Thanks, MQD, and thanks to all who keep this thread moving.
Posted on 09/23/2020 10:11:59 AM PDT by ransomnote
NEW Q DROPS - For Ransomnote’s Ping List
Q4742 and live link
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=22#22
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=25#25
Q4743 and Q4744, and Q4744 live link
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=45#45
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=49#49
Q4745
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=53#53
Q4746
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3886936/posts?page=55#55
Thanks, MQD, and thanks to all who keep this thread moving.
Is that pointing to Hannity’s 99% of agency is patriotic?
4746
Sep 23 2020 12:46:26
Let the truth be told.
Political spying [illegal] less than 1%.
Have faith in Humanity.
Q
“...
The Department of Justice’s draft legislation focuses on two areas of reform, both of which are, at minimum, necessary to recalibrate the outdated immunity of Section 230.
Promoting Transparency and Open Discourse
First, the draft legislation has a series of reforms to promote transparency and open discourse and ensure that platforms are fairer to the public when removing lawful speech from their services.
The current interpretations of Section 230 have enabled online platforms to hide behind the immunity to censor lawful speech in bad faith and is inconsistent with their own terms of service. To remedy this, the department’s legislative proposal revises and clarifies the existing language of Section 230 and replaces vague terms that may be used to shield arbitrary content moderation decisions with more concrete language that gives greater guidance to platforms, users, and courts.
The legislative proposal also adds language to the definition of “information content provider” to clarify when platforms should be responsible for speech that they affirmatively and substantively contribute to or modify.
Addressing Illicit Activity Online
The second category of amendments is aimed at incentivizing platforms to address the growing amount of illicit content online, while preserving the core of Section 230’s immunity for defamation claims.
Section 230 immunity is meant to incentivize and protect online Good Samaritans. Platforms that purposely solicit and facilitate harmful criminal activity — in effect, online Bad Samaritans — should not receive the benefit of this immunity. Nor should a platform receive blanket immunity for continuing to host known criminal content on its services, despite repeated pleas from victims to take action.
...”
Not getting that one.
DOJ has 113,114 employees.
1% is 1,131. That’s a lot of bad apples.
You don't understand or you aren't seeing it in aggregators? If the latter, it's a qanon.pub.
INterestink days ahead
Pace is picking up, hold on to your shorts!
In before they find Hunter
Joe Biden will be going faster than Kamala Harris!
Needs correct keyword
So, is 4746 saying that embedding people in the Trump campaign, and “wiretapping” Trump Tower, and Russia, Russia, Russia are actually relatively insignificant? Less than 1% of the malfeasance? Are we looking at straight-up Treason which is aimed against America specifically and not aimed directly at Trump? Is that the 99% of the malfeasance that has been uncovered?
Bring on the military tribunals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
