Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trump Tweets

The National Guard has arrived on the scene. They are in Minneapolis and fully prepared. George Floyd will not have died in vain. Respect his memory!!!


REVOKE 230!
 
slyjoe said:
"Prosecute" and "state" are interesting words to use. We are talking civil lawsuits, correct?

I don't know enough about how these types of suits work. I was under the impression that if party A sues party B, judges always had an option to let the case proceed to make a point. Anyway, not that big a deal. Personally I don't think this will amount to much. Twitter has already banned most political ads.

I would think any judge would be hesitant to step into a case with the government telling a private firm they can't publish something.
Click to expand...

I chose to use 'state' as an example, because the EO specifically mentions it, too. This is referring to the current situation where several US state assemblies have issued screeds against social media platforms for what they consider to be political activity hiding behind moderation protections.

And prosecute is another 'just an example' thing. For example, a state could pass a law that the social media platform has to comply with certain guidelines for moderation, and if they find the platform noncompliant, issue fines.

Texas is a good candidate for this, they've already tried a few laws about political moderation on social media platforms, but they've struggled to enforce because of conflicts with federal regulation.
eg: ([SB2373 - relating to certain deceptive trade practices by interactive computer services ])

The EO would remove the federal regulatory barrier that stands in the way of this type of state law.
 
Horatius said:
The problem is, less than a day after posting the EO, Trump and his cronies are already expanding the scope of their attack. Did you miss this from earlier?

[repeal 230 tweet]

Emphasis added. Repealing Section 230 would affect every online platform, and leave them open to virtually any attack.
Click to expand...

I saw it yeah. That's a bigger fish to fry, and outside his power since it's legislative.




Horatius said:
Your whole argument is based on Trump actually understanding the legal subtleties that distinguish interpreting a regulation, amending a regulation, writing a new regulation, repealing a regulation, or repealing a law.

He doesn't actually understand any of that.

You need to stop looking at this situation from the point of view of someone who understands what he's talking about. The only point of view that matters is that of the cranky manbaby who wants to hurt the people who won't give him everything he wants. He doesn't give two ***** about anything else. He'll burn down the whole damn country to hurt them, if that's what it will take.
Click to expand...

I wish I could agree with that. My point of view is that he's a conduit for people who actually have agendas backed by competence and resources. His judge appointments are from a list prepared for him by the Federalist Society, for example.

I suspect the fact check link on his mail in voting tweet triggered an all hands meeting at the Trump Election Campaign HQ, and they composed this EA for him to sign. He doesn't have to understand it, he just has to sign it and get back to practicing his putting.
 
There's been a lot of commentary about trump's 'shooting starts' tweet. I just happened across a screen cap of it. I'm posting this for people to see. I know I was curious.

He tweeted this at 3:21am? He's losing it. :boggled:
 

Attachments

  • a twit tweets.jpg
    a twit tweets.jpg
    51.5 KB · Views: 23
BobTheCoward said:
I always disagrees with people saying it is a lie.

It is a general statement. It doesn't have to apply to every single person to be true. A small portion did lose their doctor, and only a portion of that was actually caused by the ACA.
Click to expand...

Obama never tweeted that statement, as far as I know.
 
blutoski said:
I understand his point, though. He's not comparing himself to Obama as a president in that tweet. He's comparing Twitter's treatment of Obama's false statement as different than how they treated his false statement, and saying that means their fact checking is not neutral or in good faith. And therefore should not shielded by 230.

He's wrong because the policy was implemented later, it's in appropriate to compare past and current content management to look for fairness, but I do understand where he's going with the tweet.
Click to expand...

Did Obama actually tweet the "You'll get to keep your doctor" comment?

Far as I know, it was part of a weekly address. That's got **** all to do with Twitter.
 
newyorkguy said:
There's been a lot of commentary about trump's 'shooting starts' tweet. I just happened across a screen cap of it. I'm posting this for people to see. I know I was curious.

He tweeted this at 3:21am? He's losing it. :boggled:
Click to expand...

You still seem surprised. It's clear he lost it decades ago. I'm surprised every morning and realize that Trump didn't nuke the world.
 
phiwum said:
Did Obama actually tweet the "You'll get to keep your doctor" comment?

Far as I know, it was part of a weekly address. That's got **** all to do with Twitter.
Click to expand...

Unless somebody else posted it on Twitter. Point is, the misleading or false statement probably didn't have a fact checking flag.

It's just an example, though. I'm sure we could come up with tweets containing false or misleading statements from politicians other than Trump, that weren't flagged with fact checking links.
 
Last edited:
blutoski said:
Unless somebody else posted it on Twitter. Point is, the misleading or false statement probably didn't have a fact checking flag.

It's just an example, though. I'm sure we could come up with tweets containing false or misleading statements from politicians other than Trump, that weren't flagged with fact checking links.
Click to expand...

According to this old WaPo fact check, an Obama aide tweeted something somewhat similar (though with a caveat).

Obama never tweeted that you can keep your doctor, far as I can tell.
 
Each moment people talk about Twitter, they're not talking about 100,000 dead Americans. 128-D Chess.
 
phiwum said:
According to this old WaPo fact check, an Obama aide tweeted something somewhat similar (though with a caveat).

Obama never tweeted that you can keep your doctor, far as I can tell.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure thousands of people tweeted something similar, as it was a statement he made in front of an audience (I think he was doing a talk for the AMA). The point being that I'd be shocked if even one of those tweets had a Twitter bot flag it as misleading.

The complaint at the core of the Conservative interest in this is that they may genuinely believe they're being explicitly targeted by social media owners, through a biased moderation policy that is hiding behind regulatory protection.

I don't think this is true, but it's why they bring up whattabouts. If there's even one Democrat getting away with BS online, they can point to it as anti-conservative discriminatory enforcement of moderation policies.

If you look at the wording of the Texas bill, it's positioning these moderation policies as a type of consumer fraud because they tell users these are neutral but the legislators feel this is a deception, that they're actually partisan political activity by the platforms' owners/management.
 
Cain said:
Each moment people talk about Twitter, they're not talking about 100,000 dead Americans. 128-D Chess.
Click to expand...

Funny how that Dimensional Chess value has increased during Trump's reign. It used to be that people asked if he was playing 4-D Chess.
 
The Left thought they could steal 2020 with a few Trayvons (one down in Georgia, another in NYC). Now there are riots, and the quiet majority of real Americans will rally at Trump's side: When the looting starts, the shooting starts. He just flipped another blue state. 256-D Chess.


“In an ever-changing, incomprehensible world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything was possible and that nothing was true. ... Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along that the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness.” -- (((Hannah Arendt))), The Origins of Totalitarianism
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Retweeted

Lara Trump
@LaraLeaTrump
Looting is not protesting. Burning down local homes and businesses is not protesting. How sad that the memory of #GeorgeFloyd has been lost in all of this.
Click to expand...

Is it a Trump family trait not to know when to shut the hell up? It's like they go looking for a shovel to dig themselves into a hole even deeper.
 
blutoski said:
I understand his point, though. He's not comparing himself to Obama as a president in that tweet. He's comparing Twitter's treatment of Obama's false statement as different than how they treated his false statement, and saying that means their fact checking is not neutral or in good faith. And therefore should not shielded by 230.

He's wrong because the policy was implemented later, it's in appropriate to compare past and current content management to look for fairness, but I do understand where he's going with the tweet.
Click to expand...

I understood that. My post was in response to Trump's obsession with Obama.
 
Trump Tweets

Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means....

....It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!
 
newyorkguy said:
There's been a lot of commentary about trump's 'shooting starts' tweet. I just happened across a screen cap of it. I'm posting this for people to see. I know I was curious.

He tweeted this at 3:21am? He's losing it. :boggled:
Click to expand...

Once again proving that there is no situation that Trump doesn’t make worse by becoming involved in it. Escalate the threats of violence. Smear and undermine the mayor and the efforts of the local government to respond to the situation. All this for his ego and to feed his supporters.

This happens over and over again. Just look at his actions in regard to the Covid-19 epidemic. It is not just that he doesn’t do the right thing; he subverts and undermines the others who are doing the right thing. It can’t be that he is just stupid, although that is part of it. He exploits every crisis he can, no matter how many are hurt, for his own selfish benefit. What an evil, evil man. I’m voting that he is the Anti-Christ.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom