Will we see a reemergence of Minutemen groups, will they defend Americans and our border when Biden refuses not to?

[westwall]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

 

[Votto]

Texas will be fine, but I don't now about the other Panzy blue states on the border like NM and AR and definitely CA.

 

[XponentialChaos]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

Ok. So your argument is that big tech maybe might someday buy off judges in the future which will allow them to openly break laws. You believe all of this even though you don’t have evidence of judges being bought.

I don’t find your argument very compelling.

I would suggest that you just avoid tech companies that you don’t approve of. It’s quick and effective and based in reality.

 

[westwall]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

Ok. So your argument is that big tech maybe might someday buy off judges in the future which will allow them to openly break laws. You believe all of this even though you don’t have evidence of judges being bought.

I don’t find your argument very compelling.

I would suggest that you just avoid tech companies that you don’t approve of. It’s quick and effective and based in reality.

Oh, I don't use any of them. That's why I am as informed as I am. However, most people don't have my resources, nor do they even know where to begin in most cases. I want a level playing field for everyone.

Why don't you?

It seems to me that if you claim to want people to be better informed you would DEMAND that big tech not censor anything.

Or were you lying about that desire?

 

[XponentialChaos]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

Ok. So your argument is that big tech maybe might someday buy off judges in the future which will allow them to openly break laws. You believe all of this even though you don’t have evidence of judges being bought.

I don’t find your argument very compelling.

I would suggest that you just avoid tech companies that you don’t approve of. It’s quick and effective and based in reality.

Oh, I don't use any of them. That's why I am as informed as I am. However, most people don't have my resources, nor do they even know where to begin in most cases. I want a level playing field for everyone.

Why don't you?

It seems to me that if you claim to want people to be better informed you would DEMAND that big tech not censor anything.

Or were you lying about that desire?

I don’t have a problem with people choosing for themselves whether or not to use certain companies. Just like you have.

 

[WTF19]

im sure we can run the USA the way it should be, not the way some chinese politician, pedophile, geriatric waste of oxygen, or the home wrecking whore, or hitlery, or barrag o wants---fuck them treasonist pieces of shit

Just don’t break any laws from hate crimes and kidnapping and murdering governors down to wearing seat belts, You can do whatever the hell you want. Nobody will give a shit because you’re irrelevant in about 46 days. Trump lost Biden won / get over it MoveOn

you would be first on the list...just saying

 

[westwall]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

Ok. So your argument is that big tech maybe might someday buy off judges in the future which will allow them to openly break laws. You believe all of this even though you don’t have evidence of judges being bought.

I don’t find your argument very compelling.

I would suggest that you just avoid tech companies that you don’t approve of. It’s quick and effective and based in reality.

Oh, I don't use any of them. That's why I am as informed as I am. However, most people don't have my resources, nor do they even know where to begin in most cases. I want a level playing field for everyone.

Why don't you?

It seems to me that if you claim to want people to be better informed you would DEMAND that big tech not censor anything.

Or were you lying about that desire?

I don’t have a problem with people choosing for themselves whether or not to use certain companies. Just like you have.

The problem is big tech has become so big, thanks to those bought politicians, that they now can control the dissemination of information. For people without resources like mine, they are the only game in town.

Do you approve of the fascist control of information?

 

[XponentialChaos]

As would the majority of Americans. That's one reason why big tech needs to destroyed. They are trying to control the release of information so that they are the sole source.

Do you agree with that?

Do I agree that big tech needs to be destroyed? Not at all.

Oh? You agree that they should be able to censor information?

I thought you wanted people to be better informed. Your support of big tech is contrary to your stated goal.

I think businesses should be able to conduct themselves how they want within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like their policy, then go somewhere else.

They are violating the law. They have used a law that protects content providers from lawsuit, but have changed into publishers while still claiming protection from that law.

That is wrong on all counts. Either they return to being merely a platform, or they revert to being publishers, or they get broken up. Choose one of the three options.

Then it's up to the courts to decide if they are in violation of the law.

What happens when they use their vast wealth to buy those judges? Not mention the politicians who write the laws?

At what point are their business practices best described as fascist?

Is there any evidence that they are using their vast wealth to buy judges? Or are you just making that up?

Judges, no, not yet. But there is ample evidence of the politicians they have bought.

Ok. So you don't have evidence that judges are being bought.

Sounds like some interesting fiction but not based in reality.

The bought politicians ARE a reality, and not fiction. It doesn't take a tiny leap to find judges who are bought. They get found out every year.

Ok. So your argument is that big tech maybe might someday buy off judges in the future which will allow them to openly break laws. You believe all of this even though you don’t have evidence of judges being bought.

I don’t find your argument very compelling.

I would suggest that you just avoid tech companies that you don’t approve of. It’s quick and effective and based in reality.

Oh, I don't use any of them. That's why I am as informed as I am. However, most people don't have my resources, nor do they even know where to begin in most cases. I want a level playing field for everyone.

Why don't you?

It seems to me that if you claim to want people to be better informed you would DEMAND that big tech not censor anything.

Or were you lying about that desire?

I don’t have a problem with people choosing for themselves whether or not to use certain companies. Just like you have.

The problem is big tech has become so big, thanks to those bought politicians, that they now can control the dissemination of information. For people without resources like mine, they are the only game in town.

Do you approve of the fascist control of information?

If they have broken a law, then then should be penalized accordingly.

If they haven’t broken the law, then they should not be penalized.

Simple as that.

 

[WTF19]

Better a nutjob who loves my country than a fucking traitor, like you, when loves china more than this country.

I have never paid one cent to the Chinese dictatorship. I buy American as much as possible. I have bought good American Ford Motor Co vehicles my entire life. I can’t imagine why you would call me a traitor since you know nothing about me.

I know this about your cult master:


|Oct 21, 2020,06:57am EDT
Report: Trump Paid Nearly $200,000 In Taxes To China
Robert HartForbes Staff
Business

is TrumpO a traitor?

you are a flip flopping retard---as much as possible...wow.....where will you place blame? were you set up?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you are a flip flopping retard-

Why are you OK With Trump paying more taxes to China than he paid to America?

Joe never did that?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You would be first on the list...

what list?

 

[22lcidw]

Cali went red. But...Dominion helped keep us blue.

Trump supporters are delusional.

Xiden supporters are traitors.

Do you also think California went red?

Nope. I think Trump made inroads for sure, but Cali is too far gone. Too many idiots live there.

Oh good. It's nice to know that not all Trump supporters are so clueless to think that California actually went red.

Why do you think someone would be so delusional to believe that California is a red state? I don't have a good reason for it. What do you think?

We need to have sports stadiums blown up. With the sports players inside them. Nothing clueless about that.

 

[XponentialChaos]

We need to have sports stadiums blown up. With the sports players inside them. Nothing clueless about that.

Not clueless. Just insane.

 

[22lcidw]

We need to have sports stadiums blown up. With the sports players inside them. Nothing clueless about that.

Not clueless. Just insane.

All of those riots were what? The new mantra is people taking care of their own. Let everything else be destroyed as long as they ain't in them. Riots with Trump is different then riots with Biden. Who cares.

 

[XponentialChaos]

We need to have sports stadiums blown up. With the sports players inside them. Nothing clueless about that.

Not clueless. Just insane.

All of those riots were what? The new mantra is people taking care of their own. Let everything else be destroyed as long as they ain't in them. Riots with Trump is different then riots with Biden. Who cares.

Ok. Well I disagree with you wanting to murder a bunch of people.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Trump supporters are saying some really weird stuff today. More so than usual.

 

[22lcidw]

We need to have sports stadiums blown up. With the sports players inside them. Nothing clueless about that.

Not clueless. Just insane.

All of those riots were what? The new mantra is people taking care of their own. Let everything else be destroyed as long as they ain't in them. Riots with Trump is different then riots with Biden. Who cares.

Ok. Well I disagree with you wanting to murder a bunch of people.

You do not mind your own business. You interfere to much in others. You do not have that right. About others dying you are the ones who do not care. You use deaths as part of the Prog Socialist agendas. Its the decline of the other side caring that worries you because they are used as the soap box for your spewing of Prog issues. Life can suck. You make it worse.

 

[XponentialChaos]

You do not mind your own business. You interfere to much in others. You do not have that right. About others dying you are the ones who do not care. You use deaths as part of the Prog Socialist agendas. Its the decline of the other side caring that worries you because they are used as the soap box for your spewing of Prog issues. Life can suck. You make it worse.

K.

 

[Blaine Sweeter]

Grab your popcorn....Should we expect to see massive amounts of bloodshed at our southern border if Biden doesn't take action for good real Americans?

Not exactly a Constitutional scholar, now are you?
The original Minutemen prior to 1776 were the forerunners of why the Second Amendment exists:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.""""
Well regulated as in by the newly founded government, not rogue, self-formed militias.
And the intention was mainly for these WELL REGULATED militias to spring to action in the event of an act of tyranny by our own government or a foreign power.

 

[schmidlap]

When I say you...I mean all Leftist filth.
I responded to your wide brush paint job....did you forget?

If you are attempting to justify your indulging in falsehoods by proclaiming that you are a fanatical ideological zealot, you should be aware that your fanaticism does not license you to pleasure yourself with your lies.

Americans have different political prospectives that merit mutual respect. Not all Trumpers are neo-nazis just because Daily Stormer is so smitten with the Loser.