They never do.

 

[Synthaholic]

Mueller did not prove or would have so stated

He did state it. In the Mueller Report. You obviously didn't read it, just listened to wingnut radio talkers tell you there was nothing there.

 

[Synthaholic]

So the cop who arrested you before you joined the gated community... would it be in your "first amendment" right to say, "I'll pay you 50,000 dollars to let me go?"

That is what the blob did. He tried to get election officials to overturn an election for him.

Only, instead of a bribe, he hinted that they could be jailed for not doing what he wanted.

 

[MinTrut]

They are garish people hoping that he dies so they feel that they will feel better. They won’t. They never do.

Yup.

Their dreamed for mugshot has left them more deperately deranged than ever.

 

[Synthaholic]

They simply no longer live in reality.

They've all agreed to promote the lies, and deny the facts. All it does is make their lives miserable, not ours. The Democratic President of The United States didn't just have his mug shot taken at a filthy inner-city jail.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It’s incredibly annoying/confusing.

Good!

 

[MinTrut]

Good!

That’s the spirit!

Drive crucial support away.

You assure Trump’s loss in 2024.

 

[WEATHER53]

He did state it. In the Mueller Report. You obviously didn't read it, just listened to wingnut radio talkers tell you there was nothing there.

Mr Wishful. The words he wrote did not so state or there would have been immediate repercussions.
You are stating what your feelings wished his words said and meant

 

[WEATHER53]

Yup.

Their dreamed for mugshot has left them more deperately deranged than ever.

I think they have been stating he is under arrest and in jail. It’s gone past feelings and wishes and is now Full Blown Delusion.

 

[Synthaholic]

Mr Wishful. The words he wrote did not so state or there would have been immediate repercussions.
You are stating what your feelings wished his words said and meant

From who - the Attorney General Bill Barr who acted as Trump's personal defense attorney instead of the head of the DoJ?


READ: The Justice Department's Summary Of The Mueller Report

A year later, a federal judge sharply rebuked Barr's handling of Mueller's report, saying Barr had made "misleading public statements" to spin the investigation's findings in favor of Trump and had shown a "lack of candor."Aug 20, 2022

The DOJ under Barr wrongly withheld parts of a Russia probe memo, a court rules

The Justice Department improperly withheld parts of an internal memo Attorney General William Barr cited in announcing that President Donald Trump had not obstructed justice, an appeals panel said.

www.npr.org

Judge slams Barr, orders review of Mueller report deletions​

Judge Calls Barr's Handling of Mueller Report 'Distorted' ...​

Judge Calls Barr’s Handling of Mueller Report ‘Distorted’ and ‘Misleading’ (Published 2020)

​

​

William Barr is still misleading about the Mueller report​

Here’s the now-familiar backstory: After Barr on March 24, 2019, released a summary of the Mueller report on President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia’s interference in that election, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III sent him a letter complaining that the summary failed to “fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of his report and its conclusions. When the report itself came out the next month, it became clear that Barr’s summary had indeed been misleading in some significant ways. And eventually a federal judge — a Republican-appointed one, no less — issued a scathing review of the matter that called Barr’s “candor” and “credibility” into question.

In what was otherwise a relatively chummy interview, Maher did briefly press Barr on the subject of the summary, saying the way he “mischaracterized” the Mueller report was “shady.”
Barr defended his handling of the matter. But in doing so, he rolled out some of the most misleading aspects of his summary all over again.

“I felt that I had to say something to give the bottom line of what [Mueller] had decided,” Barr said. “Number one, I said that he had found there was no collusion.”

This isn’t strictly accurate now, just as it wasn’t strictly accurate back when Barr first said it. In fact, as we came to find out, Mueller said explicitly in his report that he wasn’t examining the nonlegal concept of collusion.

“Collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law,” the Mueller report reads. “For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law.”

Barr’s use of the “no collusion” phrasing was suspect not just because the report didn’t directly address it, but because it matched Trump’s own mantra and defined the amorphous term in a way Trump surely approved of. And it’s arguably even more jarring today, given that a later bipartisan Senate report, released in August 2020, detailed perhaps the most significant example to date of a high-ranking Trump campaign aide working with someone it described as a “Russian intelligence officer.”