Trump v Biden 2020,The insurrection (pt 6) Read OP

francois

francois wrote: »

Free speech warriors in global meltdown

WE definitely need less free speech alright, whilst condemning China and other dictatorships for ** checks notes *** prohibiting free speech.

But but but, that's the government, says you. Doesn't really matter says I.

Anyway those of you getting a bit horny about this will, some day in the future, see your own politicians disappear from electronic media, and what will be left would be bland centrists. And war mongers, always the war mongers.

Professor Moriarty

Deleted User wrote: »

WE definitely need less free speech alright, whilst condemning China and other dictatorships for ** checks notes *** prohibiting free speech.

But but but, that's the government, says you. Doesn't really matter says I.

Anyway those of you getting a bit horny about this will, some day in the future, see your own politicians disappear from electronic media, and what will be left would be bland centrists. And war mongers, always the war mongers.

Yeah, yeah, grand.

MeMen2_MoRi_

https://twitter.com/punishedDJT/status/1347693365937147904?s=19

Tell me how

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

They believe that both law and order have been usurped by the Democrat steal. They do not recognize Biden as the legitimate President they do not recognise the Senate and Congress as representing the will of the people by endorsing Biden's electors. They believe the Supreme Court reneged on its duty to rule in favour of the challenge to the legitimacy of the election.

They had their opportunities to challenge election results at every court level in the land. They failed.

They are willfully ignoring the evidence in order to undermine the democratic process.

They're only belief is that they should get what they want. That isn't good enough.

MeMen2_MoRi_

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

Here was me thinking the US stood against terrorism?

That would be pretty naive. The US promotes terrorism all over the world.

For Forks Sake

https://twitter.com/Tucker5law/status/1347691760567386112

MeMen2_MoRi_

[Deleted User] wrote: »

WE definitely need less free speech alright, whilst condemning China and other dictatorships for ** checks notes *** prohibiting free speech.

But but but, that's the government, says you. Doesn't really matter says I.

Anyway those of you getting a bit horny about this will, some day in the future, see your own politicians disappear from electronic media, and what will be left would be bland centrists. And war mongers, always the war mongers.

The guy just got permabanned for being.... A war monger?

Sierra Oscar

Too little, too late with the Twitter ban at this stage. Just reinforces the conspiracy theory amongst his supporters. Trump has been moving his campaign to the likes of Parlour for months now.

His supporters get their news and content from the likes of Parlour now, which no responsible persons have any control over. Twitter and Facebook are just used for trolling.

Expect a massive upsurge in the use of Parlour. I'm considering getting it myself as someone who likes to keep abreast of what is being discussed amongst Trump supporters and right wing extremists in general.

It's important that we know what their narrative is. Driving discussion underground and pretending it isn't happening is just asking for a catastrophe to happen.

jill_valentine

He is the sitting President of the United States. He has a wider communicative reach than any other human being on Earth, he's just too stupid to use it.

Amirani

Amirani wrote: »

Private censorship is a bit of an oxymoron.

No it isn't. There is no definition of censorship which says it is only public.

From wiki ( and pretty much everywhere else).

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient."[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions, and other controlling bodies.

Also here is what oxymoron means.

a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

So who knows what you are going for there. Unless you think that private is contradictory to censorship.

MeMen2_MoRi_

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

The guy just got permabanned for being.... A war monger?

Did he? What wars recently did Trump engage in? Is that what Twitter claimed? No.

Here's Johnny Bolton. Warmonger. On Twitter.

https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Sparko

He's probably desperately looking for Melania to get her to let him use her phone.

I wonder what tweet got him banned. We'll never see it.

nolivesmatter

Amirani wrote: »

Private censorship is a bit of an oxymoron.

If I want to go make a speech in your house, you don't have to let me. Trump still has plenty of ways to make himself heard, he has not been censored. Tech companies have no obligation to allow their platforms be used for inciting violence (or anything really).

I mostly agree. But there is an argument to be made that Twitter has become much more than just a platform for speech, and that the possibility of silencing people on it is a concern. Trumps case however isn't that argument.

For Forks Sake

Deleted User wrote: »

No it isn't. There is no definition of censorship which says it is only public.

From wiki ( and pretty much everywhere else).

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient."[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions, and other controlling bodies.

Trump agreed, like every other user, to Twitters Terms of Service when he set up his account.

The fact that he's violated pretty much every one of them puts him in breach of that agreement with Twitter, and they are 100% within their rights to remove his service.

Fact that they should have done it years ago (back when he started pushing the Obama Birther nonsense would have been ideal) is a conversation for another day, but there is NO CENSORSHIP at play.

Trump is well within his rights to set up his own platform if he wants his nonsense heard, other platforms are not obliged to host him.

Overheal

I called it! I ****ing CALLED IT.

Axios’ Jonathan Swan (“it is what it is” interview) reports White House is operating under ‘DEFACTO 25TH AMMENDMENT.’

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jonathan-swan-reports-white-house-under-de-facto-25th-amendment-with-cabinet-ignoring-trump-operating-as-if-he-is-not-the-president/

Have (and many) suspected since the delay of the national guard. When we learned Pence and the Joint Chiefs acted on that without mentioning Trump.

F*CK YES, if this means they will not give him the paperwork to issue pardons.

God damn sex is good but - damn.

Tony EH

A private company can censor who they like for breaking THEIR RULES. No amount of whinging will change that.

Samsonsmasher

Tell me how wrote: »

They had their opportunities to challenge election results at every court level in the land. They failed.

They are willfully ignoring the evidence in order to undermine the democratic process.

They're only belief is that they should get what they want. That isn't good enough.

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen now?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

Professor Moriarty

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

Followed by a riot involving Republicans who invaded Capitol Hill and caused the death of five people while crapping all over the constitution.

Tell me how

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen now?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

What parallel universe did this happen in?

Samsonsmasher

nolivesmatter wrote: »

I mostly agree. But there is an argument to be made that Twitter has become much more than just a platform for speech, and that the possibility of silencing people on it is a concern. Trumps case however isn't that argument.

It sets a dangerous precedent for everyone's freedom of expression regardless where on the political spectrum they may be.

everlast75

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen now?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

Delusional or disingenuous.

Donald Trump

Overheal wrote: »

I called it! I ****ing CALLED IT.

Axios’ Jonathan Swan (“it is what it is” interview) reports White House is operating under ‘DEFACTO 25TH AMMENDMENT.’

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jonathan-swan-reports-white-house-under-de-facto-25th-amendment-with-cabinet-ignoring-trump-operating-as-if-he-is-not-the-president/

Have (and many) suspected since the delay of the national guard. When we learned Pence and the Joint Chiefs acted on that without mentioning Trump.

F*CK YES, if this means they will not give him the paperwork to issue pardons.

God damn sex is good but - damn.

No. Defacto is not good enough. The Republicans need to help to push it through and push him out to make a statement. Even if it is only for a few days. They need to end it in control of the situation and try to start washing themselves of him.



Will they do it? Possibly given that they can say they are doing it to save him from being impeached.


Would he be impeached? I'd say it would be close enough. That said, some the Democrats who were drafting the articles, such as Omar, are particularly detested by Republicans. When I saw her pushing it I thought that that might backfire. I would have preferred to see it being driven by a Democrat who is considered less extreme by Republicans

weisses

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen now?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

Yeah sure, Democrat's are the problem here :o

Samsonsmasher

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Followed by a riot involving Republicans who invaded Capitol Hill and caused the death of five people while crapping all over the constitution.

Biden and Harris and Pelosi endorsed BLM last year.

Why aren't they banned for inciting violence?

Professor Moriarty

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

It sets a dangerous precedent for everyone's freedom of expression regardless where on the political spectrum they may be.

Bollox. What happened yesterday was the greatest threat to democracy in the US in the past two centuries.

Tony EH

Tony EH wrote: »

A private company can censor who they like for breaking THEIR RULES. No amount of whinging will change that.

They can but it is still censorship, despite what is being claimed here. I admire your commitment to property rights, though. I don't have that kind of regard for property myself, certainly not in monopoly situations.

extra gravy

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Twitter just banned Trump permanently and Pelosi is looking for his head.

Do you think they are going to want to listen now?

They just went through a year of the statues of Lincoln Washington and Jefferson being torn down across their country with police being murdered property looted and burned by mobs of insane Democrats.

You would get a more enthusiastic response to the shiite you post here: https://parler.com/

Robert ninja

Tony EH wrote: »

A private company can censor who they like for breaking THEIR RULES. No amount of whinging will change that.

They ban people who haven't broken any rules and let loose those who do all the time. Their banning is based on agenda not some noble set of ideals they think will actually improve conversation.

Places like twitter live off of conflict and social media platforms in general are time vampires who design their sites around manipulating their users to waste as much time as possible. They are not your friends. Nobody voted them in. They're foreign corporations with hard-left stances yet play some of the filthiest capitalist games. Think twice before celebrating their actions no matter how they might seemingly align with you.

weisses

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

It sets a dangerous precedent for everyone's freedom of expression regardless where on the political spectrum they may be.

You mean looting the capitol buildings yes ? ..no ?