Ruh Roh

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

And THATs why we’re leaving Afghanistan.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Trump pulled us out of Afghanistan. Biden’s keeping us in. He’s feverishly trying to get us into another war.

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

And THATs why we’re leaving Afghanistan.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

Yeah, Trump decided to pull us out. It was supposed to happen yesterday actually. Joe decided to push it back to Sept 11 because he wants to celebrate our loss.

We'd have been out sooner if warhawks on both sides didn't try to stop it.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bambino

Zarif refuted Kerry. But that’s not the point. The NYT broke the story. Not Parler or any news organization that posts on Parler. But Speedy, what you fail to comprehend is that Parler wouldn’t exist if FB, Twitter didn’t ban conservative voices. And the 1st amendment is just as important as due process in this country. Do you agree Speedy. And there are calls for Kerry to testify in congress. But, obviously Biden will protect him. There’s a two tier justice system in this country. Gen Flynn was tortured for less than what Kerry did.

You are correct in that Parler would not exist if not for the actions of FB and Twitter. 1st amendment rights, like 2nd amendment rights, are NOT absolute. Those that have been sued by Dominion Voting Systems will learn that in spades.

Will Kerry be asked to appear before Congress? Some Republicans will ask for it but I doubt he will but it won't be Biden's decision but rather the decision of those in Congress. I personally do not care one way or the other.

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

1st amendment rights, like 2nd amendment rights, are NOT absolute. Those that have been sued by Dominion Voting Systems will learn that in spades.

Incorrect, rights are absolute and inalienable. The difference is that in the Dominion case, it's not an infringement because the government is not the one infringing on their rights.

Much like the Facebook and Twitter shenanigans, they are the publisher on their site, and much like personal property, they can make whatever arbitrary rules they want and kick anyone off they want to. However, if they wish to do that, they need to forfeit their publisher rights in Section 230, and are then legally accountable for the content they publish, as they are "moderating" it.

If they wish to have the immunity "platform" status affords them, then they have to forfeit their right to kick people off of it.

A better example of how it works is the phone company:
If I call you on the phone, and call you a bunch of racial slurs and hang up, you cannot sue the phone company for my actions or their technology for enabling it. However, in turn, the phone company cannot deny me access.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You are correct in that Parler would not exist if not for the actions of FB and Twitter. 1st amendment rights, like 2nd amendment rights, are NOT absolute. Those that have been sued by Dominion Voting Systems will learn that in spades.

Will Kerry be asked to appear before Congress? Some Republicans will ask for it but I doubt he will but it won't be Biden's decision but rather the decision of those in Congress. I personally do not care one way or the other.

Your completely wrong. It’s probably been 65yrs since you’ve had a civics class. But you should revisit the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They’re under assault und the Joseph Robinate Biden administration. Or whoever is running the country now. They’re certainly not Patriots.

[pfunkdenver]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

Incorrect, rights are absolute and inalienable. The difference is that in the Dominion case, it's not an infringement because the government is not the one infringing on their rights.

Are you claiming, that non-government people, can publish lies about Dominion, without being held accountable?

[bambino]

Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

Are you claiming, that non-government people, can publish lies about Dominion, without being held accountable?

Of course. The whole Russian Collusion thing was a lie. Jesus tapping Christ.

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

Are you claiming, that non-government people, can publish lies about Dominion, without being held accountable?

It's up to Dominion to take it to the courts and make a case that it's hurting their business.

I can lie about you in the public square and say all sorts of awful and untruthful things, that's not illegal. What's punishable, is my harming your ability to make a living by damaging your reputation, and that's only if it's false, and even then the only damage is that I have to pay for the amount of business you can demonstrate you've lost.

The real world is not kindergarten, I don't get in trouble just for calling you names.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

It's up to Dominion to take it to the courts and make a case that it's hurting their business.

I can lie about you in the public square and say all sorts of awful and untruthful things, that's not illegal. What's punishable, is my harming your ability to make a living by damaging your reputation, and that's only if it's false, and even then the only damage is that I have to pay for the amount of business you can demonstrate you've lost.

The real world is not kindergarten, I don't get in trouble just for calling you names.

But this forum is Kindergarten. Maybe not as advanced. Where’s the toilets meme?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by bambino

Your completely wrong. It’s probably been 65yrs since you’ve had a civics class. But you should revisit the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They’re under assault und the Joseph Robinate Biden administration. Or whoever is running the country now. They’re certainly not Patriots.

Courts all the way up to and including the SCOTUS have ruled that the 1st and 2nd Amendments are not absolute. Do your homework.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

It's up to Dominion to take it to the courts and make a case that it's hurting their business.

I can lie about you in the public square and say all sorts of awful and untruthful things, that's not illegal. What's punishable, is my harming your ability to make a living by damaging your reputation, and that's only if it's false, and even then the only damage is that I have to pay for the amount of business you can demonstrate you've lost.

The real world is not kindergarten, I don't get in trouble just for calling you names.

Fake Claims About Dominion Voting Systems Do Real Damage

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fake-cl...ge-11606755399

Dominion and Smartmatic have serious shot at victory in election disinformation suits, experts say

To win a defamation case, a plaintiff typically needs to show that the defendant made a false statement of fact that caused harm to the defendant. If the plaintiff is a public figure, they also have to show that the defendant acted with “actual malice” — essentially meaning that the speaker knew or should have known that what they said wasn’t true.

Among the false statements that Dominion and Smartmatic are suing over are claims made by Giuliani and Powell, on Fox News shows and elsewhere, that Dominion is owned by Smartmatic and was created at the direction of the deceased Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez to fix elections, including the 2020 contest between Trump and Biden. Lindell also falsely claimed that Dominion machines were used to steal millions of votes for Biden.

Schulz said the lawsuits are “one of the few avenues we have at the moment to rein in misinformation.”

If Dominion and Smartmatic do win their cases, it could still be an uphill battle for them to receive the billions they say they are owed.

If the companies prove that the defendants’ statements were defamatory, they are entitled to the amount of money they can prove they lost as a result of the claims — such as lost elections contracts. They may also be entitled to punitive damages, or money meant to dissuade the defendants from spreading lies in the future.

Each company has asked for punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages, or money to repay them for harm they suffered. In Dominion’s case, it has split those damages down the middle, saying it is owed about $651.7 million for each kind of damage. Smartmatic has not specified the amount of punitive damages it wants, but says that it is owed $2.7 billion in compensatory damages.

While Dominion and Smartmatic can support their claim to compensatory damages with evidence that they’ve lost business as a result of the false statements they are suing over, punitive damages are far more discretionary and can turn on factors such as how wealthy a defendant is.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/24/domi...e-experts.html

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Courts all the way up to and including the SCOTUS have ruled that the 1st and 2nd Amendments are not absolute. Do your homework.

That's nice, but I'm a free man. The Supreme Court doesn't tell me what to do.

If I obey a law, it's because it's in-line with what I was going to do anyways. If I find a law to be inconvenient or I disagree with it, I choose to ignore it. The only authority I submit to is the owner of a given parcel of land that I'm standing on, because I believe in treating people with the respect I wish to be treated with.

I do not submit to those who violate their oaths to the Constitution, and I don't submit to Federal Hegemony.

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Fake Claims About Dominion Voting Systems Do Real Damage

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fake-cl...ge-11606755399

Dominion and Smartmatic have serious shot at victory in election disinformation suits, experts say

To win a defamation case, a plaintiff typically needs to show that the defendant made a false statement of fact that caused harm to the defendant. If the plaintiff is a public figure, they also have to show that the defendant acted with “actual malice” — essentially meaning that the speaker knew or should have known that what they said wasn’t true.

Among the false statements that Dominion and Smartmatic are suing over are claims made by Giuliani and Powell, on Fox News shows and elsewhere, that Dominion is owned by Smartmatic and was created at the direction of the deceased Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez to fix elections, including the 2020 contest between Trump and Biden. Lindell also falsely claimed that Dominion machines were used to steal millions of votes for Biden.

Schulz said the lawsuits are “one of the few avenues we have at the moment to rein in misinformation.”

If Dominion and Smartmatic do win their cases, it could still be an uphill battle for them to receive the billions they say they are owed.

If the companies prove that the defendants’ statements were defamatory, they are entitled to the amount of money they can prove they lost as a result of the claims — such as lost elections contracts. They may also be entitled to punitive damages, or money meant to dissuade the defendants from spreading lies in the future.

Each company has asked for punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages, or money to repay them for harm they suffered. In Dominion’s case, it has split those damages down the middle, saying it is owed about $651.7 million for each kind of damage. Smartmatic has not specified the amount of punitive damages it wants, but says that it is owed $2.7 billion in compensatory damages.

While Dominion and Smartmatic can support their claim to compensatory damages with evidence that they’ve lost business as a result of the false statements they are suing over, punitive damages are far more discretionary and can turn on factors such as how wealthy a defendant is.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/24/domi...e-experts.html

Yeah, that's the point I was trying to make.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

That's nice, but I'm a free man. The Supreme Court doesn't tell me what to do.

If I obey a law, it's because it's in-line with what I was going to do anyways. If I find a law to be inconvenient or I disagree with it, I choose to ignore it. The only authority I submit to is the owner of a given parcel of land that I'm standing on, because I believe in treating people with the respect I wish to be treated with.

I do not submit to those who violate their oaths to the Constitution, and I don't submit to Federal Hegemony.

What you stated does not impact my statement that the 1st and 2nd Amendments are NOT absolute. You may disagree with court rulings and choose to not abide by their decisions but that does not invalidate my statement.

None of us is "free" as you seem to be defining free. We don't get to pick and choose the laws that we follow without risking consequences. If you break the law you are subject to those consequences. Every moment of the day I am subject to laws and regulations. I can choose to ignore them but most if not all are in place for valid reasons. Whether I agree with those reasons or not is irrelevant.

[pfunkdenver]

Originally Posted by GastonGlock

That's nice, but I'm a free man. The Supreme Court doesn't tell me what to do.

If I obey a law, it's because it's in-line with what I was going to do anyways. If I find a law to be inconvenient or I disagree with it, I choose to ignore it. The only authority I submit to is the owner of a given parcel of land that I'm standing on, because I believe in treating people with the respect I wish to be treated with.

I do not submit to those who violate their oaths to the Constitution, and I don't submit to Federal Hegemony.

So... you're an anarchist!

"Anarchism is a political philosophy and movement that is sceptical of authority and rejects all involuntary, coercive forms of hierarchy."