Amazon Shutting Down PARLER

~ I wonder how many states would actually pass such legislation ? I believe too many have sold out to big tech/media .

~ It appears many Judges are as well.

 

~ Let us pray ...

 

Kamala is his 25A and impeachment insurance. The GOP will never vote for his removal so long as she is #2 and they won't remove her so long as Crazy Nancy is #3.

 

Well, they stand for election, don't they? State judges do as well. My grandpa tells of a time when CA fired the Chief Justice and a couple of associate Justices in CA over their refusal to carry out the death penalty. They were completely against it. Weird thing, their replacements were all for it!

When voters cleaned house at the state Supreme Court​

As Patrick K. Brown wrote in “The Rise and Fall of Rose Bird,” the voters cared only that she “did not care about victims of crime.” She also had struck down a law, endorsed by Jerry Brown, requiring a prison term in any crime committed with a gun.

https://www.ocregister.com/2016/10/28/when-voters-cleaned-house-at-the-state-supreme-court/

 

Good point and ironic that R Senators would block the impeachment of a Democrat President. Biden may resign under pressure from Party and family. I don’t se him in office all four years.

 

Win the House and gavel back in 2022. Democrats just taught the country that an 8-hour impeachment with no evidence of wrong-doing and no hearings is now hunky dory. Biden could be impeached in one day; Kamala the next. (Though, we'd also need 67 Senate seats to convict.)

 

He already said that if he and Kamala come to an impasse on policy that he will invent some chronic illness and resign from office. Same deal he made with Obama.

Dementia is pretty chronic. I don't think he'll have to fib. I do think he was showing the DNC's hand. No one seriously expects him to be president for four years.

 

Yes, he could stroke out and if the GOP could pull it off, it would be "Weekend at Bernie's" until the 2024 election. Biden will have no stauncher support in Congress when it comes to 25A and impeachment than the Republicans.

 

Yes, but the GOP are more rule followers than get even folks. I think the Clinton impeachment was a little out of character, Dole and other cooler heads warned repeatedly against it and for censure instead, but, the young turks would not be denied, and it's remembered as not a positive experience. I have no idea what Dems are taking from Crazy Nancy's repeated tilts at the windmill, but a sound thumpin' in 2022 would probably send the Dems the right message. They really didn't do very well in 2020, but, these folks aren't big on seeing corrective feedback.

 

With the Parlor affair: Silicon Valley Has Decided To Reveal Their Power

Niall Ferguson,

For years American conservatives have been making noises about how they were "fixin' to" do something about big tech. For those unfamiliar with the term "fixin' to" is the response when you should have already done something, but in terms of real world effect, you haven't done a damn thing. More charitably, it's "getting ready to get ready".

Donald Trump and Silicon Valley were always on a collision course.

Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Google and Apple, or FATGA for short

FATGA's Fatwa against a sitting president gave away the game.

 

And with Swalwell around he could be blamed for the foul oders.

 

Well, this is an interesting development which will lead to MORE censorship of users.



https://thepostmillennial.com/bc-court-allows-twitter-to-be-sued-for-defamation

So, if you could somehow defame me here on PF, it would make sense for me to sue you for defamation and not sue PF. If a court allowed me to sue PF for your words which they had no control over, and assuming that PF has "deeper pockets", of course I would sue them for the harm you caused. Seems like a bad court decision. What would be a natural PF response? Start wiping out and banning anyone at the slightest hint of (?) well just about anything that "might be" offensive to someone else. This type of lawsuit could end social media altogether.

Moral of the story? Social media mega-sites should serve as public squares for all voices without corporate responsibility for what is said. If they are a platform, then no one can sue them for content. If they start arbitrarily deleting some posters, but not others, then they just made themself legally responsible for every word they did not delete on their website and can then be sued for defamation, liable and any financial harm caused by one member toward another member.

Most everyone would agree on common sense deletions of content such as child porn or credible plots threatening deadly harm. I suppose where we draw the line is on who gets to define absolutely unacceptable "harm".

 

Something similar happened to me as an admin of a group. I did not delete automatically posts which contained personal attacks and insults but chose to leave them up as examples of bad behavior and lack of argument. I was told that if I did not delete the posts I would be removed as admin and the group shutdown.

 

So it is ok for the store not to sell goods due to political opinion?
E.g. if I disagree with BLM can I refuse to sell goods to BLM protester?

 

Works for me.

 

Except for the part where he shows ZERO signs of dementia. LOL.

 

That ^^^ indeed is LOL.

 

Name one.

 

Totally - along with SCOTUS. Who selects members of the SC - and on what basis. What we do know is that SC has completely failed in its duty to interpret law and the constitution on the basis of the founding principles - as per the Declaration - and as per the purpose of that document -

Near every member of SC should be dismissed for dereliction of duty. Judges that are aligned with a certain perspective - get selected - those who are not aligned - do not.

The media is being used as a tool of the State - this is the bottom line - and both Red and Blue are on Board.

Look not to where Red and Blue disagree on this issue - but where they agree - as that is where you will find the Devil hiding.

Fair Trial for Snowden anyone ?? - Who in Red or Blue is taking out Gov't to task over this ? - that he is not allowed a fair trial in the USA.
- that he will not be able to use the crimes of Gov't as a defense - the jury instructed to disregard such arguments.

Each of the big Social Media companies got a visits from the Spooks - and now have an active relationship.
In addition to Social Media - they work with companies such as Apple to ensure that the ability to spy on US citizens at will is maintained.
for "National Security Reasons" of course.

Starting to hear some voices in the background speak up - but - I think in general the die is cast - and Big Brother is here to stay.

 

And I'm sure that you would say that Twitter and Facebook should have been shut down for being used by BLM and antifa rioters!

 

Well Twitter and Facebook were able to continue operating even as BLM and antifa activists coordinated riots, so maybe the Nazi's can use them.

 

Does antifa need to communicate using the Internet underground, or are they still on Twitter and Facebook?

 

Oh, so Amazon can do what it wants, but a Christian baker must be forced to bake a cake for a same sex wedding?

 

It's important to remember that it's not only Democrats who think that it's okay that Parlor was shut down. Pro_Line_FL is probably a libertarian, perhaps even a libertarian conservative.

 

Facebook own their servers, and they are not going to shut themselves down. Having said that, it doesn't take much to be banned from FB. I know people who have had posts deleted and accounts banned for posting tasteless humor and/or advertising things. Parler was 'renting space' so they were at the mercy of the landlords, and the rest is history.