I was telling my family that the left had to be thinking that they missed the chance to kill Hitler, so they feel obligated to kill the guy they call the new Hitler. Looks like I was right.
If a new Hitler was coming into power would you not feel an obligation to stop him?
Trump tried to steal an election, ie coup the government. Last year he said "I will be a dictator on day one". He can't be impeached, because the Senate decided that you can't be impeached after you leave office. He can't be held criminally liable, because the courts said he has to be impeached before he can be tried for unofficial actions he took as president, and he can't EVER be tried for an official action. States can't take him off the ballot for violating the 14th amendment because Trump's SCOTUS said they can't. By anointing him as King, Republicans have made it so that he can't be held accountable in any way other than violence.
^^ The dangerous effects of a stupid population and a dishonest media on full display here.
If you get the violence you so desperately want you are absolutely f*cked.
The men are all on the right. The food is all on the right. The majority of the weapons are all on the right. The majority of the military is on the right.
I was telling my family that the left had to be thinking that they missed the chance to kill Hitler, so they feel obligated to kill the guy they call the new Hitler. Looks like I was right.
If a new Hitler was coming into power would you not feel an obligation to stop him?
Trump tried to steal an election, ie coup the government. Last year he said "I will be a dictator on day one". He can't be impeached, because the Senate decided that you can't be impeached after you leave office. He can't be held criminally liable, because the courts said he has to be impeached before he can be tried for unofficial actions he took as president, and he can't EVER be tried for an official action. States can't take him off the ballot for violating the 14th amendment because Trump's SCOTUS said they can't. By anointing him as King, Republicans have made it so that he can't be held accountable in any way other than violence.
If a new Hitler was coming into power would you not feel an obligation to stop him?
Trump tried to steal an election, ie coup the government. Last year he said "I will be a dictator on day one". He can't be impeached, because the Senate decided that you can't be impeached after you leave office. He can't be held criminally liable, because the courts said he has to be impeached before he can be tried for unofficial actions he took as president, and he can't EVER be tried for an official action. States can't take him off the ballot for violating the 14th amendment because Trump's SCOTUS said they can't. By anointing him as King, Republicans have made it so that he can't be held accountable in any way other than violence.
The left is the party of censorship not the right.
The Biden administration and groups like GARM and media matters lean on social media companies to regulate content to fit their politics not the other way around.
The left is anti-free speech.
A non-profit “leaned” on a social media company by writing a report that exposed anti-semitism and Ken Paxton responded by launching an investigation and trying to issue subpoenas (note, media matters has no connection to Texas, so Paxton has no basis for investigating). But, your take away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
Texas and Florida want to force private companies to host conservative speech and your take-away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
You are so brainwashed by Trumpmax that you can’t even recognize how idiotic you sound when you pretend the right care about free speech or the first amendment.
The left is the party of censorship not the right.
The Biden administration and groups like GARM and media matters lean on social media companies to regulate content to fit their politics not the other way around.
The left is anti-free speech.
A non-profit “leaned” on a social media company by writing a report that exposed anti-semitism and Ken Paxton responded by launching an investigation and trying to issue subpoenas (note, media matters has no connection to Texas, so Paxton has no basis for investigating). But, your take away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
Texas and Florida want to force private companies to host conservative speech and your take-away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
You are so brainwashed by Trumpmax that you can’t even recognize how idiotic you sound when you pretend the right care about free speech or the first amendment.
Nothing says free speech like mandating any speech you don't like be silenced and banned.
A cultist calling other people brainwashed is pretty rich.
The left is the party of censorship not the right.
The Biden administration and groups like GARM and media matters lean on social media companies to regulate content to fit their politics not the other way around.
The left is anti-free speech.
A non-profit “leaned” on a social media company by writing a report that exposed anti-semitism and Ken Paxton responded by launching an investigation and trying to issue subpoenas (note, media matters has no connection to Texas, so Paxton has no basis for investigating). But, your take away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
Texas and Florida want to force private companies to host conservative speech and your take-away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
You are so brainwashed by Trumpmax that you can’t even recognize how idiotic you sound when you pretend the right care about free speech or the first amendment.
And how obscenely dishonest is it to pretend Facebook and Twitter are just "private companies" no different than an Arby's.
So far this year, @realDonaldTrump has faced a sham civil case meant to bankrupt him for loans he repaid, a sham criminal case meant to imprison him for winning in 2016, and now an assassination attempt. I’m starting to think he’s not the one who’s the threat to democracy.
It was a registered Republican.... one of your own who tried to take him out.
did you see the video of the sharp shooter taking the guy out after he fired the shots. The sharp shooter had him in his sights before he fired a shot. They let him shoot first.
A non-profit “leaned” on a social media company by writing a report that exposed anti-semitism and Ken Paxton responded by launching an investigation and trying to issue subpoenas (note, media matters has no connection to Texas, so Paxton has no basis for investigating). But, your take away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
Texas and Florida want to force private companies to host conservative speech and your take-away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
You are so brainwashed by Trumpmax that you can’t even recognize how idiotic you sound when you pretend the right care about free speech or the first amendment.
Nothing says free speech like mandating any speech you don't like be silenced and banned.
A cultist calling other people brainwashed is pretty rich.
Florida and Texas are LITERALLY trying to mandate the speech of social media platforms.
Thank you for proving my two points: 1) the right don’t care (or understand) what free speech or the first amendment are, and 2) you’re a delusional nutjob that is so brainwashed that my dog just crapped out a turd that’s smarter than you.
A non-profit “leaned” on a social media company by writing a report that exposed anti-semitism and Ken Paxton responded by launching an investigation and trying to issue subpoenas (note, media matters has no connection to Texas, so Paxton has no basis for investigating). But, your take away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
Texas and Florida want to force private companies to host conservative speech and your take-away is “the left is anti-free speech” and “the party of censorship”?
You are so brainwashed by Trumpmax that you can’t even recognize how idiotic you sound when you pretend the right care about free speech or the first amendment.
And how obscenely dishonest is it to pretend Facebook and Twitter are just "private companies" no different than an Arby's.
They are exactly like Arby’s when it comes to the government’s right to mandate their speech.
I was telling my family that the left had to be thinking that they missed the chance to kill Hitler, so they feel obligated to kill the guy they call the new Hitler. Looks like I was right.
If a new Hitler was coming into power would you not feel an obligation to stop him?
Trump tried to steal an election, ie coup the government. Last year he said "I will be a dictator on day one". He can't be impeached, because the Senate decided that you can't be impeached after you leave office. He can't be held criminally liable, because the courts said he has to be impeached before he can be tried for unofficial actions he took as president, and he can't EVER be tried for an official action. States can't take him off the ballot for violating the 14th amendment because Trump's SCOTUS said they can't. By anointing him as King, Republicans have made it so that he can't be held accountable in any way other than violence.
How did Trump try to 'steal the election'? Pursuing every legal challenge to the election results isn't trying to steal it.
And this is the dictator on day 1 quote: "“Except for day one,” the GOP front-runner said Tuesday night before a live audience in Davenport, Iowa. “I want to close the border, and I want to drill, drill, drill.” And in case anyone missed it, he reenacted the exchange. “We love this guy,” Trump said of Hannity. “He says, ‘You’re not going to be a dictator, are you?’ I said: ‘No, no, no, other than day one. We’re closing the border, and we’re drilling, drilling, drilling. After that, I’m not a dictator.’”"
Nothing says free speech like mandating any speech you don't like be silenced and banned.
A cultist calling other people brainwashed is pretty rich.
Florida and Texas are LITERALLY trying to mandate the speech of social media platforms.
Thank you for proving my two points: 1) the right don’t care (or understand) what free speech or the first amendment are, and 2) you’re a delusional nutjob that is so brainwashed that my dog just crapped out a turd that’s smarter than you.
This is a lie. They're trying to force platforms to allow all speech and not have arbitrary and capricious moderation, all favoring leftists, that's even worse than here
Nothing says free speech like mandating any speech you don't like be silenced and banned.
A cultist calling other people brainwashed is pretty rich.
Florida and Texas are LITERALLY trying to mandate the speech of social media platforms.
Thank you for proving my two points: 1) the right don’t care (or understand) what free speech or the first amendment are, and 2) you’re a delusional nutjob that is so brainwashed that my dog just crapped out a turd that’s smarter than you.
No... they are trying to prevent the social media platforms from violating the first amendment rights of people they disagree with.
Social media platforms are not ordinary private companies.
Stop being dishonest.
Social media companies are given protection under section 230.
If you're going to insist on being dishonest and pretend that they're just normal companies that section 230 protection needs to be removed.
The only reason you believe the stupid sh*t you believe is because social media can publish the dumbest sh*t imaginable without consequence unlike legitimate publishers.
I was telling my family that the left had to be thinking that they missed the chance to kill Hitler, so they feel obligated to kill the guy they call the new Hitler. Looks like I was right.
If a new Hitler was coming into power would you not feel an obligation to stop him?
Trump tried to steal an election, ie coup the government. Last year he said "I will be a dictator on day one". He can't be impeached, because the Senate decided that you can't be impeached after you leave office. He can't be held criminally liable, because the courts said he has to be impeached before he can be tried for unofficial actions he took as president, and he can't EVER be tried for an official action. States can't take him off the ballot for violating the 14th amendment because Trump's SCOTUS said they can't. By anointing him as King, Republicans have made it so that he can't be held accountable in any way other than violence.
You know, you lefties really ought to get your story straight.
First, you are estatic to hear that the shooter was a registered Republican (which us entirely meaningless).
Now you are doubling down on the Biden rhetoric that Trump is dangerous, and calling him literally Hitler (Trump is going to gas six million jews!), and so of course Crooks is a hero.
Florida and Texas are LITERALLY trying to mandate the speech of social media platforms.
Thank you for proving my two points: 1) the right don’t care (or understand) what free speech or the first amendment are, and 2) you’re a delusional nutjob that is so brainwashed that my dog just crapped out a turd that’s smarter than you.
This is a lie. They're trying to force platforms to allow all speech and not have arbitrary and capricious moderation, all favoring leftists, that's even worse than here
Why should the government force the platforms to allow *all* speech? Conservatives are not a protected class. If Facebook doesn’t want to host conservative speech because they think it will harm their business (advertisers don’t like their ads showing next to right-wing nutjobs), why should the government force them to?
Again, this just highlights how the right doesn’t understand free speech or the first amendment.
Florida and Texas are LITERALLY trying to mandate the speech of social media platforms.
Thank you for proving my two points: 1) the right don’t care (or understand) what free speech or the first amendment are, and 2) you’re a delusional nutjob that is so brainwashed that my dog just crapped out a turd that’s smarter than you.
No... they are trying to prevent the social media platforms from violating the first amendment rights of people they disagree with.
Social media platforms are not ordinary private companies.
Stop being dishonest.
Social media companies are given protection under section 230.
If you're going to insist on being dishonest and pretend that they're just normal companies that section 230 protection needs to be removed.
The only reason you believe the stupid sh*t you believe is because social media can publish the dumbest sh*t imaginable without consequence unlike legitimate publishers.
How can a private social media company violate somebody’s first amendment rights? Here’s a hint: they can’t.
The first amendment prevents censorship or compelled speech BY THE GOVERNMENT. Section 230 protection does not make social media companies government entities.
So, again, thank you very much for proving just how little the right wing nutjobs who rant about “the left being anti-free speech” understand about free speech or the first amendment. Truly pathetic.
They are exactly like Arby’s when it comes to the government’s right to mandate their speech.
Thank you for demonstrating you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
You've been told to pretend to be upset so here you are pretending to be upset despite not having any idea what you're supposedly upset about.
lol.
Please do explain why the government should be able to treat the first amendment rights of social media companies differently than the first amendment rights of Arby’s.
I know you WANT the government to be able to trample all over the first amendment (when convenient for you), but that doesn’t make “the left anti-free speech,” it does make you a pathetic hypocrite though.
No... they are trying to prevent the social media platforms from violating the first amendment rights of people they disagree with.
Social media platforms are not ordinary private companies.
Stop being dishonest.
Social media companies are given protection under section 230.
If you're going to insist on being dishonest and pretend that they're just normal companies that section 230 protection needs to be removed.
The only reason you believe the stupid sh*t you believe is because social media can publish the dumbest sh*t imaginable without consequence unlike legitimate publishers.
How can a private social media company violate somebody’s first amendment rights? Here’s a hint: they can’t.
The first amendment prevents censorship or compelled speech BY THE GOVERNMENT. Section 230 protection does not make social media companies government entities.
So, again, thank you very much for proving just how little the right wing nutjobs who rant about “the left being anti-free speech” understand about free speech or the first amendment. Truly pathetic.
The companies are acting as political advocacy groups at the instruction/demand of the government which is the government restricting free speech.
When the government demands posts be taken down or people be banned and the company complies because they agree with the politics or fear the consequences of defying the government the 1st amendment is being violated.
Thank you for demonstrating you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
You've been told to pretend to be upset so here you are pretending to be upset despite not having any idea what you're supposedly upset about.
lol.
Please do explain why the government should be able to treat the first amendment rights of social media companies differently than the first amendment rights of Arby’s.
I know you WANT the government to be able to trample all over the first amendment (when convenient for you), but that doesn’t make “the left anti-free speech,” it does make you a pathetic hypocrite though.
If you can find me some e-mails from the federal government demanding Arby's restrict the speech of its customers you will have a point.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.