Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances./——-/ Are you playing stupid just to get attention? It’s restricting the government, not private citizens or corporations. GEEEEZE.
if congress made a law saying that black people cannot speak about slavery that would be a violation of the first amendment, for example. I don't think all black people work for the government./——-/ Are you playing stupid just to get attention? It’s restricting the government, not private citizens or corporations. GEEEEZE.
He hasn't done either, douchebag.
View attachment 740657
Twitter Files Part 6 reveals FBI's ties to tech giant: 'As if it were a subsidiary'
Substack writer Matt Taibbi published the sixth installment of Elon Musk's "Twitter Files," highlighting the tech giant's cozy relationship with the FBI.www.foxnews.com
That's a big fat lie, you dumb asshole. Only NAZIs swallow that argument.
The FBI was identified interfering in our elections, you dumb fuck.
so if you work for a large corporation you give up your first amendment rights when you are at work? Don't think that's what the founders had in mind when they wrote it.
Well you can say any damn thing you want at work, doesn't mean your employer can't fire you for it.
.
true, but you can say it, that's the point. private companies cannot override the first amendment.Well you can say any damn thing you want at work, doesn't mean your employer can't fire you for it.
.
true, but you can say it, that's the point. private companies cannot override the first amendment.
The FBI isn't a private company, moron.You may want to check the first word of the first amendment on the folly of trying to apply it to private companies.
The FBI isn't a private company, moron.
Getting censored by the FBI is not a consequence of speech.Yeah, the first amendment doesn't protect one from consequence for speech.
As directed by the FBI, dirtbag.The private company we're discussing is Twitter, and their actions.
As directed by the FBI, dirtbag.
what a pile of horseshit. There is no statute that require' s the FBI to violate the First Amendment. Only a fucking NAZI would try to justify this crap.These were requests by the FBI. If they were statutorily required to do so, you might have a point. But there's no law requiring Twitter to pull any post.
what a pile of horseshit. There is no statute that require' s the FBI to violate the First Amendment. Only a fucking NAZI would try to justify this crap.
The First Amendment bars the FBI from administering censorship, period. The FBI is not allowed to make any such request, NAZI. IF the FBI "requested" me to murder someone, would that make it OK?What law required Twitter to pull the posts? Cite it.
If there is no such law, then there is no 1st amendment violation. As demonstrated by the first four words of the 1st amendment. The FBI made *requests*. Twitter CHOSE to grant them.
The First Amendment bars the FBI from administering censorship, period. T
he FBI is not allowed to make any such request, NAZI. IF the FBI "requested" me to murder someone, would that make it OK?
Getting censored by the FBI is not a consequence of speech.
