Trump to sign revenge-EO targeting social media

truthatallcost said:

These companies (not just Twitter btw) really do have a track record of shutting down conservative voices, while allowing far more extremist left wing voices to operate with impunity. Did you watch the 'debate' between Jack Dorsey, and Tim Pool on this subject? Joe Rogan was the moderator. Dorsey is so cowed by the extreme left, he requested to do the interview with one of his attorneys present, who ended up speaking on his behalf the whole time, and still lost the debate in most viewers eyes.

While you look for small bakeries to punish for not catering an LGBT wedding, you and the rest of the left should stop using the phrase, 'it's their business, they can do what they want'. The left has no room to speak with credibility on this matter. They don't even object to tech companies like Yahoo and Google, which censor the internet in favor of China, and hand over user's information to a murderous dictatorship, which then uses that info to arrest and torture people.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The only real questions are: (1) whether it's just more hot air and someone will talk his wannabe dicatator ass down, (2) if it does what he threatens, how quickly courts will smack it down, (3) just how small (one hopes) the probability is that law enforcement would enforce it despite court decisions smacking it down


President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies on Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices. McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force One that the order is “pertaining to social media” but shared no additional details on what it will do. Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday, and the president pledged Wednesday that "big action" will follow.

[cont].

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furor - POLITICO

Trump Will Sign an Executive Order on Social Media Companies: White House Spokeswoman - The New York Times


Earlier Wednesday, Trump warned social media giants that the federal government could “strongly regulate” or “close them down” if they continue to “silence conservative voices,” amid his flaring battle with Twitter after the platform fact-checked one of his tweets for the first time this week.

[cont].

White House says Trump will sign an executive order on social media | Fox News

The media companies engaged in political speech - the core of first amendment protections against government punishment/interference, the core of which in turn is protection against actions based on content of speech - to punish the lot and cow others because twitter fact-checked his constant lies in tweets. They would be free under the 1st to delete his account. But they didn't. Twitter just put a fact checker on his tweets because he keeps lying. Now he's saying he's going to sign an EO targeting them.

That's right. Twitter stood on its first amendment right to engage in political speech against government (Trump being leader of the executive branch of government, the authority of which these so-called conservatives pretend to stand against)). And a leader of one of government's branches is squawking about signing an unspecified executive order targeting social media because of this.

Will Trumpists cheer this on? Defend it? Will the usual suspects line up with diversions in the first ten posts? Let's see what the order contains and what they say. If it's like most things Trump, it'll be 100% bark, 0% bite. The announcement tests the waters. He'll spend tomorrow morning watching Fox instead of working. And then we'll see.

Click to expand...

maxparrish said:

It's remarkable that Trump's enemies have no concern over the bill of rights and the first amendment when it comes to social control by executive edict (e.g. the lockdown) but some are now wailing about the same amendment when there is some unwelcome social control by edict on them...my...my.

And it is equally interesting to see the left wail about how the internet companies ought to be regulated by the FCC (an agency who has routinely denied since its birth that broadcasting and common carriers have anything to do with free speech)...and may yet see that such swords cut both ways.

Liberals deserve to be hoisted by their own petard, but such is not wise. Trump's edict will be either ineffective or struck down, and hopefully the left learns a lesson about the principle and value of free speech.

Somehow though, I doubt they will.

Click to expand...

veritas1 said:

Google, Facebook Twitter and You Tube should just come clean and admit that they're liberals, that they facilitate the liberal agenda and that they try to censor conservatives. It's their right to do so and everyone knows they do it so acknowledging what is already well known shouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The only real questions are: (1) whether it's just more hot air and someone will talk his wannabe dicatator ass down, (2) if it does what he threatens, how quickly courts will smack it down, (3) just how small (one hopes) the probability is that law enforcement would enforce it despite court decisions smacking it down


President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies on Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices. McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force One that the order is “pertaining to social media” but shared no additional details on what it will do. Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday, and the president pledged Wednesday that "big action" will follow.

[cont].

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furor - POLITICO

Trump Will Sign an Executive Order on Social Media Companies: White House Spokeswoman - The New York Times


Earlier Wednesday, Trump warned social media giants that the federal government could “strongly regulate” or “close them down” if they continue to “silence conservative voices,” amid his flaring battle with Twitter after the platform fact-checked one of his tweets for the first time this week.

[cont].

White House says Trump will sign an executive order on social media | Fox News



The media companies engaged in political speech - the core of first amendment protections against government punishment/interference, the core of which in turn is protection against actions based on content of speech - to punish the lot and cow others because twitter fact-checked his constant lies in tweets. They would be free under the 1st to delete his account. But they didn't. Twitter just put a fact checker on his tweets because he keeps lying. Now he's saying he's going to sign an EO targeting them.

That's right. Twitter stood on its first amendment right to engage in political speech against government (Trump being leader of the executive branch of government, the authority of which these so-called conservatives pretend to stand against)). And a leader of one of government's branches is squawking about signing an unspecified executive order targeting social media because of this.

Will Trumpists cheer this on? Defend it? Will the usual suspects line up with diversions in the first ten posts? Let's see what the order contains and what they say. If it's like most things Trump, it'll be 100% bark, 0% bite. The announcement tests the waters. He'll spend tomorrow morning watching Fox instead of working. And then we'll see.

But more importantly, let's see what Trumpists will do as compared to what they say.

I know my bet: the most ardent will straight-up defend it, lying about first amendment jurisprudence in the process. A good number will pretend to criticize it, saying they "don't like it" or "don't agree", but not one of them will change their minds. At most, if a miracle strikes, there will be some words. No action.




So let us see what really happens, and when we do:

Remember when they pretend to care about America.

Remember when they pretend to love the constitution.

Remember when they chest-thump about their freedoms.

And always remember that actions so often speak far louder than words every could.

Click to expand...

maxparrish said:

It's remarkable that Trump's enemies have no concern over the bill of rights and the first amendment when it comes to social control by executive edict (e.g. the lockdown) but some are now wailing about the same amendment when there is some unwelcome social control by edict on them...my...my.

And it is equally interesting to see the left wail about how the internet companies ought to be regulated by the FCC (an agency who has routinely denied since its birth that broadcasting and common carriers have anything to do with free speech)...and may yet see that such swords cut both ways.

Liberals deserve to be hoisted by their own petard, but such is not wise. Trump's edict will be either ineffective or struck down, and hopefully the left learns a lesson about the principle and value of free speech.

Somehow though, I doubt they will.

Click to expand...

CaughtInThe said:

our President is literally a baby.

Click to expand...

veritas1 said:

Google, Facebook Twitter and You Tube should just come clean and admit that they're liberals, that they facilitate the liberal agenda and that they try to censor conservatives. It's their right to do so and everyone knows they do it so acknowledging what is already well known shouldn't be a problem.

Click to expand...

marke said:

It is becoming more common among Americans to see politicians as children and babies.

View attachment 67281778

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The only real questions are: (1) whether it's just more hot air and someone will talk his wannabe dicatator ass down, (2) if it does what he threatens, how quickly courts will smack it down, (3) just how small (one hopes) the probability is that law enforcement would enforce it despite court decisions smacking it down


President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies on Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices. McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force One that the order is “pertaining to social media” but shared no additional details on what it will do. Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday, and the president pledged Wednesday that "big action" will follow.

[cont].

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furor - POLITICO

Trump Will Sign an Executive Order on Social Media Companies: White House Spokeswoman - The New York Times


Earlier Wednesday, Trump warned social media giants that the federal government could “strongly regulate” or “close them down” if they continue to “silence conservative voices,” amid his flaring battle with Twitter after the platform fact-checked one of his tweets for the first time this week.

[cont].

White House says Trump will sign an executive order on social media | Fox News



The media companies engaged in political speech - the core of first amendment protections against government punishment/interference, the core of which in turn is protection against actions based on content of speech - to punish the lot and cow others because twitter fact-checked his constant lies in tweets. They would be free under the 1st to delete his account. But they didn't. Twitter just put a fact checker on his tweets because he keeps lying. Now he's saying he's going to sign an EO targeting them.

That's right. Twitter stood on its first amendment right to engage in political speech against government (Trump being leader of the executive branch of government, the authority of which these so-called conservatives pretend to stand against)). And a leader of one of government's branches is squawking about signing an unspecified executive order targeting social media because of this.

Will Trumpists cheer this on? Defend it? Will the usual suspects line up with diversions in the first ten posts? Let's see what the order contains and what they say. If it's like most things Trump, it'll be 100% bark, 0% bite. The announcement tests the waters. He'll spend tomorrow morning watching Fox instead of working. And then we'll see.

But more importantly, let's see what Trumpists will do as compared to what they say.

I know my bet: the most ardent will straight-up defend it, lying about first amendment jurisprudence in the process. A good number will pretend to criticize it, saying they "don't like it" or "don't agree", but not one of them will change their minds. At most, if a miracle strikes, there will be some words. No action.




So let us see what really happens, and when we do:

Remember when they pretend to care about America.

Remember when they pretend to love the constitution.

Remember when they chest-thump about their freedoms.

And always remember that actions so often speak far louder than words every could.

Click to expand...

marke said:

It is becoming more common among Americans to see politicians as children and babies.

View attachment 67281778

Click to expand...

CaughtInThe said:

what's really becoming common is evangelicals lying all the time now.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The only real questions are: (1) whether it's just more hot air and someone will talk his wannabe dicatator ass down, (2) if it does what he threatens, how quickly courts will smack it down, (3) just how small (one hopes) the probability is that law enforcement would enforce it despite court decisions smacking it down


President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies on Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices. McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force One that the order is “pertaining to social media” but shared no additional details on what it will do. Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday, and the president pledged Wednesday that "big action" will follow.

[cont].

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furor - POLITICO

Trump Will Sign an Executive Order on Social Media Companies: White House Spokeswoman - The New York Times


Earlier Wednesday, Trump warned social media giants that the federal government could “strongly regulate” or “close them down” if they continue to “silence conservative voices,” amid his flaring battle with Twitter after the platform fact-checked one of his tweets for the first time this week.

[cont].

White House says Trump will sign an executive order on social media | Fox News

Part cut due to length restrictions please see post#1 for full quote.


Will Trumpists cheer this on? Defend it? Will the usual suspects line up with diversions in the first ten posts? Let's see what the order contains and what they say. If it's like most things Trump, it'll be 100% bark, 0% bite. The announcement tests the waters. He'll spend tomorrow morning watching Fox instead of working. And then we'll see.

But more importantly, let's see what Trumpists will do as compared to what they say.

I know my bet: the most ardent will straight-up defend it, lying about first amendment jurisprudence in the process. A good number will pretend to criticize it, saying they "don't like it" or "don't agree", but not one of them will change their minds. At most, if a miracle strikes, there will be some words. No action.




So let us see what really happens, and when we do:

Remember when they pretend to care about America.

Remember when they pretend to love the constitution.

Remember when they chest-thump about their freedoms.

And always remember that actions so often speak far louder than words every could.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

They always have. It's just more obvious now.

Click to expand...

PirateMk1 said:

Twitter itself can say whatever it is they want, as by their right in a separate tweet. They are however seeking protections under law which protect them from legal liability from copyright holders, individuals ect. that normal publishing houses are NOT immune from. Editing Trumps tweet can be considered an act of a publishing house and thereby expose themselves to potential suit, said suit may succeed where otherwise the law would protect the company under normal circumstance. A normal publishing house can censor as much as they like, however they are also responsible on civil law for what they publish. If the published content is slanderous false or what have you, the aggrieved parties can sue civilly. Not so with a platform, whose function is to promote the freedom of speech, censoring content is the exact opposite of the purpose of a platform.

Platforms cannot have it both ways. They can not just censor the content of their users and not remain immune to suit. As they are protected by federal law, Trump can decide how to have those protections applied and could sue civilly on behalf of other aggrieved parties as well.

Definitely makes for an interesting court case, or two.

Click to expand...

JustHanging said:

It's clearly his primary occupation. That and social media troll.

His handling of this pandemic is going to be a case study in failed leadership for a long long time. 100% guarantee you'll see it across the country in numerous faculties, as educators attempt to forewarn their students, and hopefully prevent this from happening again.

Click to expand...

marke said:

It is becoming more common among Americans to see politicians as children and babies.

View attachment 67281779

Click to expand...

ttwtt78640 said:

The issue is not whether they can edit content because, like any other publisher, they obviously can do so - the issue is whether they should continue to enjoy special legal protection from being sued for their edited (approved?) published content. Once they go from being an "open platform" to yet another edited source of mass media content then they should be held legally responsible for any and all of their published content.

Click to expand...

PirateMk1 said:

Twitter is NOT a publisher. Lets make this VERY clear. They claim they are a platform and therefor entitled to the protections of a platform. Under this rubric they should not be editing at all, nor discriminating on who may use their platform, and only removing content which is unlawful. Now that doesn't mean that cant exercise their speech it just means it has be identified as theirs and not another content providers. All a platform is supposed to be is a place to distribute and consume ideas. Thats ideal anyhow.

Click to expand...

Mr Person said:

The only real questions are: (1) whether it's just more hot air and someone will talk his wannabe dicatator ass down, (2) if it does what he threatens, how quickly courts will smack it down, (3) just how small (one hopes) the probability is that law enforcement would enforce it despite court decisions smacking it down


President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order aimed at social media companies on Thursday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters Wednesday evening, a move that comes as the president and his allies have escalated their allegations that companies like Twitter and Facebook stifle GOP voices. McEnany told reporters aboard Air Force One that the order is “pertaining to social media” but shared no additional details on what it will do. Trump and his supporters have been hammering Twitter since the social network labeled a pair of his tweets with a fact-checking notice for the first time on Tuesday, and the president pledged Wednesday that "big action" will follow.

[cont].

Trump to sign executive order on social media amid Twitter furor - POLITICO

Trump Will Sign an Executive Order on Social Media Companies: White House Spokeswoman - The New York Times


Earlier Wednesday, Trump warned social media giants that the federal government could “strongly regulate” or “close them down” if they continue to “silence conservative voices,” amid his flaring battle with Twitter after the platform fact-checked one of his tweets for the first time this week.

[cont].

White House says Trump will sign an executive order on social media | Fox News



The media companies engaged in political speech - the core of first amendment protections against government punishment/interference, the core of which in turn is protection against actions based on content of speech - to punish the lot and cow others because twitter fact-checked his constant lies in tweets. They would be free under the 1st to delete his account. But they didn't. Twitter just put a fact checker on his tweets because he keeps lying. Now he's saying he's going to sign an EO targeting them.

That's right. Twitter stood on its first amendment right to engage in political speech against government (Trump being leader of the executive branch of government, the authority of which these so-called conservatives pretend to stand against)). And a leader of one of government's branches is squawking about signing an unspecified executive order targeting social media because of this.

Will Trumpists cheer this on? Defend it? Will the usual suspects line up with diversions in the first ten posts? Let's see what the order contains and what they say. If it's like most things Trump, it'll be 100% bark, 0% bite. The announcement tests the waters. He'll spend tomorrow morning watching Fox instead of working. And then we'll see.

But more importantly, let's see what Trumpists will do as compared to what they say.

I know my bet: the most ardent will straight-up defend it, lying about first amendment jurisprudence in the process. A good number will pretend to criticize it, saying they "don't like it" or "don't agree", but not one of them will change their minds. At most, if a miracle strikes, there will be some words. No action.




So let us see what really happens, and when we do:

Remember when they pretend to care about America.

Remember when they pretend to love the constitution.

Remember when they chest-thump about their freedoms.

And always remember that actions so often speak far louder than words every could.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

It's a shame that the people who constantly spout out about the Constitution have no ****ing clue of what the damned thing even says. "Guns," which isn't even written into the ****ing thing, seems to be the only word in it they understand.

Click to expand...

TheDoctorWasIn said:

None of this is correct. They already have legal protection for copyright claims, for this express purpose - to allow websites and service providers to moderate content without being liable as a publisher.

It's called Section 230, and this is what it says:

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

Click to expand...