Cont: Trump et al continued “2020 election” conspiracy theories

Status
Not open for further replies.
Resume said:
Nope.
Click to expand...

Question, its seems Bubba thinks all social media companies are suppose to be neutral - they aren't of course - but a question; are there any social media companies that ARE neutral by design and purpose?
 
Hans said:
Question, its seems Bubba thinks all social media companies are suppose to be neutral - they aren't of course - but a question; are there any social media companies that ARE neutral by design and purpose?
Click to expand...

I don't know of any, but I don't pay much attention to the bulk of them. Parler claims to be, but, you know, no
 
gnome said:
He means Section 230 liability protection. However, it's not a "status" of an organization. A particular piece of content is either protected or not. There's no "status" that online services have or can lose.
Click to expand...

47 U.S.C. § 230(f)(2) famously avoids defining what service is actually provided by an entity given safe harbor under the relevant section. Further, (c)(2)(A) gives the service provider discretion to judge content, including "otherwise objectionable" material without defining further what should constitution a legally cognizable objection. Finally, it expressly grants permission to take action regarding content even if the content is "constitutionally protected." None of the purported abuses complained of by conservatives is disallowed in the law.

What it seems disgruntled conservatives want is for everyone to believe Twitter or Facebook or whatever should be "common carrier" entities that are given safe harbor only if they take no editorial position on what people use their services to communicate to others. But more likely what they want is to remove the legal shield from liability so that the threat of a lawsuit becomes a reason a provider might not want to control some particular objectionable content.

Now of course you still have terms and services for these privately owned services, so it's not as if someone who agrees to be allowed to use the service cannot be made by contract to submit to moderation in exchange. But the safe harbor provision closes the door on pretty much any legal threat, credible or otherwise, that moderation might entail. So it removes legal intimidation from the toolchest of anyone who isn't satisfied with how a service threats them.
 
[url="https://theintercept.com/2020/12/21/detroit-black-lives-matter-lawsuit]DETROIT IS SUING BLACK LIVES MATTER PROTESTERS FOR “CIVIL CONSPIRACY”[/url]

For comparison, this is what actual government suppression of political exercise looks like.
 
Last edited:
Hans said:
One has to wonder just how stupid and incompetent these plotters are? It took them what 35 years to do this? We fought two world wars in far less time and THOSE took some real planning. Chuckle.

Why are the evil and cunning plans always so slow?
Click to expand...


Because the conspirators can’t be any smarter than the people who imagine them.
 
When the newspaper I worked for folded, it kept a legacy website that was supposed to serve as a platform for bloggers with a few rules. Predictably "conservatives" claimed they were being censored. It turned out that liberal bloggers were willing to use their real names while conservative bloggers wanted to remain anonymous, and this was why the site skewed liberal - it required bloggers to use their true identities. This was in 2010.

ETA: The Trump campaign has stopped robocalling my house. Maybe because I hung up on them the first 200 times? Or could they be getting into dicy territory re: accountability for how the funds are used? But that doesn't sound right; the people who would donate would never hold Trump accountable for anything. They haven't so far.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
When your lunacy is too much for Pat Robertson, it may be time to consider giving up.
Click to expand...

This used to be a safe statement. But the Trump cult is a force like no personality cult before in American history, potentially overpowering fundamentalist Christian figureheads like Robertson's sway over their own base; and it may easily be the case that Pat Robertson has destroyed his own credibility with more people than he's undercut Trump's with this statement.

I really don't think people are taking seriously enough how thoroughly Trump-worship has invaded and captured the American right. People who have been major influential conservative thought-leaders for decades are falling from grace and being disavowed instantly, instantly, by the people they've until now had unchallengeable control over, if they dare to suggest that Trump should pack it in and accept defeat gracefully.
 
Checkmite said:
This used to be a safe statement. But the Trump cult is a force like no personality cult before in American history, potentially overpowering fundamentalist Christian figureheads like Robertson's sway over their own base; and it may easily be the case that Pat Robertson has destroyed his own credibility with more people than he's undercut Trump's with this statement.

I really don't think people are taking seriously enough how thoroughly Trump-worship has invaded and captured the American right. People who have been major influential conservative thought-leaders for decades are falling from grace and being disavowed instantly, instantly, by the people they've until now had unchallengeable control over, if they dare to suggest that Trump should pack it in and accept defeat gracefully.
Click to expand...

He's the biggest case of it, but it isn't exactly a brand new phenomena.

Their loyalty is more fickle and ephemeral than it appears.

Look at how quickly they turned on FOX News, on Barr, on Newsmax when they showed their voting machine retraction.

Sure you can say that's all because their greater loyalty is to Trump, but that's just the form their group identity has taken at the moment. They'll turn on Trump too the moment the group reshapes itself.

They were going to the mat to defned Geroge W too, but nowadays they lump him in with the terrible democrat war hawks and declare his wars the most horrible things ever.

I saw crowds SCREAMING their Palin support as she really kicked off this leg and got us closer to Trumpism. Where is she now? I don't think she even has enough interest for FOX to have her on as an occaisional talking head.

Yeah, yeah Trump is different. I don't disagree. But just a much higher level of the same effect. It's an intensee puppy love. I think a lot of people will be surprised how quickly Trump's support diminishes.

Many people are saying.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Televangelist Pat Robertson declared that Biden will be president and that Trump "lives in an alternate reality," "is very erratic," and should not run again in 2024: "You've had your day and it's time to move on."
Click to expand...


He previously claimed that God told him "without question, Trump is going to win", so I guess God changed his mind.
 
Armitage72 said:
He previously claimed that God told him "without question, Trump is going to win", so I guess God changed his mind.
Click to expand...

He also claimed an asteroid would destroy the human race about five years after Trump was re-elected.

As far as God changing his mind, this might have had something to do with it:

President Trump allegedly called evangelical pastors “hustlers” in a 2015 conversation with his then-lawyer Michael Cohen, The Atlantic reported on Tuesday.

Cohen told the magazine that Trump made the comments after reading an article about pastor Creflo Dollar raising money from followers for a private jet and appeared excited by the “scam.” He reportedly told Cohen that the pastor was “full of ****.”’

“They’re all hustlers,” the president said, according to the magazine.
Click to expand...
 
dudalb said:
Newsmax backtracks

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/21/media/newsmax-clarification/index.html

Funny how they backtracked when they saw it might cost them money....
Click to expand...

The extraordinary about-face came after Smartmatic sent a blistering legal threat to Newsmax and other right-wing media outlets earlier this month. Ben Rhodes summed up the Monday messages succinctly, tweeting, "So, we're going to spread massive amounts of total disinformation like cancer metastasizing through American democracy, but we also don't want to get sued so we're offering this clarification."
Click to expand...

Sue them off the face of the planet, I say.
 
Just to show it's not just Trump and the Republicans buying into this nonsense:

Even as Republicans across the country still insist that the election was rife with fraudulent Democratic votes, no one’s asking how McConnell managed one of the most lopsided landslides of the Nov. 3 election. They should. An investigation of Kentucky voting results by DCReport raises significant questions about the vote tallies in McConnell’s state.

McConnell racked up huge vote leads in traditionally Democratic strongholds, including counties that he had never before carried.
There were wide, unexplained discrepancies between the vote counts for presidential candidates and down-ballot candidates.
Significant anomalies exist in the state’s voter records. Forty percent of the state’s counties carry more voters on their rolls than voting-age citizens.
Kentucky and many other states using vote tabulation machines made by Election Systems & Software all reported down-ballot race results at significant odds with pre-election polls.
Click to expand...

And we all know how accurate pre-election polls are.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom