Clarence Thomas: Supreme Court Will Soon Have to Address Tech Censorship

Lol what an odd question. No, I did not. Why do you ask?

 

Are you making excuses for any or all of them?

 

How is the government threatening Twitter?

He is an advocate for removing free legal representation for people too poor to afford it, for allowing states to endorse religious belief, for allowing abortion to be banned, for overturning elements of press freedoms and expressed sympathy for the false claims the election was stolen.

He is a partisan extremist. Just because he writes opinion well doesn’t change this. The nation will be a better place when he can no longer damage it further.

 

I’m making excuses for their freedom. Why aren’t you?

 

If you got banned from shopping at a store that required/allowed you express your political views, would you support the store?

Trump was not banned for what he did. He was banned for speaking.

 

Bad analogy because none of those platforms require you to share political views. And of course that isn’t why trump got banned.

 

Nah.
Thomas is WRONG. And Thomas is a complete idiot.

Btw-This is a Duplicate Thread.

There was already be thread about this 12 HOURS before you posted this Dupe Thread.

Here:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...grumbles-over-trumps-social-media-ban.586721/

Anyway, in the interest of staying on topic (even in a Redundant Thread), I shall recycle my comments from the Original Thread (which I posted at 4:41 yesterday afternoon):

Thomas sounds like a crybaby.

What Thomas thinks is completely irrelevant.

His confirmation was one of the worst mistakes in Senate History.

Let him think whatever he wants.
He is free to say what he wants, just as people are free to ignore his pathetic rants.

 

It can if government uses them to do it on its behalf as is happening now.

 

Not the same at all except Thomas being in both. This has little if anything to do with Trump issues and is about all of big tech social media and their war against conservatives.

 

I was not for one moment seeking your opinion as to my analogy.

It appears to my learned eyes that indeed those agents do suppress free speech due to their running the platforms. The share of views for them is fine so long as one adheres only to Democrats curious views.

 

There are lots of conservatives on those platforms, so your entire premise is flawed.

 

What? Uses them to do what?

 

Censor other viewpoints on governments behalf.

 

Twitter isn’t censoring others viewpoints on the government’s behalf to my knowledge. Do you have a source of them doing this?

 

Thomas has "erred' much less because he keeps his mouth shut.

When he does speak he simply parrots other Hard Line Right Wing causes with no content.

With the few exceptions of the millions of dollars his wife promotes into their own pockets confirming that Justice Thomas is on the Corporate Side. Then Thomas can get a few jurisprudence "zingers" to ensure his wife will another money pot from the psudo-Republicans shoring up Thomas's willingness to vote against the Law and the Constitution.

He's a hack-for-sale.

 

To prove who the hack is ... ^^^^^^^^^^ or Thomas,

PROVIDE PROOF

 

When do you expect Twitter to kill the Biden account? When will Youtube or Facebook ban his talking points?

 

Too many are suppressed. Do you truly believe in voter suppression?

 

You can’t vote via social media. Why doesn’t fox give me a show? Is that voter suppression?

 

I did not claim voters were suppressed when voting, I called people voters since this smells like politics to me.
Banning only Republicans for daring to question the election.

Especially when Democrats questioned it, had million women marches due to them questioning the election, those were not banned by the media. In fact WAPO and NY Times supported their sedition.

 

Perhaps when he starts telling his followers half the nation are their enemies, they are stealing an election in the absence of all evidence and the only way to stop it is to march on the Capitol and fight...

 

Dems questioned actions confirmed by the fbi, not made up BS

 

As it turned out the Obama /Biden administration was corrupt and went to bat to defeat the Trump administration. This explains the strange actions of Comey (meeting with Trump as a hostile director) plus how Obama painted a picture of Trump and the Russians as good pals. This was proven by Mueller to be a lie.

 

It's a big issue, but I also fear this could set a concerning precedent for government getting involved in the domain of free speech.


Here's an idea: What if each state passed a law that internet services providers cannot have an automatic recommended search engine unless that search engine meets neutrality standards?

People of course would still be free to manually type in the address to any search engine they wanted to use. It just wouldn't be automatically handed to them on a silver plate, or suggested to them by the physical internet or phone provider.

 

I hope you learn today what the FBI works on. It is a domestic law enforcement agency.