Trump and free speech

[jakee 1,498]

The best I can decipher the twisted logic of this - Trump thinks it's ok to eliminate the freedom of the press and the free speech rights of all social media users because he thinks his right to free speech has been stifled... because Twitter put a question mark next to one of his posts. 

 

Some people have mentioned they thought Hillary treated voters with contempt - so what the hell can you call this?

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

10 minutes ago, jakee said:

The best I can decipher the twisted logic of this - Trump thinks it's ok to eliminate the freedom of the press and the free speech rights of all social media users because he thinks his right to free speech has been stifled... because Twitter put a question mark next to one of his posts. 

 

Some people have mentioned they thought Hillary treated voters with contempt - so what the hell can you call this?

Hi Jakee,

But, But, Bengahzi; and those emails.

Jerry Baumchen

[DJL 235]

16 minutes ago, jakee said:

The best I can decipher the twisted logic of this - Trump thinks it's ok to eliminate the freedom of the press and the free speech rights of all social media users because he thinks his right to free speech has been stifled... because Twitter put a question mark next to one of his posts. 

Some people have mentioned they thought Hillary treated voters with contempt - so what the hell can you call this?

The economy is in the tank and COVID is entirely unresolved but he's spending his time on mini-battles.

[Phil1111 1,149]

54 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Jakee,

But, But, Bengahzi; and those emails.

Jerry Baumchen

 

48 minutes ago, DJL said:

The economy is in the tank and COVID is entirely unresolved but he's spending his time on mini-battles.

Come-on its distraction and new scapegoats. China, China, China.

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

48 minutes ago, DJL said:

The economy is in the tank and COVID is entirely unresolved but he's spending his time on mini-battles.

Hi DJL,

Remember how Andy9o8 used to say, 'Hey, look over here.'

Gotta get their attention going somewhere else.

Jerry Baumchen

[Phil1111 1,149]

1 hour ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi DJL,

Remember how Andy9o8 used to say, 'Hey, look over here.'

Gotta get their attention going somewhere else.

Jerry Baumchen

Don't forget bullying, intimidation, grandstanding and making Americans look like fools once again. Trump threatens Twitter with ‘big action’

On another note FOX news has disclosed a truthful fact!

Fox's Perino presses Trump official on Scarborough tweets: 'How does this help the president win?'

"There’s these ongoing tweets from the president and comments from the White House about the tweets in regard to Joe Scarborough and the intern that died in the office," Perino, a former George W. Bush White House press secretary, said. "The coroner said she had a heart defect that was undetected until she had actually passed away. And the president continues to tweet about this and talk about this and I wonder, from your perspective at the campaign, how does this help the President win an election in November?"

Murtaugh responded that he thought "most Americans have a clear understanding of the way President Trump uses Twitter."

"He’s got a long-standing feud with Joe Scarborough. I don’t think that’s a secret to anybody else," he said."

Feuding vendettas, vengeful attacks, slander, innuendo, all of the actions that evangelicals and his base love about him.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Phil1111

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

3 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Feuding vendettas, vengeful attacks, slander, innuendo, all of the actions that evangelicals and his base love about him.

Hi Phil,

And that is the really sad part.

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  Got this from my daughter:

 

[kallend 2,027]

Trump prepares executive order:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/us/politics/trump-executive-order-social-media.html

Apparently the 1st Amendment protects his lies, falsehoods and smears, but does not apply to those who fact check him.

Another step closer to the Ministry of Truth.

"We have always been at war with Eastasia"  

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

33 minutes ago, kallend said:

Trump prepares executive order:

Hi John,

Based upon most court decisions since he took office, he needs to get used to 'All of the losing.'

Jerry Baumchen

[BIGUN 1,317]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Trump prepares executive order:

The former vice president’s stance, presented in an interview with The New York Times editorial board, is more extreme than that of other lawmakers who have confronted tech executives about the legal protection from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms,” Biden said in the interview published Friday.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/biden-wants-to-get-rid-of-techs-legal-shield-section-230.html

[yoink 321]

6 hours ago, kallend said:

Trump prepares executive order:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/us/politics/trump-executive-order-social-media.html

Apparently the 1st Amendment protects his lies, falsehoods and smears, but does not apply to those who fact check him.

Another step closer to the Ministry of Truth.

"We have always been at war with Eastasia"  

His MO has always been to sue companies that threaten him in some way. He’s used to them backing down because he’s a bully.

I suspect Twitter and Facebook have MORE than enough capital to fight that legally if he does it, all the way to the Supreme Court, where he’ll lose.

I’d love it if Twitter banned him for a week just to annoy him.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

The former vice president’s stance, presented in an interview with The New York Times editorial board, is more extreme than that of other lawmakers who have confronted tech executives about the legal protection from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms,” Biden said in the interview published Friday.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/biden-wants-to-get-rid-of-techs-legal-shield-section-230.html

So Biden thinks Twitter should be held responsible for Trump's rants?

Great. I would guess that their reaction to that increased liablility would be very simple. 

When the Mango Mussolini tweets shit like 'kill Democrats' (a real post he re-tweeted), he gets banned.

I'd love to see his reaction to getting banned from Twitter.

[turtlespeed 221]

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

The former vice president’s stance, presented in an interview with The New York Times editorial board, is more extreme than that of other lawmakers who have confronted tech executives about the legal protection from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms,” Biden said in the interview published Friday.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/17/biden-wants-to-get-rid-of-techs-legal-shield-section-230.html

But he's not Trump - so that makes it OK.

My GOD Keith get with the program.

[mistercwood 287]

48 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

But he's not Trump - so that makes it OK.

My GOD Keith get with the program.

I don't get what your point here is, Trump and Biden are taking almost completely opposite stances.

The article re: Biden has him wanting to remove the protections that social media companies currently have from the content posted on their platforms, making them put better efforts into policing and removing inappropriate content.

Trump is wanting to prevent social media from policing content (specifically his) so that lies and propaganda get left alone.

You can critique Biden's hardline approach for sure, but you really can't paint this as hypocrisy.

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

2 hours ago, yoink said:

His MO has always been to sue companies that threaten him in some way. He’s used to them backing down because he’s a bully.

Hi Will,

He really is not in a position to do that anymore; his 'hammer' Roy Cohen is dead.  He has yet to find anyone to take Cohen's place.

I have read, in numerous publications/internet, that many NY law firms will not work for him.  Something about not getting paid.

Jerry Baumchen

[BIGUN 1,317]

3 hours ago, mistercwood said:

I don't get what your point here is, Trump and Biden are taking almost completely opposite stances.

That's not true at all, Brother. It is the exact same stance. 

Edited May 29, 2020 by BIGUN

[mistercwood 287]

4 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

That's not true at all, Brother. It is the exact same stance. 

Can you elaborate how though? I'm just not seeing it. One wants the platform to be accountable for user content, and thus monitor/police said content. The other wants the platform to stay the fuck away from the user content and let them post anything they want.

[BIGUN 1,317]

4 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

So Biden thinks Twitter should be held responsible for Trump's rants?

Not at all. Both Trump and Biden agree that 230 should be repealed. Trump's EO only has certain powers. To repeal it requires a vote from Congress. 

Quote

I'd love to see his reaction to getting banned from Twitter.

Should have happened a long time ago. 

[billvon 2,998]

3 hours ago, mistercwood said:

I don't get what your point here is, Trump and Biden are taking almost completely opposite stances.

They likely are in this case - but it's hard to tell 100% because no one knows what the executive order is going to say yet. 

However, if you compare Biden's claim in that article to Trump's election pledge that he would reform United States libel laws so that “when the New York Times or the Washington Post writes a hit piece, we can sue them" then their approach is somewhat similar.  Trump wants to remove First Amendment protections from the press, and Biden wants to remove "outside content" protections from social media outlets.  From a 10,000 foot level those two approaches are similar - make it easier to sue outlets that post something that is politically incorrect.

[BIGUN 1,317]

3 minutes ago, mistercwood said:

One wants the platform to be accountable for user content, and thus monitor/police said content. The other wants the platform to stay the fuck away from the user content and let them post anything they want.

Sure. They both want the same thing. 

The text of the order, which was reviewed by CNN, targets a law known as the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 of the legislation provides broad immunity to websites that curate and moderate their own platforms, and has been described by legal experts as "the 26 words that created the internet."

It argues that the protections hinge mainly on tech platforms operating in "good faith," and that social media companies have not.
"In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression, we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to hand-pick the speech that Americans may access and convey on the internet," the order says. "This practice is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic. When large, powerful social media companies censor opinions with which they disagree, they exercise a dangerous power."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/politics/trump-twitter-social-media-executive-order/index.html

 

The bottom line is, the government cannot restrict free speech, but private companies can. Both Biden and Trump want the social medias held responsible for limiting free speech.  

 

[jakee 1,498]

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Sure. They both want the same thing. 

Not really.

 

Trump wants to punish the social media companies for being mean to him (the Executive order specifically references beng a reaction to the fact check of his Tweet) which is dangerous behaviour for any head of state.

 

Also, while Biden wants to simply get rid of 230, Trump wants to police it on a case by case basis, with his Justice Department tasked with determining whether individual flags, deletions or fact checks are a result of following across the board policy or political bias on the part of the media companies. 

 

Go on, tell me you think that's a good idea.

[jakee 1,498]

7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

But he's not Trump - so that makes it OK.

My GOD Keith get with the program.

No, his stance is different from Trump's, so that makes it different. Biden wants to treat all speech the same, Trump wants the government to decide which speech is honest and which speech is politically biased. 

 

How about you take the time to post a response that isn't just based on your knee jerk pro Trump bias?

[Guest]

7 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

But he's not Trump - so that makes it OK.

My GOD Keith get with the program.

\m/ >< \m/

[ScottishJohn 25]

Twitter has added an unprecedented warning to a Trump tweet, warning users that the post "glorifies violence".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/twitter-trump-minneapolis-shoot-tweet-protestors-glorifying-violence-warning-george-floyd-a9538196.html

It's a bit early for Trump to be up but i would bet that his head will explode with rage when he sees this warning.

Pull up a deck chair and make some popcorn. 

 

 

[nigel99 482]

23 minutes ago, ScottishJohn said:

Twitter has added an unprecedented warning to a Trump tweet, warning users that the post "glorifies violence".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/twitter-trump-minneapolis-shoot-tweet-protestors-glorifying-violence-warning-george-floyd-a9538196.html

It's a bit early for Trump to be up but i would bet that his head will explode with rage when he sees this warning.

Pull up a deck chair and make some popcorn. 

 

 

Wonder how Turtle is going to justify Trump on this one?