The Constitution won’t save America- It has lost touch: open

[SmarterthanYou]

Only government can violate the 1st amendment--not people or social media companies.

that's a cop out, if that government is requesting favors of the corporations to do so, paying said corporations, or even threatening them if they don't.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

why are libertarians human garbage now?

I wonder........

 

[SmarterthanYou]

What law are they breaking?

If government coerces them the government is committing a crime, not the social media company. They are not violating the 1st amendment.

If government "encourages" a company (not threatens or coerces) to limit posts the company is willingly making that decision and nobody has violated the 1st amendment.

Several times throughout history presidents have asked the press not to print a certain story at that time because it might hurt national security or endanger lives. The press makes the decision whether to publish or not.

is that anything like 'just following orders'? like the nazis did?

 

[Kamala Trump]

I wonder........

where are you on coporations censoring at the government's behest?

 

[Kamala Trump]

keep in mind this is all in the context of all doubt about government direction being removed on several occasions by disclosure from social media.

Facebook cia liaison office really , and thats fine with you?

this is CCP.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

where are you on coporations censoring at the government's behest?

they are acting as a government agent and are completely complicit in the criminal act.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

keep in mind this is all in the context of all doubt about government direction being removed on several occasions by disclosure from social media.

Facebook cia liaison office really , and thats fine with you?

this is CCP.

exactly what the left wants and needs. todays idiocracy and gen z don't know anything except what they are told on social media.

 

[Kamala Trump]

love you man.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

love you man.

right back atcha brother

 

[Flash]

that's a cop out, if that government is requesting favors of the corporations to do so, paying said corporations, or even threatening them if they don't.

A basic principle of constitutional law. A threat is different than a request which governments make all the time. Threats are illegal. The other can be refused and companies/individuals often refuse to follow the government's requests.

 

[Flash]

is that anything like 'just following orders'? like the nazis did?

Nope. If military men don't follow orders they can be shot. If government requests a social media company to help reduce misinformation from Russian sources the company does not have to follow those requests.

The company might actually believe Hillary had a child sex ring in a pizza/ping-pong shop.

 

[Into the Night]

if they are acting on behalf of a criminal request from the government they ARE complicit.

No, they aren't. There is no law that says a corporation can't censor.

take it up with the concept of law.

No such law, dummy.

do you understand that we are no better than fascist totalitarian CHINA if we allow wanton government interference in corporate activities,

Now you're just getting stupid. It is legal for government to interfere in certain ways with corporate activities.

or corporate interference in government activities?

Corporations don't interfere with government activities.

 

[Into the Night]

if you are being coerced into a criminal plot it is up to you to blow the whistle asap, not comply.

Paradox. Irrational. You are getting really stupid. You cannot say a corporation is coerced and not coerced at the same time!

 

[Into the Night]

but they can choose to value free speech.

No. They are coerced.

conspiracy to censor IS a crime tho.

No such crime. Stop making shit up.

if you facilitate a government crime you're just as liable as if the mafia had come to you to commit a crime.

Coercion is not a choice, dummy.

 

[Into the Night]

being complicit in a government crime is itself a crime.


can your comprehend that, dumbass?

No, it isn't. Stop making shit up. There is no such crime.

 

[Into the Night]

a corporation is a proxy for government when it's commiting crimes on it's behalf and at it's direction.

It is not a crime for a corporation to censor.

 

[IBDaMann]

There is no World Government.

The Marxist forces of the world fight 24/7 to tear down existing national borders, national identities and national loyalties.

Beyond that, the socialist forces of the world strive 24/7 to bring about an all-controlling one-world order (like a global version of the European Union), whereas the communists struggle 24/7 to have a world devoid of any governments, any militaries, any police, or any authority whatsoever.

This is why the communists are always the first to be killed/executed/assassinated by whatever socialist power that emerges, and why no communist country ever emerges.

 

[Into the Night]

they can if they are facilitating government criminality.

Corporations are not liable for crimes committed by a government. Corporations are not subject to the 1st amendment.

they are facilitating violation of the 1st amendment if they censor at the government behest and direction.

It is not a crime to be a victim.

sorry fascist.

Redefinition fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

they are acting as a government agent and are completely complicit in the criminal act.

Corporations are not government agents. It is not a crime to be a victim of coercion.

 

[Into the Night]

A basic principle of constitutional law. A threat is different than a request which governments make all the time. Threats are illegal. The other can be refused and companies/individuals often refuse to follow the government's requests.

Threats in and of itself is not illegal, either by government or by corporations.