• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Donny Vs. The World

I think the most amusing part of this is that if Twitter and Facebook were somehow able to violate the first amendment (they aren’t) then that would mean they were acting as agents of the government.

Trump was still president when they banned him, so if his complaint is true that means he’s so incompetent he got banned by his own government. Lol.
 
Trump needs access to social media to fleece the rest of his flock for more money. He learned quickly how those donations add up. He needs social media to collect those ignorant souls' money.
 
fskimospy said:
I think the most amusing part of this is that if Twitter and Facebook were somehow able to violate the first amendment (they aren’t) then that would mean they were acting as agents of the government.

Trump was still president when they banned him, so if his complaint is true that means he’s so incompetent he got banned by his own government. Lol.
Click to expand...

Now see here Sonny, Twitter and Facebook and Google are the small-G “government” of cyberspace. But because they’re US-based, cyberspace is under US Big-G government jurisdiction and must abide by “free speech” whatever that means. Ergo, if Twitter bans Trump, then they are infringing on his civil rights!!

Something to that effect—let’s see how it holds up in court!
 
Thankfully, as the AP piece points out, these cases are unlikely to fly.

Section 230 still stands, and I'm pretty sure Facebook/Google/Twitter are acting in good faith when they ban someone for promoting known false election claims that lead to sedition and violence at the US Capitol. Thats on top of past violations on Trump's part. He was given every exception and still pushed past the limits.

There's also the basic matter of the First Amendment. Private companies are allowed to choose what goes on their own platforms, so long as they aren't violating other laws in the process; they weren't violating laws by giving Trump the boot.

I wouldn't be surprised if these cases are dismissed before they even reach trial. And oh, how I'd laugh if they are.
 
Lawsuit is shite. This type of lawsuit has been tried already a bunch of times and has repeatedly failed. Florida may have passed a law allowing such a suit, but federal law prevails under the Supremacy Clause. Federal law says they can censor without incurring liability. Unless or until the federal law is changed, there is no recourse to the courts.

www.theverge.com

Social media bias lawsuits keep failing in court

Sites have broad rights to ban users — Trump tweets notwithstanding.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
 
Like I put on another thread .....


Donny T, Donny T
He's a clown, that Donny T
He's gonna get caught
Just you wait and see
(Why's everybody always pickin' on me?)
 
woolfe9998 said:
Lawsuit is shite. This type of lawsuit has been tried already a bunch of times and has repeatedly failed. Florida may have passed a law allowing such a suit, but federal law prevails under the Supremacy Clause. Federal law says they can censor without incurring liability. Unless or until the federal law is changed, there is no recourse to the courts.

www.theverge.com

Social media bias lawsuits keep failing in court

Sites have broad rights to ban users — Trump tweets notwithstanding.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
Click to expand...

Could Facebook, Twitter and whatever others accused in the suit file a frivolous counter suit kind of thing to get legal fees paid by Trump?
 
Fanatical Meat said:
Could Facebook, Twitter and whatever others accused in the suit file a frivolous counter suit kind of thing to get legal fees paid by Trump?
Click to expand...

Anyone can file a "frivolous" suit but the general rule is that each side pays its own attorneys fees unless a specific statute or contract says otherwise.
 
This will be even worse for Trump if it does go to trial. If Trump is compelled to testify in court there is a good likelihood that he would burst into flames. Of course it would be good for TV ratings, and popcorn sales would skyrocket.
 
Basically the only time Trump can get his message out is at his rallies. I just wish that the mainstream media would quit covering Trump at all. Let Fox cover him if they want to.
 
The headline I read said it was a "class action" suit. Does that mean its Trump and a gang of his banned bums instead of just Trump?
 
Pathetic little Donnie is like the bully we all endured in middle/high school. A fucking pussy without his posse, who for this sad little man is the threat of lawyers.
 
PingSpike said:
The headline I read said it was a "class action" suit. Does that mean its Trump and a gang of his banned bums instead of just Trump?
Click to expand...

If it gets class action status, that is. In cases like this, the plaintiffs have to convince the court that their case warrants class action status. And like every other part of this legal action... I wouldn't count on it happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top