• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
As I said in the other thread, “Mike Pence, rather than swinging from a gibbet erected by Trump fans, will applaud politely while Biden swears to uphold the Constitution. And Donald Trump will rage impotently in front of a TV somewhere, but no one will care.”

ETA: And, no, that TV won’t be on Air Force One as he slinks off to Florida. That aircraft is for use by the President.
 
Last edited:
sts60 said:
As I said in the other thread, “Mike Pence, rather than swinging from a gibbet erected by Trump fans, will applaud politely while Biden swears to uphold the Constitution. And Donald Trump will rage impotently in front of a TV somewhere, but no one will care.”
Click to expand...

An irrelevant, twice-impeached, worst president ever; a six time bankrupted faux billionaire in massive debt . . .

The worst thing for him though: Irrelevant. Irrelevant and ignored save for quack outlets like OANN or Newsflash, newsfax, whatever.

The Art of the Con: The Complete Ignominy of Diaper Donald Trump

Bwahahahahahahaha!!
 
Resume said:
An irrelevant, twice-impeached, worst president ever; a six time bankrupted faux billionaire in massive debt . . .

The worst thing for him though: Irrelevant. Irrelevant and ignored save for quack outlets like OANN or Newsflash, newsfax, whatever.

The Art of the Con: The Complete Ignominy of Diaper Donald Trump

Bwahahahahahahaha!!
Click to expand...

If you want to find a man who really hates that the electoral college stole the election from Hillary Clinton, you would do well to head to Mar-a-Lago.
 
Bubba said:
No and no....Anderson Cooper putting Sullivan on CNN trumps those ideas.


Bigly.


Sullivan is obviously a COINTELPRO type, a paid pretender working for someone behind the curtain.


This is what they do.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're losing it.
 
Foster Zygote said:
:p

He was never really in the CIA. He interned with the agency for a couple of summers while majoring in Political Science. But of course that's proof that he was the CIA assassin/emissary who negotiated repurchase of the baby blood youth formula from the Reptiloids, right?
Click to expand...


Whew, good thing you put out that fire.


In other words, parroting the official story *proves conclusively* that Anderson Cooper didnt opt to go from 'intern' to undercover agent in media.

For that matter, you may as well assert there is no such thing as cia agents masquerading as media or govt officials, or businessmen. Or embassy drivers.

/sarcasm


Yes, I knew Cooper said he was a cia intern.)


Actual journalist Luke Rudkowski publicly outed Cooper years ago.
 
You guys are so trusting of authority.


When Mussolini invited a popular American guru type to speak in Italy, he wasnt pleased, and sent the guy packing.

The guru began his speech with "Question authority".

You guys remind me of Mussolini. You're essentially condoning the suppression of free speech, ala Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and your trustworthy (dishonest, corrupt) MSM.
 
Bubba,
Private companies can suppress speech all they want. Only the government's ability to do that is curtailed. You know this.
 
Galaxie said:
Bubba,
Private companies can suppress speech all they want. Only the government's ability to do that is curtailed. You know this.
Click to expand...


Thats right, and its not the point.


As if that justifies silencing half the nation in what is the equivalent of the town square, and having the power to steer votes by silencing half the electorate in that town square.


This is the significance of section 230. Someone just said the "platforms" should become like public utilities for this reason.

The thing about condoning the silencing of voices you dislike is that one day it might be your voice. Look at what Dorsey was just caught planning, by Veritas.

Yes they can do what they want as private companies. Except for section 230. The double standards and hypocrisy being seen are ridiculous and very harmful to our nation.
 
Last edited:
Bubba said:
You guys are so trusting of authority.


When Mussolini invited a popular American guru type to speak in Italy, he wasnt pleased, and sent the guy packing.

The guru began his speech with "Question authority".

You guys remind me of Mussolini. You're essentially condoning the suppression of free speech, ala Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and your trustworthy (dishonest, corrupt) MSM.
Click to expand...
You are so trusting of random unqualified people spouting random garbage on youtube...

Fill in the rest.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
You are so trusting of random unqualified people spouting random garbage on youtube...

Fill in the rest.
Click to expand...


So....then you do condone what Youtube, Dorsey and FB et al are doing?


Make no mistake, countless documented instances prove they are blatantly lying about the reasons they give for silencing voices they dislike.

Do you approve or not?
 
Bubba said:
Regulate Social Media Like Public Utilities
Click to expand...

You think that would make it better? What an odd point of view.

From this and your prior comments, it appears you have not actually read 47 U.S. Code § 230. Parler, for example, wouldn't exist without its protections.
 
Do you approve of what Dorsey was caught planning?


Note:

This involves admitting that 'evil Veritas' caught Dorsey planning
 
Bubba said:
Do see any problem with the censorship by social media?
Click to expand...

I for one do not. All social media should be able to host whatever information they wish.

ETA Do you, Bubba, think that your darling Epoch Times should be required to give equal space to liberal democratic information?
 
Last edited:
Steve said:
I for one do not. All social media should be able to host whatever information they wish.
Click to expand...


Not where they are supposed to comply with section 230.


(you knew)



ETA Do you, Bubba, think that your darling Epoch Times should be required to give equal space to liberal democratic information?
Click to expand...


Of course not. They are publishers, not platforms. They are not subject to section 230.


The social media are today's de facto town square. They are abusing their 'privilege'.

Would you be OK with a social media that censored all liberal democratic voices while professing to be neutral platforms rather than publishers?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom