Biden likely violated free speech

[Luvnit2]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-likely-violated-first-amendment-covid-19-pandemic-federal-judge-says

A judge ruled the Biden administration violated free speech during Covid and barred some cabinet members and his spokesperson from communicating with Twitter, Facebook (META) and google. He cited the government attempting to force them to take down misinformation. An example is the Hunter Biden laptop the government told Twitter and others was Russian misinformation which we now know was a lie since the FBI knew it was HB's laptop since 2019.

[*pally*]

Based on this judge’s previous rulings this one isn’t a surprise

[Arturo Bandini]

It is very telling all those threads about Biden which are almost based on nothing except rumours.

It means our candidate is so much human garbage that we have to find things on Biden who can balance it ...

I like the 'If I say things a lot of time, maybe they'll became true' ?

In case, you missed it, Fox News is an entertaining company who had to find a deal of about almost A BILLION dollars because they were spreading lies on national TV. And it wasn't the first time.

Why would I trust them on anything ?

[Belsnickel]

Judge Doughty is someone who I would judge shop for with a case like this. His 2021 ruling that was filled with inaccurate statements about COVID and the vaccine shows that the potential for a biased ruling in this case is high.

That being said, I am a bit interested in the discovery in this case. The reason why is because I am curious about what the messaging was from the government towards social media companies. Did they encourage them to take action, or was there more of a strong arm scenario? Did they encourage putting the misinformation labels on things or did they push for the deplatforming of individuals? Those are things that could come about from discovery and is something I would be interested in learning.

[*pally*]

(07-05-2023, 07:24 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Judge Doughty is someone who I would judge shop for with a case like this. His 2021 ruling that was filled with inaccurate statements about COVID and the vaccine shows that the potential for a biased ruling in this case is high.

That being said, I am a bit interested in the discovery in this case. The reason why is because I am curious about what the messaging was from the government towards social media companies. Did they encourage them to take action, or was there more of a strong arm scenario? Did they encourage putting the misinformation labels on things or did they push for the deplatforming of individuals? Those are things that could come about from discovery and is something I would be interested in learning.

For sure, for example, Luvnit2 pulled out his tired Hunter laptop thing, which occurred under the previous administration. Biden didn’t become President until 2021. So it would also be interesting to see what evidence the judge relied on to make this ruling.

[Luvnit2]

(07-05-2023, 08:23 AM)pally Wrote: For sure, for example, Luvnit2 pulled out his tired Hunter laptop thing, which occurred under the previous administration.  Biden didn’t become President until 2021. So it would also be interesting to see what evidence the judge relied on to make this ruling.

You either are not informed or you like to discard proven facts. The Hunter Biden laptop story was buried (twitter files release) by social media due the the government telling them it was disinformation in October, 2020. This was right before the election and also a phony letter signed by 51 liars was produced saying the HB laptop was disinformation in October, 2020 prior to the election.

The disinformation was election interference. 

I present facts, others like to present emotions since they have no facts to counter act the truth.

[HarleyDog]

To stop Biden officials from using social media to control content and induce fear. Yep, they were moderating social media, controlling what people read, and suppressing free speech on topics they didn't agree with. Those mentioned were DHHS, FBI, DHS, etc. So basically, if you work for Joe, no more shenanigans with social media (for now). A few tidbits from the injunction:

Quote:In this case, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants suppressed conservative-leaning free speech, such as: (1) suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 Presidential election; (2) suppressing speech about the lab-leak theory of COVID-19’s origin; (3) suppressing speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns; (4) suppressing speech about the efficiency of COVID-19 vaccines; (5) suppressing speech about election integrity in the 2020 presidential election; (6) suppressing speech about the security of voting by mail; (7) suppressing parody content about Defendants; (8) suppressing negative posts about the economy; and (9) suppressing negative posts about President Biden.

Quote:Plaintiffs have shown that not only have the Defendants shown willingness to coerce and/or to give significant encouragement to social-media platforms to suppress free speech with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic and national elections, they have also shown a willingness to do it with regard to other issues, such as gas prices,690 parody speech,691 calling the President a liar,692 climate change,693 gender,694 and abortion.695

Just 1 example, which supports my opinion in another thread:

Quote:Plaintiff Dr. Kheriaty is a psychiatrist who has taught at several universities and written numerous articles. He had approximately 158,000 Twitter followers in December 2021 and approximately 1,333 LinkedIn connections. Dr. Kheriaty alleges he began experiencing censorship on Twitter and LinkedIn after posting content opposing COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates. Dr. Kheriaty also alleges that his posts were “shadow banned,” meaning that his tweets did not appear in his follower’s Twitter feeds. Additionally, a video of an interview of Dr. Kheriaty on the ethics of vaccine mandates was removed from YouTube.13

This is how you weaponize social media for political gain. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/07/04/federal-judge-restricts-biden-administration-communication-with-social-media-companies/?sh=390526617b1f

[CJD]

(07-05-2023, 09:06 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You either are not informed or you like to discard proven facts. The Hunter Biden laptop story was buried (twitter files release) by social media due the the government telling them it was disinformation in October, 2020. This was right before the election and also a phony letter signed by 51 liars was produced saying the HB laptop was disinformation in October, 2020 prior to the election.

The disinformation was election interference. 

I present facts, others like to present emotions since they have no facts to counter act the truth.

Who in the government told social media it was disinformation in October 2020?

[GMDino]

(07-05-2023, 11:08 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: To stop Biden officials from using social media to control content and induce fear. Yep, they were moderating social media, controlling what people read, and suppressing free speech on topics they didn't agree with. Those mentioned were DHHS, FBI, DHS, etc. So basically, if you work for Joe, no more shenanigans with social media (for now). A few tidbits from the injunction:



Just 1 example, which supports my opinion in another thread:


This is how you weaponize social media for political gain. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/07/04/federal-judge-restricts-biden-administration-communication-with-social-media-companies/?sh=390526617b1f

Damn!  I had a whole response posted and the thread got moved.

Anyway, the number of followers doesn't mean someone is right.  Nicki Minaj has millions of followers on twitter, Instagram and Youtube and she passed the wrong information on about the vaccine causing some one's testicles to swell.

Secondly, lots of people are restricted by their employers social media terms.

Lastly, this was covered during the "hearing" about the Twitter Files where they said the last administration asked for some things to be taken down too.  It is up tot he private site to decide if they will follow through or not.  So I'm not sure what this is all about.

[HarleyDog]

(07-05-2023, 11:34 AM)GMDino Wrote: Damn!  I had a whole response posted and the thread got moved.

Sorry - That was my dumbass trying put up a story and not looking hard enough to see if it was already posted. 

Quote:So I'm not sure what this is all about.

It's the first I heard. I'm in happy dance mode. 

[Luvnit2]

(07-05-2023, 11:24 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Who in the government told social media it was disinformation in October 2020?

It is known fact the FBI told Twitter the laptop was Russian disinformation. It was a lie as the FBI knew in 2019 and well before the election in November of 2020 it was indeed Hunter's laptop. They verified the laptop through his Apple iCloud account within weeks of confiscating it.

Don't believe me, read the twitter files released, threats were made to discredit the laptop by the same FBI that knew in fact it was Hunter's laptop and had not been tampered with.

[*pally*]

(07-05-2023, 12:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It is known fact the FBI told Twitter the laptop was Russian disinformation. It was a lie as the FBI knew in 2019 and well before the election in November of 2020 it was indeed Hunter's laptop. They verified the laptop through his Apple iCloud account within weeks of confiscating it.

Don't believe me, read the twitter files released, threats were made to discredit the laptop by the same FBI that knew in fact it was Hunter's laptop and had not been tampered with.

Ok...now a simple question for you. Who was in charge of the government in 2019 through Nov of 2020?


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Luvnit2]

(07-05-2023, 11:34 AM)GMDino Wrote: Damn!  I had a whole response posted and the thread got moved.

Anyway, the number of followers doesn't mean someone is right.  Nicki Minaj has millions of followers on twitter, Instagram and Youtube and she passed the wrong information on about the vaccine causing some one's testicles to swell.

Secondly, lots of people are restricted by their employers social media terms.

Lastly, this was covered during the "hearing" about the Twitter Files where they said the last administration asked for some things to be taken down too.  It is up tot he private site to decide if they will follow through or not.  So I'm not sure what this is all about.

It is about free speech. The government intervened in free speech under the ruse of disinformation.

To me this is very simple, the government does not have the right to determine misinformation on social media sites. I would hope everyone would agree. I could say the sky is falling and the end of the world is upon us. The government should have no right to tell Facebook or Twitter to delete my post. This is a huge win for free speech. We all have our mind to do research and ether believe or not believe anything that is said and written. We don't need government intervention.

[Luvnit2]

(07-05-2023, 12:25 PM)pally Wrote: Ok...now a simple question for you.  Who was in charge of the government in 2019 through Nov of 2020?


Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Why is that relevant? The Justice department is supposed to be independent of the executive (POTUS) branch. I understand liberals think it is OK to weaponize the justice department against your political foes, but it is not OK.

So, it was the independent FBI who lied to social media. We know it and yet for political reasons liberals ignore it.

Sad indeed.

[CJD]

(07-05-2023, 12:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It is known fact the FBI told Twitter the laptop was Russian disinformation. It was a lie as the FBI knew in 2019 and well before the election in November of 2020 it was indeed Hunter's laptop. They verified the laptop through his Apple iCloud account within weeks of confiscating it.

Don't believe me, read the twitter files released, threats were made to discredit the laptop by the same FBI that knew in fact it was Hunter's laptop and had not been tampered with.

Who led the FBI in November 2020?

[GMDino]

(07-05-2023, 12:29 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: It is about free speech. The government intervened in free speech under the ruse of disinformation.

To me this is very simple, the government does not have the right to determine misinformation on social media sites. I would hope everyone would agree. I could say the sky is falling and the end of the world is upon us. The government should have no right to tell Facebook or Twitter to delete my post. This is a huge win for free speech. We all have our mind to do research and ether believe or not believe anything that is said and written. We don't need government intervention.

Yep.  But they can ask.  Then it is up to the site to decide.  I believe someone already said that. 

[*pally*]

(07-05-2023, 12:32 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why is that relevant? The Justice department is supposed to be independent of the executive (POTUS) branch. I understand liberals think it is OK to weaponize the justice department against your political foes, but it is not OK.

So, it was the independent FBI who lied to social media. We know it and yet for political reasons liberals ignore it.

Sad indeed.

So we will try again....who was in charge of the Justice Dept and FBI in 2019 and 2020?  You can google the answer if you don't know off the top of your head

[Luvnit2]

(07-05-2023, 01:31 PM)pally Wrote: So we will try again....who was in charge of the Justice Dept and FBI in 2019 and 2020?  You can google the answer if you don't know off the top of your head

Wray was in charge of the FBI and Barr the department of justice. Again, are you saying the DOJ and FBI should be allowed to be weaponized by the POTUS????????

[CJD]

(07-05-2023, 12:32 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Why is that relevant? The Justice department is supposed to be independent of the executive (POTUS) branch. I understand liberals think it is OK to weaponize the justice department against your political foes, but it is not OK.

So, it was the independent FBI who lied to social media. We know it and yet for political reasons liberals ignore it.

Sad indeed.

Okay, so why would an independent FBI lying to social media indicate that Biden likely violated free speech?

[Luvnit2]

https://www.foxnews.com/media/ex-biden-aide-jen-psaki-hit-coercing-tech-companies-censor-conservatives-federal-judge

Hmm..... President's mouth piece guilty of coercing tech companies

Great news is they no longer will be able to try and control social media in the future. This whole scenario stinks and shows Democrats trying to stop free speech, going so far as making threats.