Donald Trump: Tech Lawsuit ‘Will Prove Censorship Is Unlawful, Unconstitutional’

[Unforgiven]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/07/donald-trump-tech-lawsuit-will-prove-censorship-is-unlawful-unconstitutional/

 

Former President Donald Trump announced Wednesday a class action lawsuit against Facebook,

Twitter, and Google in the Southern District of Florida to “order an immediate halt to social media

companies, illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”

 

Hopefully this is the beginning of retaking the country from deranged leftists.

[Tiberius]

4 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/07/07/donald-trump-tech-lawsuit-will-prove-censorship-is-unlawful-unconstitutional/

 

Former President Donald Trump announced Wednesday a class action lawsuit against Facebook,

Twitter, and Google in the Southern District of Florida to “order an immediate halt to social media

companies, illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”

 

Hopefully this is the beginning of retaking the country from deranged leftists.

Compelling private businesses to serve unruly customers? Soon airlines will have to allow violent passengers to wreak havoc on planes. Not very Conservative. 

[LeGOATski]

I don't think so. Trump likely knows he will lose, but he won't actually lose anything from it. 

 

Like the article says, had they been able to position the other pieces earlier (section 230; regulation laws; etc) then they would have a chance.

 

This is posturing and a possible way of setting up those pieces, just in a different order.

[frostbitmic]

 

WAAAAAAHHHH

[Westside]

Once again, liberals show their immaturity. Another reason not to engage in mentally handicapped liberals.

[All_Pro_Bills]

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Compelling private businesses to serve unruly customers? Soon airlines will have to allow violent passengers to wreak havoc on planes. Not very Conservative. 

Like people that supported the COVID Lab origin theory for over the past year and all got censored and de-platformed?  And suddenly it all seems credible and all these social media sites are back peddling.  Why are all the liberals that used to distrust the government and big corporations suddenly their biggest supporters and apologists?  Can you explain please?

[B-Man]

https://scottrasmussen.com/47-believe-big-tech-companies-actively-supported-biden-in-2020-10-say-they-supported-trump/

 

 

THIS IS THE BACKGROUND AGAINST WHICH TRUMP IS SUING BIG TECH COMPANIES:

 

Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters believe Big Tech companies actively supported Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential election. A Scott Rasmussen national survey found that just 10% think they actively supported Donald Trump.

 

Twenty percent (20%) believe that the companies remained neutral and 23% are not sure.

 

In every measured demographic group, more voters believed that the companies supported Biden rather than Trump. Even Democrats, by a 3-to-1 margin, held that view.

 

Other data showed that 78% of voters believe tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google could swing the results of the election to benefit their preferred candidate. Additionally, 62% believe technology companies have too much influence on our politics and political campaigns.

 

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives big tech companies special immunity from prosecution for things posted on their platforms. Since they received this immunity from the government, 63% of voters believe they should they be required to abide by the 1st Amendment guarantee of free speech.

 

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of voters believe it is more important to ensure that social media companies operate fairly rather than protecting the companies from government interference. A Scott Rasmussen national survey found that 19% disagree and believe protecting social media companies from government interference is the higher priority.

 

 

 

Big Tech has done a truly outstanding job of getting people to hate it.

 

[Frat-Train]

The things that will be on the record, permanently….  This is a VERY interesting move.  Trump has nothing to lose, unlike big tech that will now have everything they’re doing on the record, under the threat of perjury.  I’ve noticed the selective feeds on my accounts, but not to the extent it’s being claimed by some.  But friends of mine that lean right definitely feel something is up with their posts.  This could be something…

[BillStime]

2 hours ago, Bidens_basement said:

Once again, liberals show their immaturity. Another reason not to engage in mentally handicapped liberals.

BILLSFANS.CON

[US Egg]

Social media is an oxymoron.

[The Frankish Reich]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

https://scottrasmussen.com/47-believe-big-tech-companies-actively-supported-biden-in-2020-10-say-they-supported-trump/

 

 

THIS IS THE BACKGROUND AGAINST WHICH TRUMP IS SUING BIG TECH COMPANIES:

 

Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters believe Big Tech companies actively supported Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential election. A Scott Rasmussen national survey found that just 10% think they actively supported Donald Trump.

 

Twenty percent (20%) believe that the companies remained neutral and 23% are not sure.

 

In every measured demographic group, more voters believed that the companies supported Biden rather than Trump. Even Democrats, by a 3-to-1 margin, held that view.

 

Other data showed that 78% of voters believe tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google could swing the results of the election to benefit their preferred candidate. Additionally, 62% believe technology companies have too much influence on our politics and political campaigns.

 

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act gives big tech companies special immunity from prosecution for things posted on their platforms. Since they received this immunity from the government, 63% of voters believe they should they be required to abide by the 1st Amendment guarantee of free speech.

 

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of voters believe it is more important to ensure that social media companies operate fairly rather than protecting the companies from government interference. A Scott Rasmussen national survey found that 19% disagree and believe protecting social media companies from government interference is the higher priority.

 

 

 

Big Tech has done a truly outstanding job of getting people to hate it.

 

I hate your product! How dare you preclude me from using it!! I'm gonna sue!!!!!

[Doc Brown]

For all those cheering his latest political stunt with this frivolous lawsuit, he could've gone after big tech when he was president with the majority in both houses.  It would seem he didn't care about monopolies until it impacted him personally.

[Big Blitz]

2 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

For all those cheering his latest political stunt with this frivolous lawsuit, he could've gone after big tech when he was president with the majority in both houses.  It would seem he didn't care about monopolies until it impacted him personally.

 

 

I said this in January 2017

 

He needed to quit Social Media right then and there and say why.  

 

 

But now, they need to bake the cake or we need to find a way to treat them as hostile foreign nations because they are.  

 

This isn't NBC Nightly News giving you lib spin on events anymore in 22 minutes of air time.  

 

These companies are the biggest threat to democracy, free thought, free expression, and free speech on the planet.

 

Never forget they know this:

 

2016

 

How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election

Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548/

 

 

That was 2016 now after 2020 they want you to think that claim was actually bogus.  

[Doc Brown]

12 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I said this in January 2017

 

He needed to quit Social Media right then and there and say why.  

 

 

But now, they need to bake the cake or we need to find a way to treat them as hostile foreign nations because they are.  

 

This isn't NBC Nightly News giving you lib spin on events anymore in 22 minutes of air time.  

 

These companies are the biggest threat to democracy, free thought, free expression, and free speech on the planet.

 

Never forget they know this:

 

2016

 

How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election

Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548/

 

 

That was 2016 now after 2020 they want you to think that claim was actually bogus.  

It won him the primary and the election.  What was his incentive to do it?

[Big Blitz]

14 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It won him the primary and the election.  What was his incentive to do it?

 

 

Trump's own people knew there was a change but Trump's people aren't politicians and didn't foresee or at least had their heads in the sand over how they were never ever going to let 2016 (which included Brexit) happen again:  

 

 

They knew this in 2017.

 

 

They knew Social Media companies completely changed their algorithms in 2017:

 

Decoding the Facebook Algorithm: A Fully Up-to-Date List of the Algorithm Factors and Changes

 

ALFRED LUA - 18 OCT 2017

 

https://buffer.com/library/facebook-news-feed-algorithm/

 

Europe has fined Google $2.7 billion for manipulating search results

 

Google has 90 days to change its practices or face further penalties.

 

Jun 27, 2017, 6:13am EDT

 

https://www.vox.com/2017/6/27/15878980/europe-fine-google-antitrust-search

 

 

 

 

.....In June 2014, Harvard Law scholar Jonathan Zittrain wrote an essay in New Republic called, “Facebook Could Decide an Election Without Anyone Ever Finding Out,” in which he called attention to the possibility of Facebook selectively depressing voter turnout. (He also suggested that Facebook be seen as an “information fiduciary,” charged with certain special roles and responsibilities because it controls so much personal data.)

 

In late 2014, The Daily Dot called attention to an obscure Facebook-produced case study on how strategists defeated a statewide measure in Florida by relentlessly focusing Facebook ads on Broward and Dade counties, Democratic strongholds. Working with a tiny budget that would have allowed them to send a single mailer to just 150,000 households, the digital-advertising firm Chong and Koster was able to obtain remarkable results. “Where the Facebook ads appeared, we did almost 20 percentage points better than where they didn’t,” testified a leader of the firm. “Within that area, the people who saw the ads were 17 percent more likely to vote our way than the people who didn’t. Within that group, the people who voted the way we wanted them to, when asked why, often cited the messages they learned from the Facebook ads.”

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/10/what-facebook-did/542502/

 

 

 

 

After 2016, they all aligned to never let "Trump" happen again.  This is fact.   His team needed to say "thanks, and we're out" in January of 2017.

[Big Blitz]

Shadow banning, sometimes known as “Stealth Banning” or “Hell Banning,” is commonly used by online community managers to block content posted by spammers. Instead of banning a user directly (which would alert the spammer to their status, prompting them to create a new account), their content is merely hidden from public view.

 

For site owners, the ideal shadowban is when a user never realizes he’s been shadowbanned.

 

Twitter and other platforms such have Reddit have twisted shadow banning from a tool to fight spammers into a tool to prevent tweets and content from spreading naturally. Followers do not see tweets from the shadow banned individual in their timeline, and therefore do not engage with the tweets by responding, liking, or retweeting them. The shadow banned user is essentially tweeting to themselves, unless a follower directly visits their account.

 

Former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu, as recorded by Project Veritas, confirmed that Twitter was doing this or had at some point done it in the past. Vadrevu told Project Veritas,

 

....According to the source, Twitter maintains a ‘whitelist’ of favored Twitter accounts and a ‘blacklist’ of unfavored accounts. Accounts on the whitelist are prioritized in search results, even if they’re not the most popular among users. Meanwhile, accounts on the blacklist have their posts hidden from both search results and other users’ timelines.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/01/11/twitter-censorship-what-is-shadow-banning/

 

Edited July 8, 2021 by Big Blitz

[The Frankish Reich]

10 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I said this in January 2017

 

He needed to quit Social Media right then and there and say why.  

 

 

But now, they need to bake the cake or we need to find a way to treat them as hostile foreign nations because they are.  

 

This isn't NBC Nightly News giving you lib spin on events anymore in 22 minutes of air time.  

 

These companies are the biggest threat to democracy, free thought, free expression, and free speech on the planet.

 

Never forget they know this:

 

2016

 

How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election

Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548/

 

 

That was 2016 now after 2020 they want you to think that claim was actually bogus.  

So ... we can declare war on them? Bomb Menlo Park? What on earth are you talking about? These are U.S. companies, not "hostile foreign nations." 

 

Anyone who wanted to know what Trump has to say could've simply gone to the From the Desk of Donald J. Trump website. Apparently few did.

[LeGOATski]

@Big Blitz rants about how social media is a "hostile foreign nation" while at the same time screenshotting and posting a link to Twitter.

 

This is gold.

[Tiberius]

Quote

 

His complaint against Facebook — presumably prepared by actual lawyers, hard as that may be to believe — claims that it “rises beyond that of a private company to that of a state actor. As such, Defendant is constrained by the First Amendment right to free speech in the censorship decisions it makes regarding its Users.”

It goes on to use the word “unconstitutional” again and again to describe Facebook’s decisions, despite the fact that only government action is or isn’t constitutional.

 

That's a really stupid argument 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/07/trumps-latest-ridiculous-lawsuit-shows-how-small-he-has-become/

[716er]

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

@Big Blitz rants about how social media is a "hostile foreign nation" while at the same time screenshotting and posting a link to Twitter.

 

This is gold.

Dude has so many layers of foil on he’s in a Reynolds Wrap box.

[The Frankish Reich]

Meanwhile, the muzzled Donald John Trump is given precious Wall St Journal op-ed page space to have his say:

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-j-trump-why-im-suing-big-tech-11625761897?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

 

And I'm fine with this. Let's start with this whine from his piece:

 

"Perhaps most egregious, in the weeks after the election, Big Tech blocked the social-media accounts of the sitting president."

 

He says "in the weeks after the election ... ." Twitter banned him on January 8, more than two months after the election, and only after he incited a mob to storm the Capitol, and only after ON THAT VERY DAY he used the Twitter platform not to calm the mob, but to egg them on.

 

To the merits of the case: this is a profoundly stupid legal argument that will get zero traction in the courts. It is all symbolic rage.

 

Here's a great law school exam question:

Remember the short, inconsequential life of From the Desk of Donald J. Trump? The blog that was to serve as a forum for post-Twitter Trump? Was that a public forum? Should Trump (he is, after all, a former president, still supported by the taxpayers, unlike Twitter) have been required to host a guest post by me entitled "Donald Trump Should Be Indicted for Incitement to Riot?" If not, why not? If Twitter is a public forum/quasi-government actor subject to viewpoint-neutral First Amendment rules, why should the former president's website be considered something different?

Edited July 8, 2021 by The Frankish Reich

[Irv]

14 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I said this in January 2017

 

He needed to quit Social Media right then and there and say why.  

 

 

But now, they need to bake the cake or we need to find a way to treat them as hostile foreign nations because they are.  

 

This isn't NBC Nightly News giving you lib spin on events anymore in 22 minutes of air time.  

 

These companies are the biggest threat to democracy, free thought, free expression, and free speech on the planet.

 

Never forget they know this:

 

2016

 

How Google Could Rig the 2016 Election

Google has the ability to drive millions of votes to a candidate with no one the wiser.

 

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/how-google-could-rig-the-2016-election-121548/

 

 

That was 2016 now after 2020 they want you to think that claim was actually bogus.  

 

I don't agree with this.  What other option did he have other than social media?  If he said anything to the press or mainstream media, it would be printed or broadcast with their negaive slant.  So he bypassed them.      

 

 

[BillStime]

11 minutes ago, Irv said:

 

I don't agree with this.  What other option did he have other than social media?  If he said anything to the press or mainstream media, it would be printed or broadcast with their negaive slant.  So he bypassed them.      

 

 

 

I know

 

 

[Big Blitz]

5 hours ago, Irv said:

 

I don't agree with this.  What other option did he have other than social media?  If he said anything to the press or mainstream media, it would be printed or broadcast with their negaive slant.  So he bypassed them.      

 

 

 

 

You presume that half the country cares what the other half has to say.

 

The People's Republic of Silicon Valley went full tilt all in for the Ds during the 2018 mid-terms and the Kavanaugh hearings.  

 

What they have done since to the Trump half of the country since (cut them off) is exactly what we should have done because these people are gone.  Look at the things they're defending now.  It's embarrassing.  But January 6!!!

 

 

The logical conclusion of 2016 is something our fake friends on the other side of the aisle haven't understood, grasped, or are just flat out ignoring. 

 

DeSantis winning in 2024 won't change this fact.  The media and social media will be just as relentless and even moreso then they were with Trump.    

 

It's over.  Half the country is dead to the other half.  And when the one half saw post 2016 that Big Tech is firmly in their corner, they have gone full Soviet Union.  They've been lying about everything the second those staged viral videos from Wuhan came out in December 2019.

 

To anyone that thinks this doesn't end horribly I don't know what to tell you.  Just wait till the Military realizes what's happening within it is the same thing that's happening within society and has completely destabilized America.  

 

Edited July 8, 2021 by Big Blitz

[BillStime]

 

13 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

You presume that half the country cares what the other half has to say.

 

The People's Republic of Silicon Valley went full tilt all in for the Ds during the 2018 mid-terms and the Kavanaugh hearings.  

 

What they have done since to the Trump half of the country since (cut them off) is exactly what we should have done because these people are gone.  Look at the things they're defending now.  It's embarrassing.  But January 6!!!

 

 

The logical conclusion of 2016 is something our fake friends on the other side of the aisle haven't understood, grasped, or are just flat out ignoring. 

 

DeSantis winning in 2024 won't change this fact.  The media and social media will be just as relentless and even moreso then they were with Trump.    

 

It's over.  Half the country is dead to the other half.  And when the one half saw post 2016 that Big Tech is firmly in their corner, they have gone full Soviet Union.  They've been lying about everything the second those staged viral videos from Wuhan came out in December 2019.

 

To anyone that thinks this doesn't end horribly I don't know what to tell you.  Just wait till the Military realizes what's happening within it is the same thing that's happening within society and has completely destabilized America.  

 

 

Did you respond to Trumps fundraising appeal to help the “billionaire” support his legal defense fund?

 

 

[B-Man]

16 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Did you respond to Trumps fundraising appeal to help the “billionaire” support his legal defense fund?

 

🐿️

 

 

[Irv]

3 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

You presume that half the country cares what the other half has to say.

 

The People's Republic of Silicon Valley went full tilt all in for the Ds during the 2018 mid-terms and the Kavanaugh hearings.  

 

What they have done since to the Trump half of the country since (cut them off) is exactly what we should have done because these people are gone.  Look at the things they're defending now.  It's embarrassing.  But January 6!!!

 

 

The logical conclusion of 2016 is something our fake friends on the other side of the aisle haven't understood, grasped, or are just flat out ignoring. 

 

DeSantis winning in 2024 won't change this fact.  The media and social media will be just as relentless and even moreso then they were with Trump.    

 

It's over.  Half the country is dead to the other half.  And when the one half saw post 2016 that Big Tech is firmly in their corner, they have gone full Soviet Union.  They've been lying about everything the second those staged viral videos from Wuhan came out in December 2019.

 

To anyone that thinks this doesn't end horribly I don't know what to tell you.  Just wait till the Military realizes what's happening within it is the same thing that's happening within society and has completely destabilized America.  

 

 

So we violently agree! 

 

[LeGOATski]

Any update on this?

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, LeGOATski said:

Any update on this ?

Is there any update on a week old lawsuit story ?

 

No.

 

 

Here is a NYT article 

 

3 days ago — Trump Suits Against Tech Giants Face Steep First Amendment 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/12/us/politics/trump-tech-lawsuits.html

[LeGOATski]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

Is there any update on a week old lawsuit story ?

 

No.

 

 

Here is a NYT article 

 

3 days ago — Trump Suits Against Tech Giants Face Steep First Amendment 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/12/us/politics/trump-tech-lawsuits.html

Darn.

 

This is like when he sued the NFL. Trump really just wants to make a deal with the big players in social media. It'd be funny if they settled for $1.

[B-Man]

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2021/07/16/thread-shows-how-the-white-houses-comments-today-on-facebook-and-other-social-media-platforms-could-help-trumps-lawsuits/

 

 

Thread shows how the White House’s comments today on Facebook and other social media platforms could help Trump’s lawsuits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LeGOATski]

Both parties want control over social media. They all realize how powerful it is, as well as the vulnerabilities in it. We're on a dangerous path. 

 

Keep linking to Twitter, though...

[LeGOATski]

 

I'm thinking about getting the Freedom Phone

https://gizmodo.com/maga-branded-freedom-phone-is-a-black-box-that-should-b-1847299215

[Wacka]

On 7/8/2021 at 10:36 AM, The Frankish Reich said:

So ... we can declare war on them? Bomb Menlo Park? What on earth are you talking about? These are U.S. companies, not "hostile foreign nations." 

 

Google and Facebook are built on filled in SF Bay marshland.  Lets make them marshland again!

[T master]

It's all about a agenda how certain very rich people want the world to be seen and how they want the future to be better as far as their personal opinions of that .

 

I just today went to google and did a search of "How many players were vaccinated in the 2020 season" every thing other than that came up .

 

It's just like most politicians when you ask a certain question they change the subject in hopes to deflect the question long enough for you to forget what you were asking in the first place .

 

Suppressing certain opinions helps their end cause .

[All_Pro_Bills]

Social media companies that do not editorialize or censor or regulate the content on their platforms are protected from legal liability governing content.  But Google, Facebook, and Twitter operate consciously and methodically in a manner inconsistent with the business model those laws are intended to protect.  They do censor and apply editorial license.  Which is inconsistent with the types of companies the law is intended to protect.  So the law doesn't apply to Google, Facebook, or Twitter as a key component of their current business model is censorship which is applied in a discriminatory way.  More or less censor what they don't like, don't censor what they do like.  Which is editorial license.  Which voids these legal protections.  I think that's a lot of the argument with the lawsuit.  And it seems logical and provable.  If so, Trumps case is sound.  

Edited July 17, 2021 by All_Pro_Bills

[frostbitmic]

It's a good thing trump never joined TBD, it wouldn't be long before he received the banhammer for breaking the TOS repeatedly and then he would sue SDS.

 

I hope the judge hearing this decides that the lawsuit is frivolous and hits him with a large penalty for wasting the courts time and comes down hard on trumps attorney.