Exec Orders wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Thankfully, the president can't remove justices by executive order.
Except in cases where the rules were not followed. The 60% vote rule was changed by a 50% vote. The requirement for Senate rules changes is 2/3rds (Rule XXII).
Uh, no. The president has zero authority to remove a sitting justice. Did you just make that up or did someone tell you and you believed it?
5/27 stats
Wednesday was a catchup day as feared - and so will be Thursday, probably. Deaths were higher, stopping the streak of a declining 7 day average of daily deaths.
But only by a little. The trend is still lower.
No change in the rankings.
Antone see this as a First Amendment issue?
L L wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/politics/trump-twitter-social-media-executive-order/index.htmlAntone see this as a First Amendment issue?
I'm amazed at this hypocrisy. The satire is so thick that it's almost like we're reading a Douglas Adams novel.
L L wrote:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/politics/trump-twitter-social-media-executive-order/index.htmlAntone see this as a First Amendment issue?
I'd argue that it's not a First Amendment issue. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not on Twitter and don't pay much attention to it), but they're not limiting what he can say, they're not deleting or changing anything. So, arguably, his right to free speech hasn't been impaired in any way. He's still able to say basically whatever he wants.
Is Twitter putting a fact check link on his tweet any different than some random person replying to the tweet by saying Trump is wrong and adding a fact check link? That stuff goes on here all the time, the only difference is that when it's done by Twitter, it looks more "official".
johnny99 wrote:
I'd argue that it's not a First Amendment issue. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not on Twitter and don't pay much attention to it), but they're not limiting what he can say, they're not deleting or changing anything. So, arguably, his right to free speech hasn't been impaired in any way. He's still able to say basically whatever he wants.
Is Twitter putting a fact check link on his tweet any different than some random person replying to the tweet by saying Trump is wrong and adding a fact check link? That stuff goes on here all the time, the only difference is that when it's done by Twitter, it looks more "official".
The issue isn't what Twitter is doing - it's what Trump is doing.
Trump (the government) is trying to restrict Twitter's freedom of speech.
Trump is telling a private company what it has a right to say or not say.
Would we accept Trump as a moderator to every social media site?
L L wrote:
johnny99 wrote:
I'd argue that it's not a First Amendment issue. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not on Twitter and don't pay much attention to it), but they're not limiting what he can say, they're not deleting or changing anything. So, arguably, his right to free speech hasn't been impaired in any way. He's still able to say basically whatever he wants.
Is Twitter putting a fact check link on his tweet any different than some random person replying to the tweet by saying Trump is wrong and adding a fact check link? That stuff goes on here all the time, the only difference is that when it's done by Twitter, it looks more "official".
The issue isn't what Twitter is doing - it's what Trump is doing.
Trump (the government) is trying to restrict Twitter's freedom of speech.
Trump is telling a private company what it has a right to say or not say.
Would we accept Trump as a moderator to every social media site?
Oh, OK.
No, I don't see that Twitter's First Amendment rights are at play here. There may be other constitutional issues (think the bakery that didn't want to sell a cake to a gay couple) involved, though.
L L wrote:
johnny99 wrote:
I'd argue that it's not a First Amendment issue. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not on Twitter and don't pay much attention to it), but they're not limiting what he can say, they're not deleting or changing anything. So, arguably, his right to free speech hasn't been impaired in any way. He's still able to say basically whatever he wants.
Is Twitter putting a fact check link on his tweet any different than some random person replying to the tweet by saying Trump is wrong and adding a fact check link? That stuff goes on here all the time, the only difference is that when it's done by Twitter, it looks more "official".
The issue isn't what Twitter is doing - it's what Trump is doing.
Trump (the government) is trying to restrict Twitter's freedom of speech.
Trump is telling a private company what it has a right to say or not say.
Would we accept Trump as a moderator to every social media site?
You know, I'm thinking about this and I'm not sure. Maybe Twitter can make a First Amendment argument here. Think about this website, could Trump prevent people from posting cites to fact checks that undermine what he says? I wouldn't think so.
johnny99 wrote:
Oh, OK.
No, I don't see that Twitter's First Amendment rights are at play here. There may be other constitutional issues (think the bakery that didn't want to sell a cake to a gay couple) involved, though.
The government is saying that Twitter can't fact check the president.
The amendment states that Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech.
He's the president, not Congress but he's trying to use executive order to circumvent Congress.
I don't think it's a first amendment issue - it's just saying that Twitter and LRC are responsible for what sh/tposters put on their sites.
Right now the BroJos have immunity from what Rigged says or I say.
Trump is asking that that law be changed or reinterpreted. That I can sue the BroJos if Flagpole defames me.
Not a first amendment issue as far as I can tell, but incredibly stupid.
but what it really is...is trump telling the mag@s that trumpists are under assault by tech companies and that trump is fighting for them.
Just more diversion and fear.
Worst president in modern times.
KAG2020
An occasional disgrace and a permanent embarrassment.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ugly-even-him-trumps-media-121817106.html
Umm, yeah . . . wrote:
https://www.thewrap.com/trump-retweets-good-democrat-dead-democrat/
And once again, if Barack Obama had done the *identical* thing, except with respect to Republicans, the GOPers would go out of their minds. They would *never* drop it. (Come on, they're still p.o.ed about the tan suit!)
But this? Not a peep from them.
God, the hypocrisy is just mind-boggling. WTF has happened to the Grand Old Party?
Things aren't trending well for the Trumpster Fire.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
Ciro wrote:
An occasional disgrace and a permanent embarrassment.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ugly-even-him-trumps-media-121817106.html
“Trump opening up this front with Joe Scarborough is another thing in the news cycle, another thing for people to talk about,” [Howard} Polskin said. “It occupies time on the talk shows. It gets people away from that 100,000 figure,” referring to the estimated number of Americans who have died from coronavirus.
“Trump’s a master at that,” he added. “Throwing out these bright, shiny diversions.”
What a baby. No one is be fair to poor Donny. The media is so mean to me. The CIA and FBI are bad people and are mean to me. The democrats have not be fair to me. Now social media is not fair to me. Make them all stop.
Wah, wah, wah. Quick get Mitch, baby need a bottle. "It ok baby, mommy Mitch thinks your the best baby in the world and we luv you so much!"
