President Joe Biden

[NorCalDad]

Agree speech is not unlimited. Twitters gone way beyond that. With the president, trump never called on his supporters to seize the capitol or engage in violence. The argument is he incited them by falsely claiming the election was “stolen”. Further, if incitement is the same standard Twitter engaged in a double standard by not censoring several ds (including kamala harris) that egged on the spring rioters. If violence is the standard, they engaged in double standards with China Iran and their supporters. They further did not censor Antifa accounts in the spring actually calling people to violence

with the hunter biden stuff Twitter was later proven to be wrong so engaged in a fact Checking which was later found to be incorrect and thereby interferes with a democratic election

with respect to the mask/lockdown/vaccine stuff Twitter is now interfering in debate including among credentialed experts

as to the free speech argument, the difference between Twitter and say the gay wedding cake baker is that Twitter claims it is a content neutral platform that does not edit its content and therefore can’t be legally held accountable for the actions of posters. If true they have no business editing content except for the most extreme outlines you’ve given and which should be set out in law governing isps. If not, their immunity should be removed in which case they are free to speak but also bear the liability (like a magazine or newspaper).

I have no idea if what the tech companies are doing is the right move or not. What I do know is that these decisions they're making aren't being taken lightly. They have incredibly strong legal teams. I think they have a pretty good idea of what they're doing. For Twitter here's a more detailed explanation for suspending Trump:

Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

Suspension of @realDonaldTrump

blog.twitter.com

I'm definitely conflicted on a lot of this. I think on one hand I totally get that many of these actions such as impeachment and social media banning will continue to churn the right wing propaganda machine, ultimately riling up the Trump base. On the other hand, Trump needs to be held accountable. We simply can't normalize his behavior. It's definitely a conundrum.

 

[EOTL]

This is the Bloated Buffoon’s lawyer, who had been pushing the comspiracy theory that the election was fraudulent and who is 0-60 in court telling magats to murder the VP of the US. Yet still, the magats here insist there is no connection between the President’s statements and the insurrection. What dumbs**t apologists and seditionists.

 

[Grace T.]

I have no idea if what the tech companies are doing is the right move or not. What I do know is that these decisions they're making aren't being taken lightly. They have incredibly strong legal teams. I think they have a pretty good idea of what they're doing. For Twitter here's a more detailed explanation for suspending Trump:

Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump

Suspension of @realDonaldTrump

blog.twitter.com

I'm definitely conflicted on a lot of this. I think on one hand I totally get that many of these actions such as impeachment and social media banning will continue to churn the right wing propaganda machine, ultimately riling up the Trump base. On the other hand, Trump needs to be held accountable. We simply can't normalize his behavior. It's definitely a conundrum.

The legal teams aren’t making the decisions. The people in charge of the censorship (at Twitter some of whom have known d affiliates) tell their bosses we should do x. The bosses say yeah or nah pitch it to the lawyers. The lawyers don’t say good or not: they say on the one hand if you do this y can happen, and if you don’t z could happen, but we don’t really know and here are up teen parades of horrible to the contrary. The lawyers aren’t making their decisions...they are trying to avoid making concrete rulings on their own and advise the client of the pros and cons. And not all in house teams are strong. Don’t know about Twitter but many of them are idiots.

 

[NorCalDad]

The legal teams aren’t making the decisions. The people in charge of the censorship (at Twitter some of whom have known d affiliates) tell their bosses we should do x. The bosses say yeah or nah pitch it to the lawyers. The lawyers don’t say good or not: they say on the one hand if you do this y can happen, and if you don’t z could happen, but we don’t really know and here are up teen parades of horrible to the contrary. The lawyers aren’t making their decisions...they are trying to avoid making concrete rulings on their own and advise the client of the pros and cons. And not all in house teams are strong. Don’t know about Twitter but many of them are idiots.

That's not true at all. You actually have no idea how the inner workings of these social media companies work. Legal teams at these companies have way more say than perhaps other institutions you may be familiar with. Trust me on this.

 

[EOTL]

The legal teams aren’t making the decisions. The people in charge of the censorship (at Twitter some of whom have known d affiliates) tell their bosses we should do x. The bosses say yeah or nah pitch it to the lawyers. The lawyers don’t say good or not: they say on the one hand if you do this y can happen, and if you don’t z could happen, but we don’t really know and here are up teen parades of horrible to the contrary. The lawyers aren’t making their decisions...they are trying to avoid making concrete rulings on their own and advise the client of the pros and cons. And not all in house teams are strong. Don’t know about Twitter but many of them are idiots.

Now Grace Karen wants to censor the employees of the privately-owned company that she wants to force to allow her Orange Julius to overthrow the government of the US through their company. Seriously, how could someone be this stupid? That’s right, she’s a magat.

Oh, and if she thinks lawyers should be making decisions, how does she feel about this one:

 

[EOTL]

That's not true at all. You actually have no idea how the inner workings of these social media companies work. Legal teams at these companies have way more say than perhaps other institutions you may be familiar with. Trust me on this.

You are correct. Sue also has no idea how the law works either.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Bloomberg is reporting the Ds on Monday are going to file impeachment charges that include inciting insurrection.

1. There's no basis for that charge. Trump never ordered them to storm the Capitol
2. They're probably not serious about it. If they were they'd file it tonight and keep in session through the weekend.
3. Tactically it's a mistake. He has a right to counsel and there's no way to put a trial in the Senate that quickly to remove him before inauguration. Leads me to believe its a political stunt. They could try to do it post hoc to bar him from future elections, but then that's Biden's first 100 days.
4. He's cowed right now with no friends and allies. This will just inflame things again with his supporters, force some of the Rs to rally around him, and create more violence and restore his political chances with his supporters. It's a mistake.

trump will never hold federal office again.

 

[Grace T.]

That's not true at all. You actually have no idea how the inner workings of these social media companies work. Legal teams at these companies have way more say than perhaps other institutions you may be familiar with. Trust me on this.

not true at all. I do speak from personal experience and my younger brother was second in command of a law department at one of the big tech companies until very recent. They off course have a say. No tech company would ever make a decision without their input. They don’t make decisions though and unless something is black law illegal no in house lawyer would ever say “you can’t do that”

in house lawyers also aren’t promoted or hired for their smarts (sorry little bro). They are hired for their abilities to play corporate politics (they are minefields and lawyers are generally bad at interpersonal stuff and communication with human beings) who they know and how well they fit into the corporate culture.

 

[watfly]

It is a terrible mistake silencing a side you do not agree with. And they have been doing it much more over the past year.

With these big corporations, there are only a few big platforms that reach the masses. The owners of these platforms have started to take sides. NOT a good thing.

The greatest threat to leftists is an opposing opinion. That's why we have cancel culture, etc.

Regardless of what side it may fall, being a prisoner of a narrative requires you to be proficient in mental gymnastics and also creates an environment for mob violence like we've seen in Portland, Seattle and DC.

 

[EOTL]

The greatest threat to leftists is an opposing opinion. That's why we have cancel culture, etc.

Regardless of what side it may fall, being a prisoner of a narrative requires you to be proficient in mental gymnastics and also creates an environment for mob violence like we've seen in Portland, Seattle and DC.

When you refer to “cancel culture”, you mean the 1st Amendment and free will, which is the greatest threat to magats. They can’t handle it that people have the right to not buy My Pillows.

 

[Glitterhater]

The greatest threat to leftists is an opposing opinion. That's why we have cancel culture, etc.

Regardless of what side it may fall, being a prisoner of a narrative requires you to be proficient in mental gymnastics and also creates an environment for mob violence like we've seen in Portland, Seattle and DC.

Overall, cancel culture has gotten out of control. Can't say that applies to the idiots from this week, (good riddance!) but by and large, it can be awful.

 

[EOTL]

not true at all. I do speak from personal experience and my younger brother was second in command of a law department at one of the big tech companies until very recent. They off course have a say. No tech company would ever make a decision without their input. They don’t make decisions though and unless something is black law illegal no in house lawyer would ever say “you can’t do that”

in house lawyers also aren’t promoted or hired for their smarts (sorry little bro). They are hired for their abilities to play corporate politics (they are minefields and lawyers are generally bad at interpersonal stuff and communication with human beings) who they know and how well they fit into the corporate culture.

It kind of makes you wonder when things went wrong with Grace-Karen to make her cynical and depressed about everything. In house attorneys absolutely are hired for their abilities. I’m guessing Grace-Karen was not hired because of her lack of ability and needed a way to rationalize that in her own mind. I mean the price was right for an unpaid internship...

 

[watfly]

For fucks sake this is out of control, Anti-fa and BLMers attacked a Patriot March in PB and my 17 yo daughter and her friends were just shopping and got stuck in the middle of the melee. This shit has to stop. Anyone who minimizes any of this because of the "why" can go to hell or a groundhog day of a Costco Saturday with free samples.

 

[NorCalDad]

not true at all. I do speak from personal experience and my younger brother was second in command of a law department at one of the big tech companies until very recent. They off course have a say. No tech company would ever make a decision without their input. They don’t make decisions though and unless something is black law illegal no in house lawyer would ever say “you can’t do that”

in house lawyers also aren’t promoted or hired for their smarts (sorry little bro). They are hired for their abilities to play corporate politics (they are minefields and lawyers are generally bad at interpersonal stuff and communication with human beings) who they know and how well they fit into the corporate culture.

Every comment you make on this exposes you even further. You literally have no idea what you're talking about. How about this, go on linkedin and look at the legal teams for many of these companies in the news and look at their credentials.

 

[Grace T.]

]

Every comment you make on this exposes you even further. You literally have no idea what you're talking about. How about this, go on linkedin and look at the legal teams for many of these companies in the news and look at their credentials.

Credentials have NOTHING to do with legal ability. One of the best lawyers and one that I most admire, both for his ability to navigate corporate culture and from ability to think through legal issues, is from a nothing law school in Los Angeles.

I went to one of the best law schools in the country. Half my classmates were idiots.

Every comment you make on this exposes you even further. You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Credentialism has nothing to do with competence.

We see this problem, BTW, with those idiots that are running health policy on the pandemic. And it's this attitude from the upper middle class ("oh my credential....look at me") that is one of the factors directly responsible for what we are seeing going on with the right and left this days. You credentials don't mean anything other than you are good at taking tests.

 

[NorCalDad]

Look this isn't hard. Every American/Patriot should be pretty unsettled with with what happened on Wednesday. Slate does an amazing job summarizing the timeline:

Congress Has All the Impeachment Evidence It Needs

The attack on the Capitol didn’t start with Trump’s speech. He’s been fomenting insurrection for weeks.

slate.com

This wasn't just about Wednesday, it's the culmination of everything that happened up to that point. Slate even skipped that key quotes before the election that the only way he could lose the election is if it was rigged. The list is pretty huge.

Trump and others need to be held accountable for this. I do worry how this is handled though. I think @Grace T. is right here that Wednesday was just the beginning.

 

[Grace T.]

Look this isn't hard. Every American/Patriot should be pretty unsettled with with what happened on Wednesday. Slate does an amazing job summarizing the timeline:

Congress Has All the Impeachment Evidence It Needs

The attack on the Capitol didn’t start with Trump’s speech. He’s been fomenting insurrection for weeks.

slate.com

This wasn't just about Wednesday, it's the culmination of everything that happened up to that point. Slate even skipped that key quotes before the election that the only way he could lose the election is if it was rigged. The list is pretty huge.

Trump and others need to be held accountable for this. I do worry how this is handled though. I think @Grace T. is right here that Wednesday was just the beginning.

I agree he should resign. If he were a man of honor he would. Impeachment, though, is a tactical mistake. There's no way at this point to get it done before the inauguration....to even stand a prayer Pelosi would have had to move and finish it last Wednesday. It relieves Republicans of their Trump problem, will forment more violence, and will take away a huge chunk of attention from Joe Biden's first 100 days. Further, Trump never said go attack the Capitol...he specifically told his supporters to go home...that would be a clear and easy line which all Americans could get behind....all the Slate points are grey and leave it up to argument. It sets up a horrible precedent....from now on what we will see is whenever the House is in the hands of the other party, that party will move to impeach...and both Joe Biden (for Huntergate) and Kamala Harris (for her own support of the Antifa violence) already have openings (note it doesn't even need to specifically wait to 2022....with the economy in the mess that it is in all it takes is a handful of open seats and we are potentially there since every seat swings 2 votes). Finally, today there's already been a series of partisan violence and the night is still very young....with the tech company moves things are escalating. What we need now is a calming of the partisanship and unity, not further poking of the bear. Does he deserve impeachment? Maybe (I'm a very strict constructionalist)....but it's not a good idea.

Besides, if you knife Caesar the only thing you do is give Anthony room for the speech.

 

[Glitterhater]

For fucks sake this is out of control, Anti-fa and BLMers attacked a Patriot March in PB and my 17 yo daughter and her friends were just shopping and got stuck in the middle of the melee. This shit has to stop. Anyone who minimizes any of this because of the "why" can go to hell or a groundhog day of a Costco Saturday with free samples.

So sorry. I hope she and her friends are ok! There is nothing ok about that at all.

 

[Grace T.]

the absolute blatant double standards.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1346957786517671937

 

[NorCalDad]

]


Credentials have NOTHING to do with legal ability. One of the best lawyers and one that I most admire, both for his ability to navigate corporate culture and from ability to think through legal issues, is from a nothing law school in Los Angeles.

I went to one of the best law schools in the country. Half my classmates were idiots.

Every comment you make on this exposes you even further. You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Credentialism has nothing to do with competence.

We see this problem, BTW, with those idiots that are running health policy on the pandemic. And it's this attitude from the upper middle class ("oh my credential....look at me") that is one of the factors directly responsible for what we are seeing going on with the right and left this days. You credentials don't mean anything other than you are good at taking tests.

You do realize credentials include work experience, right?

I've been in tech for a really long time (25+ years). I've seen things. While I agree there is generally a corporate legal team at all of these companies that handles standard legal issues, many also have a legal arm that is directly responsible for things like we've seen over the last few days. For example do you understand how many legal requests these companies get from government entities? Do you think the people handling those requests are the same lawyers handling internal issues/contracts/etc? For example, check out Twitter's transparency report (looks like it hasn't been updated recently, but still makes my point):

Transparency

transparency.twitter.com

BTW -- as an aside, I think the above is going to hammer Parler. Hopefully they can find more funding outside of the Mercer family. Maybe Peter Thiel will jump in, but I suspect most VCs will stay away.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt. There are companies in the valley that are not in the same space as the companies in question. So, for example, Oracle may not need to have the same legal team structure as say Facebook. They have different requirements.

 

[Glitterhater]

the absolute blatant double standards.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1346957786517671937

This was and still is, so cringe-worthy.