First President to Advocate Suspending the Constitution

chop2chip said:
Im just asking for transparency and consistency. You can’t complain about bias without demanding the full truth both good and bad.

But I don’t think we need to play the result here. Clearly Twitter (and Facebook) have been bad actors and made themselves apart of the game.
Click to expand...

I get that. I don’t believe Musk has a bone to pick, just a transparent motive.
 
To his credit Musk has been transparent in his political allegiances. Including the endorsement of DeSantis.

Being the proprietor of a social media network doesn't preclude him of the right to have political views.

And if he wanted to favor certain kinds of content that would be his prerogative as well. I believe he has already chimed in on the Paul Pelosi gay lover theory. It's his bidness. In more ways than one.
 
chop2chip said:
Im just asking for transparency and consistency. You can’t complain about bias without demanding the full truth both good and bad.

But I don’t think we need to play the result here. Clearly Twitter (and Facebook) have been bad actors and made themselves apart of the game.
Click to expand...

They've become bad actors for one side Chop.
 
nsacpi said:
To his credit Musk has been transparent in his political allegiances. Including the endorsement of DeSantis.

Being the proprietor of a social media network doesn't preclude him of the right to have political views.

And if he wanted to favor certain kinds of content that would be his prerogative as well. I believe he has already chimed in on the Paul Pelosi gay lover theory. It's his bidness. In more ways than one.
Click to expand...

I think we are long past the point of debating whether a laissez fair approach is realistic. The next few years (decades?) are going to see us meander towards some sort of equilibrium with this sort of stuff.
[TW]1599555565482823680[/TW]
 
chop2chip said:
I think we are long past the point of debating whether a laissez fair approach is realistic. The next few years (decades?) are going to see us meander towards some sort of equilibrium with this sort of stuff.
[TW]1599555565482823680[/TW]
Click to expand...

The equilibrium is likely to consist of various approaches to content moderation. May a thousand platforms bloom.
 
He wants to throw out the Constitution and be President again only because he's in big legal trouble.
 
Once again it’s hilarious to watch the righteous left contort themselves around this issue.

Everyone sees what you really are.
 
thethe said:
Yes they did - The news is propogated on Twitter. Censoring a reputable news agency from reporting on the laptop infringed on the first amendment. Especially because it was the intelligence agencies taht compelled Twitter to do it.

You keep missing whats actually happening.
Click to expand...

They didn’t censor anything, Twitter did. Ethically it’s murkier, but there’s nothing suggesting Twitter wasn’t acting on their own when they actually did the censoring. The First Amendment doesn’t protect you from Twitter, even if the DNC is asking nicely.
 
mqt said:
They didn’t censor anything, Twitter did. Ethically it’s murkier, but there’s nothing suggesting Twitter wasn’t acting on their own when they actually did the censoring. The First Amendment doesn’t protect you from Twitter, even if the DNC is asking nicely.
Click to expand...

I have to keep posting these examples for y'all I suppose. But here again

[Tw]1599131270453538816[/tw]

The wording is so always so carefully phrased to expunge them from breaking the law... But anybody who isn't a complete naive child understands what happened here

Combine the fbi warnings with the Biden team calling for reviews... Then of course the Biden admin has admitted to coordinating censorship with social media. Hell Alex Berenson has released the proof that won him his lawsuit.

How much does this need to be spelled out to you. I think nothing short of Dorsey publicly admitting that they were threatened if they didn't comply would convince... And then I'm pretty sure that still wouldn't convince you bc you would say "it was still their decision to comply... It was not the federal government executing it"

Y'all are so pathetically naive
 
At some point leftists will learn that nobody takes their virtuous moral superiority complex seriously anymore

[Tw]1599612279015673857[/tw]
 
sturg33 said:
I have to keep posting these examples for y'all I suppose. But here again

[Tw]1599131270453538816[/tw]

The wording is so always so carefully phrased to expunge them from breaking the law... But anybody who isn't a complete naive child understands what happened here

Combine the fbi warnings with the Biden team calling for reviews... Then of course the Biden admin has admitted to coordinating censorship with social media. Hell Alex Berenson has released the proof that won him his lawsuit.

How much does this need to be spelled out to you. I think nothing short of Dorsey publicly admitting that they were threatened if they didn't comply would convince... And then I'm pretty sure that still wouldn't convince you bc you would say "it was still their decision to comply... It was not the federal government executing it"

Y'all are so pathetically naive
Click to expand...


I am with you. We need to hold the Trump administration accountable for this!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top