Biden likely violated free speech

[Dill]

(07-05-2023, 05:48 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: What if the government used social media to suppress a story about the President's son and his laptop which shows emails of possible bribery by the POTUS and foreign country?

Wait, they did that to win an election. The FBI colluded with the Biden campaign to win an election. That should scare the heck out of all of us. In the end, the election was stolen from Trump with the help of the FBI. In your mind, you feel this is a lie, others believe as I do. 

You mean the story we all read about the day after the NYPost reported it?

About the "bribery" which has never materialized? Still nothing in that laptop to "throw an election." 

People who could be manipulated by mere allegation were going to vote Trump anyway.  People who couldn't, weren't.

The FBI is chock full of Republicans, many quite sympathetic to Trump. And they've been slow-dogging the investigations into Trump's sedition.
Comey handed the Trump the election when he announced he'd reopened his investigation into Hilary. Then they "colluded" with Biden
to help him beat the most erratic and mendacious president in history, who had just botched a pandemic? American people could not have
decided they wanted "normal" again? No a Biden win is not proof of FBI "collusion." 

Why am I supposed to be more afraid of them than re-election of the guy who tried to overthrow our government and promises revenge if elected?

(07-05-2023, 05:48 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: That is what makes America great, we can express our opinions based on our own fact gathering. Your scenario leaves out one very important point. Pelosi had all the gathered intelligence from social media. Trump asked her to add security for Jan. 6, but she did not do it. Why? The D.C. mayor also was looped in refused to add security. Why?

They knew there was going to be a possible major issue Jan. 6 because of social media, yet ignored it just as they ignored 9/11 intelligence. I would argue social media lets the FBI know the temperature of citizens. 

Trump's own DOJ investigated claims of election fraud, and found none to be valid. 

But Trump did not like that result, so he "expressed his opinion" based on his own "fact gathering," 
and made America even greater by sending a pack of insurgents to the Capitol, 
timed to the moment Pence was presented with a list of false electors from 7 states.

The FBI, Pelosi, and the mayor of DC knew there would be a "possible major issue" because they could see in real time how Trump was "expressing his opinion" that Biden had stolen the election and true believers should come to Washington and do something about it. 

You write as if Trump, the instigator and director of the "possible major issue," were of course very concerned law and order should prevail the day he was calling thousands of supporters to DC to shake down Congress--the C-in-C who watched for hours without lifting a finger as his supporters breached the Capitol and trashed Congressional offices.

The Jan.6 committee was unable to establish Trump's claim that he ordered 10,000 NG troops and Pelosi quashed it. 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/04/jan-6-committee-yet-again-debunks-trump-claim-10000-troops/

(07-05-2023, 05:48 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Argue as you may, but Kennedy should be able to say anything he likes about vaccinations an Covid without the government shutting him down on social media. Free speech is free speech again and I love it.

My question was whether government should stand back until the shooting starts. Apparently your answer is yes.

You love speech without responsibility--but not more than Trump. 

Should people free to "say anything they like" pay for the damage when what they "like" causes death and destruction?

It doesn't seem like you've thought much beyond "freedom--yeah!" here. And still haven't figured out WHY the Capitol needed security on 1/6.