Skip to comments.
Trump sues tech firms for blocking him, and fund-raises off it.
The New York Times ^
| July 7, 2021
| Shane Goldmacher
Posted on 07/08/2021 4:19:03 AM PDT by definitelynotaliberal
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
I checked, but nothing came up. My apologies if this has been posted already.
To: definitelynotaliberal
I would hate to think there is more than one Freeper posting articles from the discredited NYT here.
2
posted on
07/08/2021 4:21:53 AM PDT
by
SamAdams76
(Give me a Pigfoot and a Bottle of Beer)
To: definitelynotaliberal
Good. Trump is a fighter, and a smart one at that. And I don’t think the Slimes has ever compaimed about the Marxist Party’s fundraising.
3
posted on
07/08/2021 4:22:52 AM PDT
by
LIConFem
(Bring a Commie to room temperature for Mommy)
To: definitelynotaliberal
Heh, President Trump sues Fake News for robbing everyone of their first amendment rights, and Fake News responds by making up stuff about the lawsuit.
Yes, the gubmint cannot censor and cannot block first amendment rights.
Yes, the gubmint cannot delegate to fake news and the social medias that which gubmint cannot do.
Every time fake news spikes stories or socials cancel someone, is another layer in this class action lawsuit
Durham was investigating gubmint leaks to the media and socials.
Russia, Russia, Russia.
Just how much evidence does Durham have that can be used by this class action lawsuit to bankrupt the global and local deep state?
Enjoy the show!
To: definitelynotaliberal
The Internet is a US government creation.
To: definitelynotaliberal
Waiting for the dismissal because he has no standing in 3...2..1...
6
posted on
07/08/2021 4:34:27 AM PDT
by
Adder
("Can you be more stupid?" is a question, not a challenge.)
To: definitelynotaliberal
"A version of the CDA had passed through the Senate pushed by Senator J. James Exon (D-NE). A grassroots effort in the tech industry reacted to try to convince the House of Representatives to challenge Exon's bill. Based on the Stratton Oakmont decision, Congress recognized that requiring service providers to block indecent content would make them be treated as publishers in the context of the First Amendment and thus become liable for other illegal content such as libel, not set out in the existing CDA. Cox and fellow Representative Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote the House bill's section 509, titled the Internet Freedom and Family Empowerment Act, designed to override the decision from Stratton Oakmont,
so that service providers could moderate content as necessary and did not have to act as a wholly neutral conduit. The new Act was added the section while the CDA was in conference within the House."
"The overall Telecommunications Act, with both Exon's CDA and Cox/Wyden's provision, passed both Houses by near-unanimous votes and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton by February 1996. Cox/Wyden's section became Section 509 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and became law as a new Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230
To: definitelynotaliberal
To: definitelynotaliberal
“The idea that somehow, magically, we can treat them as an extension of the government is illogical.”
Except there are emails between tech hotshots and Democrat politicians proving that they ARE extensions of the government.
9
posted on
07/08/2021 4:56:34 AM PDT
by
MayflowerMadam
(Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free - Gal. 5:1)
To: definitelynotaliberal
To: definitelynotaliberal
To: LIConFem
First Amendment — which applies to the government, not to private-sector companiesThere ya go! They say so!
12
posted on
07/08/2021 5:13:12 AM PDT
by
gr8eman
(A man who only talks business is a failure in all aspects of life- Camino Del Rio)
To: MayflowerMadam
13
posted on
07/08/2021 5:24:05 AM PDT
by
LIConFem
(Bring a Commie to room temperature for Mommy)
To: definitelynotaliberal
14
posted on
07/08/2021 5:40:11 AM PDT
by
MtnClimber
(For photos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
To: definitelynotaliberal
So, the Tech Trio are allowed to profit from public Web platforms that openly discriminate against politically Conservative speech?
However, it is against the law if those same platforms discriminate on the basis of race or sexual orientation?
Yeah - that definitely sounds like the USA judicial system.
By the way - I briefly saw Trump's social media lawyer on Laura Ingraham.
He is elderly and low energy.
To: definitelynotaliberal
What is the name of the law suit web site? Linky please.
16
posted on
07/08/2021 5:46:13 AM PDT
by
duckman
( Not tired of winning!)
To: definitelynotaliberal
His political operation immediately began fund-raising off it. Good, he needs as much $$$ as possible to elect real conservatives in 2022 and to fight the Big 3 with deep pockets and thousands of lawyers.
17
posted on
07/08/2021 5:47:23 AM PDT
by
1Old Pro
(Let's make crime illegal again!)
To: definitelynotaliberal
“Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t work for the government, Jack Dorsey doesn’t work for the government,” Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University School of Law and a co-director of the High Tech Law Institute, said of the Facebook and Twitter chief executives. “The idea that somehow, magically, we can treat them as an extension of the government is illogical.”Helloooooooo, Section 230, anyone? They can't ban ordinary speech they don't agree with under Section 230.
To: MtnClimber
I'll see your Zuckerberg and raise you one Jack.
To: Adder
Waiting for the dismissal because he has no standing in 3...2..1...
—————
So true. The Robert’s special response . Pols on both sides will not touch them as they more than likely have benefited from political contributions
Will be interesting to see how Trump weaves in Zuckerbergs contributions to state elections as he tries to seperate himself from FB and claim he is an individual in that effort and not a corporate entity/ representative
20
posted on
07/08/2021 5:55:34 AM PDT
by
patriotspride
(Third generation Vet. Never forget the true cost of freedom)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson