Comments (211)
sorted by:
Nameless_Mofo 441 points ago +443 / -2

Legal action when?

Section 230 revocation when?

Enough of this fucking bullshit already!

Alpha 212 points ago +219 / -7

Strongly worded letters incoming!!!

This time in bold

AnomalusCitizen7375 82 points ago +86 / -4

I'll believe it when they write it in pen... IN CURSIVE.

PyroSphere 68 points ago +68 / -0

The Founding Fathers have entered the chat...

Flipbarryfromreddit 70 points ago +71 / -1


Flipbarryfromreddit 55 points ago +56 / -1

Smart person in the comments (Most likely a patriot and MAGA) they make great ducking points!!!!! Especially at the end!!!!: **I think it is an issue of freedom of the press and Twitter is on the wrong side of history. The NY Post should hold firm. Let every member of their staff open Twitter accounts. Unless Twitter also believes in guilt by association.

Last. Twitter needs to lock the accounts of everyone who claims Russian collusion as there is no proof.**

xcvi 34 points ago +34 / -0

I wonder if Twitter would go so far as to block every GOP account if they posted those stories. Or if say a few pedes, say 100,000+, posted these stories that they would get blocked.

Jack's behavior seems like someone who is being forced to comply. I wonder if there's video on him somewhere doing something he's not supposed to.

sometimescanbefunny 15 points ago +15 / -0

Have you seen his mug? That's about as close to 100% certainty as you can get.

GulagDweller 9 points ago +10 / -1

Epstein's Ghost just entered the chat!

King5150 6 points ago +6 / -0

i hear Smack Head Dorsey likes them "Epstein" Young.

deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
PEPEpeepee 11 points ago +11 / -0

Actually there is proof that it was a hoax perpetrated by Hillary Clinton

Flipbarryfromreddit 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yep! For the Russian collusion she paid to have it made all up by Christopher Steele and others w the Steele Dossier, I’m hip

HowDidWeGetHere 8 points ago +8 / -0 (edited)

The Post isn't losing much. Most of Twitter are a bunch of Rabid leftists that don't read the Post and they absolutely appear in the right here.

They should just let the Streisand effect do its thing here.

Leatherwood 4 points ago +4 / -0

If POTUS left twitter for another platform, all of his supporters would leave. Twitter would become a hollow shell of nothing but leftist lies and celebrity gossip.

jomten 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yo by their logic Flynns phone calls were hacked

BigCovfefe 5 points ago +5 / -0


LibertyPrimeWasRight 2 points ago +2 / -0

[The Founding Fathers have looked at the chat and left in disgust].

deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
ausglitsch 6 points ago +6 / -0

hang em all

King 3 points ago +3 / -0

Hang muh freedom of the press

ausglitsch 1 point ago +1 / -0

every freedom has an attendant responsibility. they have an obligation to at least try to be honest

KaliyugaNavigator 1 point ago +1 / -0


KS-76- 2 points ago +2 / -0

All caps incoming

540k-Again 70 points ago +75 / -5

I'm gunna repeat one more time (or 1000 more times); there are plenty of real crimes being committed that have NOTHING to do with Sect 230. Sect 230 is irrelevant.

In completely unrelated info:


Bad Big Tech will end up like ENRON.

Wtf_socialismreally 44 points ago +44 / -0

Revoking platform protections is the start of this fight, period.

We need to set a precedent that this isn't okay first.

terrichris 28 points ago +28 / -0

Thwarting freedom of the press is a 1st Amendment violation.

A class action suit with NY post and its readers led by DOJ

Wtf_socialismreally 12 points ago +12 / -0

Social media also thinks that they're the press, but they aren't. They don't get access to freedom of the press.

deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
540k-Again 11 points ago +14 / -3

Again, Sect 230 isn't going to "Be Revoked" before the election is over.

So the start of this fight is to get lawful action now, and enforce the straight laws now, not argue about how 230 needs changing or is completely unconstitutional in the first place.

Wtf_socialismreally 19 points ago +19 / -0

Section 230 isn't even being revoked, and it doesn't need to be.

It needs to be clarified, which Ajit Pai has said he has the authority to do and will be doing so.

The discussion still starts with 230 nonetheless.

Stop reading posts and inferring things from them that aren't being said.

Revoking protections isn't revoking (or repealing) 230. It's saying that they're a publisher, not a platform, and they get to be liable for all the terrorists they let roam free, all the child pornography that is likely still on there, etc.

540k-Again 4 points ago +4 / -0

[Redpill] If say tomorrow, they "reinterpret" 230 to not give protections, then the crimes under 230 committed before tomorrow get to hide under the old interpretation. i.e. this is like giving bad big tech a pardon for all their crimes covered under 230 to date.

[Redpill] The whole "publisher vs Platform" arguement is bluepill garbage. The gov doesn't have the power to grant them immunity to crimes like that.

[Redpill] hey are committing crimes, including crimes which have nothing to do with 230 "protections".

[Redpill] 230 is garbage, it needs to be striken down by the Courts, AND the High Court needs to strike down the ASHWANDER RULES; but this isn't going to happen anyday soon, definately not pre-election.

The E.O. can do what people want when they talk about 230. Enforcing other REAL laws, will ENRON, bad big tech, without any bluepills of anti-trust, utility regulation, or 230 immunities/etc.

Wtf_socialismreally 6 points ago +6 / -0

If say tomorrow, they "reinterpret" 230 to not give protections, then the crimes under 230 committed before tomorrow get to hide under the old interpretation. i.e. this is like giving bad big tech a pardon for all their crimes covered under 230 to date.

It's not changing 230, but end result is the same either way: they can no longer do it. I'd rather look towards the future at this point than get stuck in the past.

The whole "publisher vs Platform" arguement is bluepill garbage. The gov doesn't have the power to grant them immunity to crimes like that.

Bullshit. Platforms are not responsible for the things people say or do. Publishers are responsible for the content they put out.

And yes -- actually the government has the power to grant anyone immunity that they want, via non-enforcement at best and full pardons at worst.

hey are committing crimes, including crimes which have nothing to do with 230 "protections".

Then -- here's a "red pill" for you -- you can reinterpret (read: clarify) 230 AND prosecute their crimes! Wow, almost like it's not a black and white issue!

230 is garbage, it needs to be striken down by the Courts, AND the High Court needs to strike down the ASHWANDER RULES; but this isn't going to happen anyday soon, definately not pre-election.

Here's one more redpill: This isn't going to happen. It's not going away. That isn't the fight that is going to happen. Sorry.

P.S. I find you insufferable.

540k-Again 2 points ago +2 / -0

To the firstpart. Just because you want to deal with forward progress, doesn't mean you have to take away justice from past wrongs.

The whole publisher vs platform framing the issue, is NOT like say a handgun/knife maker and the person who uses the weapon. A property owner, is legally responsible to some extent of the actions and conduct on their property; just as a person can't knowingly turn a blind eye to a meth lab in a house they rent out.

Third, that's not reality, because they "SUE" to have those reinterpretations overturned, or expanded or delayed, etc. This is the legal profession trap tied in with the bureaucrats. In real life, until there's about x20 more swamp draining, this doesn't work.

Sorry for the insufferability, I certainly don't mean to, but I bring a great amount of experience and knowledge.


TrumpIsGoodForUs 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ex Post Facto does not necessarily apply here. Clarification does not automatically excuse actions made before the clarification was made.

This is not the same as in criminal cases where laws have changed after the action.

540k-Again 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, It's not Ex Post Facto (which isn't even enforced at the congress level as written in the Constitution; and another redpill-- Ex Post Facto is all laws not only criminal as taught/thought/interpreted. By allowing any law/bill to be ex post facto, erodes the very premise of the rule of law.);...

it goes to the core of how and why these 4th and 5th branches of gov are unconstitutional in the first place. By having a body/agency/etc. that can make rules, interpret rules, etc. all on their own, creates a conflict; and that conflict is often intentional for some very simple reasons.

At the heart of the issue, is while the actions were be done by industry was there a reasonable assumption/expectation that what they were doing was breaking "the/a law" or not.

In the real world, the industry which wrote the law; lobbied/paid for the law to get passed; has held off any meaningful "clarifications" so far--- here with active voting going on and <3 weeks from Election "Day"; means any "new" clarifications will be written (or already are written, with all the lobbying money spent by the industry for many years now to get 230 "updated"); will be written in a way which does basically automatically assumes to excuse any prior actions before the clarification was made. (Sorry yes :(, that was one sentence; by someone who's read way too many bookracks of law, regulations, and case law.) And in case they aren't written that way, it will be litigated for years, and settled (unlawfully) without guilt.

So this is where say the H. Biden hard drives, are a perfect example of breaking bad big' techs' reasonable assumption that what they(as a company, officers, employees, investors, etc.), are or are not doing, is either directly breaking the law or helping criminal activity after the fact; (which are well outside of any 230).

tentonbudgie 2 points ago +2 / -0

If we're not enforcing anything now, why would we suddenly enforce even more violations.

Wtf_socialismreally 2 points ago +2 / -0

Loopholes, I guess.

Should tear down the DoJ and FBI and rebuild them to be honest.

mugatucrazypills 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's a FEC violation. They could raid Twitter and perpwalk Jack now if they wanted

King 1 point ago +1 / -0

How will that actually work out? They will crack down harder...and it will be harder for you to create your own shit

usausausa5000 2 points ago +3 / -1

Daily reminder the FBI suborned perjury in the Enron case.

guitarmastershredder 6 points ago +8 / -2

Fucking republicans won’t do shit.. they think these corporations are too powerful. It’s a shame. We are all fucked and we need to rise up and burn these people’s genitals

GulagDweller 6 points ago +6 / -0

Finally open these fuckers up to legal action and lawsuits and their fuckery will end soon after. These anti-American Freaks need be ended and never be permitted to head another media company ever again, after they serve their time in jail.

pokeman 3 points ago +3 / -0

When? Never. We have too many cucks in government.

GeneralPinochet 205 points ago +206 / -1

Social media companies are coordinating and not acting like competitors. They are a monopoly and Trump needs to use antitrust laws.

CitizenPlain 57 points ago +57 / -0

Yup. Action now!

AlphaNathan 35 points ago +35 / -0

What's interesting here is that twitter doesn't just delete the posts themselves. This is what the CCP does. Bow in submission before you're sentenced, so everyone knows the CCP was right.

Seriously some 1984 stuff here.

BigIronBigIron 14 points ago +14 / -0

'Do you know where you are, Winston?' he said.

'I don't know. I can guess. In the Ministry of Love.'

'Do you know how long you have been here?'

'I don't know. Days, weeks, months -- I think it is months.'

'And why do you imagine that we bring people to this place?'

'To make them confess.'

'No, that is not the reason. Try again.'

'To punish them.'

'No!' exclaimed O'Brien. His voice had changed extraordinarily, and his face had suddenly become both stern and animated. 'No! Not merely to extract your confession, not to punish you. Shall I tell you why we have brought you here? To cure you! To make you sane! Will you understand, Winston, that no one whom we bring to this place ever leaves our hands uncured? We are not interested in those stupid crimes that you have committed. The Party is not interested in the overt act: the thought is all we care about. We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them. Do you understand what I mean by that?'

He was bending over Winston. His face looked enormous because of its nearness, and hideously ugly because it was seen from below. Moreover it was filled with a sort of exaltation, a lunatic intensity. Again Winston's heart shrank. If it had been possible he would have cowered deeper into the bed. He felt certain that O'Brien was about to twist the dial out of sheer wantonness. At this moment, however, O'Brien turned away. He took a pace or two up and down. Then he continued less vehemently:

'The first thing for you to understand is that in this place there are no martyrdoms. You have read of the religious persecutions of the past. In the Middle Ages there was the Inquisition. It was a failure. It set out to eradicate heresy, and ended by perpetuating it. For every heretic it burned at the stake, thousands of others rose up. Why was that? Because the Inquisition killed its enemies in the open, and killed them while they were still unrepentant: in fact, it killed them because they were unrepentant. Men were dying because they would not abandon their true beliefs. Naturally all the glory belonged to the victim and all the shame to the Inquisitor who burned him. Later, in the twentieth century, there were the totalitarians, as they were called. There were the German Nazis and the Russian Communists. The Russians persecuted heresy more cruelly than the Inquisition had done. And they imagined that they had learned from the mistakes of the past; they knew, at any rate, that one must not make martyrs. Before they exposed their victims to public trial, they deliberately set themselves to destroy their dignity. They wore them down by torture and solitude until they were despicable, cringing wretches, confessing whatever was put into their mouths, covering themselves with abuse, accusing and sheltering behind one another, whimpering for mercy. And yet after only a few years the same thing had happened over again. The dead men had become martyrs and their degradation was forgotten. Once again, why was it? In the first place, because the confessions that they had made were obviously extorted and untrue. We do not make mistakes of that kind. All the confessions that are uttered here are true. We make them true. And above all we do not allow the dead to rise up against us. You must stop imagining that posterity will vindicate you, Winston. Posterity will never hear of you. You will be lifted clean out from the stream of history. We shall turn you into gas and pour you into the stratosphere. Nothing will remain of you, not a name in a register, not a memory in a living brain. You will be annihilated in the past as well as in the future. You will never have existed.'

Then why bother to torture me? thought Winston, with a momentary bitterness. O'Brien checked his step as though Winston had uttered the thought aloud. His large ugly face came nearer, with the eyes a little narrowed.

'You are thinking,' he said, 'that since we intend to destroy you utterly, so that nothing that you say or do can make the smallest difference -- in that case, why do we go to the trouble of interrogating you first? That is what you were thinking, was it not?'

'Yes,' said Winston.

O'Brien smiled slightly. 'You are a flaw in the pattern, Winston. You are a stain that must be wiped out. Did I not tell you just now that we are different from the persecutors of the past? We are not content with negative obedience, nor even with the most abject submission. When finally you surrender to us, it must be of your own free will. We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us: so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him. We burn all evil and all illusion out of him; we bring him over to our side, not in appearance, but genuinely, heart and soul. We make him one of ourselves before we kill him. It is intolerable to us that an erroneous thought should exist anywhere in the world, however secret and powerless it may be. Even in the instant of death we cannot permit any deviation. In the old days the heretic walked to the stake still a heretic, proclaiming his heresy, exulting in it. Even the victim of the Russian purges could carry rebellion locked up in his skull as he walked down the passage waiting for the bullet. But we make the brain perfect before we blow it out. The command of the old despotisms was "Thou shalt not". The command of the totalitarians was "Thou shalt". Our command is "Thou art". No one whom we bring to this place ever stands out against us. Everyone is washed clean. Even those three miserable traitors in whose innocence you once believed -- Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford -- in the end we broke them down. I took part in their interrogation myself. I saw them gradually worn down, whimpering, grovelling, weeping -- and in the end it was not with pain or fear, only with penitence. By the time we had finished with them they were only the shells of men. There was nothing left in them except sorrow for what they had done, and love of Big Brother. It was touching to see how they loved him. They begged to be shot quickly, so that they could die while their minds were still clean.'

His voice had grown almost dreamy. The exaltation, the lunatic enthusiasm, was still in his face. He is not pretending, thought Winston, he is not a hypocrite, he believes every word he says. What most oppressed him was the consciousness of his own intellectual inferiority. He watched the heavy yet graceful form strolling to and fro, in and out of the range of his vision. O'Brien was a being in all ways larger than himself. There was no idea that he had ever had, or could have, that O'Brien had not long ago known, examined, and rejected. His mind contained Winston's mind. But in that case how could it be true that O'Brien was mad? It must be he, Winston, who was mad. O'Brien halted and looked down at him. His voice had grown stern again.

'Do not imagine that you will save yourself, Winston, however completely you surrender to us. No one who has once gone astray is ever spared. And even if we chose to let you live out the natural term of your life, still you would never escape from us. What happens to you here is for ever. Understand that in advance. We shall crush you down to the point from which there is no coming back. Things will happen to you from which you could not recover, if you lived a thousand years. Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feeling. Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty, and then we shall fill you with ourselves.'

PraiseBeToScience 6 points ago +6 / -0

I suspect most people who talk about 1984 haven't actually read it, and only know "spying and totalitarianism!"

The entire last half of the book, the conversations between Winston and O'Brien, about the nature of reality, what is real, what isn't, and how everything you think is completely unreliable, was the real meat of the story.

WilleZumLeben 3 points ago +3 / -0

Trippy. And agreed.

tentonbudgie 1 point ago +6 / -5


soyface_deluxe 10 points ago +10 / -0


BigIronBigIron 7 points ago +7 / -0

Relevant 1984 is all you need to know.

Fizbin7 33 points ago +35 / -2

Fuck that weak shit, raid the place and seize everything.

IAbsolutelyDare 21 points ago +21 / -0

Then antitrust the rubble.

Test_user21 9 points ago +11 / -2

There have been some rumours the FBI will seize their domain names -we'll see

Fizbin7 24 points ago +24 / -0

If the FBI were the ones to seize them, it would be to turn them over to the CCP.

Send Treasury agents. The FBI is a wholly owned subsidiary of the communist party.

horsefacestorm 9 points ago +9 / -0

FBI, what a shit organization. Shut them down.

soyface_deluxe 1 point ago +1 / -0

The treasury was infiltrated by the deep state long before the FBI was created.

At_The_Rally 5 points ago +5 / -0




Salt-N-Pepe 3 points ago +3 / -0


sustainable_saltmine 101 points ago +102 / -1


MostlyPeaceful 27 points ago +29 / -2

He surely should, but don't get too worked up. We're talking about tortious acts. These would be the subject of civil litigation, not involving a jail cell.

NazisWereSocialist 18 points ago +18 / -0

😢 now you’re going to tell me there’s not going to be gallows either 😤

MostlyPeaceful 4 points ago +4 / -0

I'd rather see him broken and shitting on the streets of LA.

ChuckedBeef 6 points ago +6 / -0

Election rigging certainly is a jailable offense.

MostlyPeaceful 3 points ago +3 / -0

Hey man. Don't let me stop you from dreaming. I want it as bad as you do.

I just think realistically, the best shot we have is hitting them in the pockets. Once its established without any ounce of ambiguity that what they're doing is wrong, we can work on smacking the shit out of the woke until they start breathing again.

Churchill 4 points ago +4 / -0

I don’t know — if the company is expending a lot of special efforts to protect the Biden campaign, that seems like a political contribution.

MostlyPeaceful 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's gonna take a papertrail. Dorsey wont even admit to recalling what his platform did 5 hours ago when put in front of a panel, and who the fuck is gonna sign the subpoenas?

All we have to leverage right now is their finances.

But that doesn't have to be the end. Our leaders still haven't found their spines. Politicians persist in what they do in the aim of gaining, maintaining and furthering power. Without adhering to this truth, they'd lose. It also seems to make them incredibly risk averse as a rule.

This election will give them their answers about whether or not its politically expedient to save the world.

Cynical? Fuck yeah it is. But until recently, incremental change was how we always operated. Everyone but the big guy is still playing backroom wheel-and-deal.

The democrats, wicked though they may be, played the best hand they had in tying up the system with their collusion circus. It hit everyone in washington on both sides of the aisle in exactly the right spot. Don't think for a moment that every last one of them don't have their hand in somebody's honeypot.

The message was, "don't get in our way while we fuck him or else"

Trump is more than a President. He's an idea. We need that idea to continue to blossom into a confident, coherent and unified movement.

Then we take the fight to them.

Churchill 2 points ago +2 / -0

Simply floating the potential of their biased treatment being viewed as political contributions, bringing campaign finance laws into play, can put fear into them and move them to stop.

MostlyPeaceful 1 point ago +1 / -0

One can only hope.

xcvi 4 points ago +4 / -0

Lol Jack's acting like Xi and the dems got something on him.

MostlyPeaceful 2 points ago +2 / -0

Probably gizz. Lots.

540k-Again 2 points ago +9 / -7

[Redpills] The lefties are baiting on 230, just like the leftie skirmishers of antifa/blm are baiting to try to get Patriots into melee range.

WHO DO YOU THINK WROTE 230 in the first place, who do you think has been spending shitloads of money (even pre covid) on Capital Hill and congressional races to UPDATE 230???

230 is unconstitutional, it's irrelevant, the US Gov of any branch doesn't have the power to create 2 sets of laws, one for nobility(platforms) and commoners(publishers). The immunities of nobility granted by 230 are not lawful in the USA. The USA doesn't have a crown or dictatorship, it can't grant such things. Which btw is also why (US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE) there is no such lawful thing as Covid biz liability either.

[Redpills] These things are not possible, the government cant get into forcing two contracts like that, just as they cant force you to buy insurance or bake a wedding cake or forced marriage.

ChuckedBeef 10 points ago +10 / -0

Sure, and the FCC can't regulate television or radio content... oh wait...

540k-Again -3 points ago +4 / -7

The swamp and bureaucratic commies have made "rule-making rules on the rules". So like the unconstitutional "Adminstrative Procedures Act" that they sued GEOTUS/WH on, any Administrative "Rule" by the 4th and 5th branches of gov would take far longer than this election cycle.

The E.O. enforcing the Constitution can be immediate, particularly when written well (and not sabotaged by never-Trumper/swamp creatures), since it's just enforcing the law already, and already well within the Constitutional executive powers of the Executive Branch.

BeefSupr3me 2 points ago +2 / -0

You said red pills, but these are more like black pills.

540k-Again 4 points ago +4 / -0

Blackpills would be like saying there's nothing which can be done about it. And we have many things which can be done, including an E.O. which like the CRT will make most of the big companies immediately back down.

_tiredofthebullshit 48 points ago +49 / -1

Can Trump issue an EO on this?

540k-Again 16 points ago +22 / -6

Sure can, like Riot Kitchen's funding boss who was "fired" by Arena Net

Reminder the WH Council's Office, no Sect 230 required:

Can write a 1 page E.O. for GEOTUS to sign, that will immediately end all marxist big tech interference and marxist media interference, and heck most major companies' election interferences too:

Every company shall be either 1 or 2:

1.) Is entirely American owned, employed, revenued, domiciled, funded, etc.; or

2.) Stop interfering with the American Election and Political Processes; or shall

Divest their foreign nationals in their employ or contracts; foreign investors; foreign revenue; foreign ownerships; and sequester any tainted fruit revenue/contracts from past entanglements; until they comply with #1 or #2.

Interfering in the American Election and domestic Poltical Process is not the right of foreign nationals, either directly or through companies; and violates the rights of American Citizens for which our Republic Stands. And the proper role for foreign-US policial process is through their foreign government and the President (and State Dept) as per the US Constitution.

[The American People in the Constitution, never gave any branch or level of government the power to give foreign nationals to interfere in our domestic policial and electoral processes.]

Any company violating this, like the CRT E.O. puts them in non-compliance with US Laws for government contracts and including visa documents; and other measures until they are in compliance with either #1 or #2.


Wtf_socialismreally 19 points ago +19 / -0

I keep seeing this post and it's stupid.

Just because they're American made, owned and operated does not give them the right to interfere with the election.

ClownTamer 5 points ago +5 / -0

It’s also easy to get around. Just buy an American company, or an America company that owns another American company. Get someone that’s technically a citizen here to buy it but they’re really a CCP operative. On and on. It’s really easy to buy your way into capitalism if you have enough capital, which is one of its few flaws. Despite how much the left hates capitalism, there’d be no left without it because they couldn’t throw money at everybody to get them to do as commanded.

If we can get the Supreme Court, and clarify 230 to mean what it very obviously was intended to mean, Big Tech loses it’s platform protection as the cases pile up. Then, the gang rape begins, or, they stop trying to 1984 everybody. Personally, I want Zuck and Jack and all of them at the very least arrested. They know what they’re doing and they know its wrong and they’re doubling down on it, especially Jack.

540k-Again -1 points ago +1 / -2 (edited)

Just because they're American made, owned and operated does not give them the right to interfere with the election.

Of course it doesn't. But that legal arguement is a separate one than from foreign companies. By spliting them first into foreign and domestic companies; separates out how and where the "rights" of these companies come from. We Americans didn't give the government of any branch or level the power to Give to even domestic only companies, to partake in our politics either, but this can wait, as this domestic company issue wouldn't be solved by E.O. and would take longer than this election cycle.

This E.O. can be done immediately for foreign nationals involvement through companies. Which does of course also includes the foreign owned NYT and others whom are very active in our election cycle, not just bystanders reporting the news.

PS Keep in mind, nearly every major company, and 100% of the big bad actors will be in the foreign box, not the domestic only box.

AnomalusCitizen7375 4 points ago +4 / -0

I'm pretty sure he has, and laws already exist that should protect people from this IIRC.

IAbsolutelyDare 2 points ago +2 / -0

laws already exist that should protect people from this IIRC.

1A comes to mind...

Alpha 48 points ago +48 / -0

How about we seize their domain until they stop being commies?



Fizbin7 17 points ago +17 / -0

Yes exactly. Take their domain, freeze their bank accounts, issue a finding that they are a communist front organization, and RICO the lot of them.

deleted 30 points ago +34 / -4
Toughsky_Shitsky 10 points ago +11 / -1

. . . And, sadly, this social media bias isn't the only serious issue that is going unanswered by our side. Did you know that members of the intelligence community tried to overthrow a duly elected president, likely at the direction of the previous President? Because there is zero evidence that anybody in charge of meting out justice for that treasonous act gives a shit. Did someone claim "Law and Order"? Really? Not much proof that, if we're honest.

ProphetOfKek 7 points ago +7 / -0

That’s the most difficult upvote I’ve given.

redstampede 28 points ago +29 / -1

Why the fuck isn't the Post suing them into oblivion?

Fizbin7 17 points ago +17 / -0

Why is it up to the Post and as slow a legal proceeding? Why doesn't the US government simply enforce our fundamental civil rights, the same at they would if the Klan tried to lock people out of a diner?

redstampede 5 points ago +5 / -0

I want prosecution and civil suits. Bury Twitter in litigation until they either implode or have to purge all the assholes.

HumbleMemeFarmer 8 points ago +8 / -0

I’m wondering why shareholders haven’t brought derivative suit against Twitter for destroying value following the political whims of management.

ElectricChad 26 points ago +26 / -0

Nothing about bias could possibly be more obvious. Heads need to roll. Jack first!

cjcivicx 16 points ago +16 / -0



MostlyPeaceful 3 points ago +3 / -0

They'll keep fighting...

And they'll win.

deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
MustafaJones 12 points ago +13 / -1

Executive action, legal action, whatever action, but it needs to happen now. This is getting out of hand. A major social network Corp is actively attempting shielding and censoring info about a presidential candidates corruption. This is election interference.

deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
rockaustin 9 points ago +9 / -0

Burn in hell Twitter.

Dictator_Bob 7 points ago +7 / -0

NY Post should run a headline:

"Twitter Gone Rogue" then do an expose on them and their work to corrupt and manipulate the political process in America.

KSUX 7 points ago +7 / -0

Twitter has forfeited their section 230 protection by acting as a publisher. Time to nuke them with lawsuits.

rob0Pede 6 points ago +6 / -0

So they changed the rule to allow the content if you're not the original hacker, or not working with the hacker...then you can post it...but not you, New York Post, you still have to delete it because we don't retroactively change enforcements. WTF mental gymnastics is that? And also, IT WASNT HACKED YOU FAGGOTS

wreckingball 2 points ago +2 / -0

So then delete it and repost it. Problem solved. Fuck you Twitter.

Dim-Ize 6 points ago +6 / -0

Seems like several years of my life included a daily MSM beating about "election interferece". Hmmm can't put my finger on it though.

LanaForge 5 points ago +5 / -0 (edited)

the NYpost could potentially sue them if they wanted because of this, section 230 does not protect them from something they did themselves, only from user posted content, but this was just twitter suppressing stuff, has nothing to do with 230... in fact you could say that it make even LESS sense that they did it BECAUSE of section 230

If they are not liable for any content posted by users, then why the hell did they did so much to suppress it? what if it was false? they wouldn't answer for it.

And I do think it falls into the 1st amendment because twitter is in every way, shape and form a public forum, doesn't mater if its privately owned or not

Traditional public forums include public parks, sidewalks and areas that have been traditionally open to political speech and debate.

One can safely say that twitter categorization falls into an "area that has been traditionally open to political speech and debate"

One thing I don't understand about the 1st amendment is if protects citizens from suppression from anyone or just that from the government though

edit: nvm... 1st amendment does not apply to the private sector

NazisWereSocialist 5 points ago +5 / -0


1776WILLCOMMENCE 5 points ago +5 / -0

I feel like they're being this brazen because they know they can get away with it. Really hope this is the tipping point for action to protect us from big tech, but we'll see.

astro_eng 5 points ago +6 / -1

When will we CANCEL Twitter????

Fizbin7 5 points ago +5 / -0

So send Treasury Agents to Twitter Headquarters with guns and lock them all out of the building until the New York Post's account is back up.

HungNavySeal300Kills 2 points ago +2 / -0

Put them all on no fly lists and hunt them down.

Seize their corporate assets and auction them to pay for the investigation.

Churchill 4 points ago +4 / -0

Shouldn’t these companies efforts on behalf of the Biden campaign be viewed as political contributions?

ca_logistician 4 points ago +4 / -0

why should they delete a factual article that has been verified by other news sources? The "it was hacked" is a lie. Hunter lost ownership of the computer when he failed to pick it up and pay for it.

However, Twatter had no issue amplifying trumps tax returns which were "hacked"

Jimiguitarguy 4 points ago +4 / -0

How about. 1 billion dollar fine for election tampering?

BlackHorse 2 points ago +2 / -0

For each violation.

silent_majority_2020 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's extortion.

incogneato 2 points ago +2 / -0

and blackmail

Wildflower11 4 points ago +4 / -0

I would love to see a lawsuit between NYP and Twit!

TearofLys 4 points ago +4 / -0

Jack Dorsey choked down so far on that Soros cock, those dusty old balls are banging off his chin.

AnomalusCitizen7375 4 points ago +4 / -0

I was expecting them to die on a hill defending pedophiles, but I guess they figured out that wasn't doing them any favors so they've decided to go for censorship instead lol

mass55th 3 points ago +3 / -0

So much for Dorsey's claim that blocking The New York Post story was handled badly. How much money are the Chi-Coms paying Twitter, Facebook, YouTube???

Chuj 3 points ago +3 / -0

Multiple confirmations that the story, computer, emails are authentic. Pure cover up at this point. Election interference

thebigbear 3 points ago +3 / -0

Post needs to start a SPECIFIC lawsuit (Aka more to come and ability to branch to a Class Action) so the case and actions if not RESOLVED can go to Supreme Court. Basis for action on resolving the 230 determination of what actual protections a PUBLISHER has in controlling free speech. This is a direct 1A violation(Freedom of the Press) and the Post needs to grow a pair and start the lawsuit. This allows DISCOVERY and Twitter loses its ability to control the narrative. Guys and Gals, the war is on and Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, Reddit, and all Social Media Platforms need to get stripped of the 230 protection but it can not happen UNLESS THERE IS A LEGAL CASE OR PRECEDENT. Store up, Arm up, Stand-by.


DX5_ 3 points ago +3 / -0

Maybe next they'll lock Trump's account. If they did I wouldn't care, perhaps that's what it will take to get some changes.

PinkoPatrol 3 points ago +3 / -0

So yeah, totally a publisher, right?





learntocode 3 points ago +3 / -0

You can avoid linking twitter directly by swapping nitter.net in for twitter.com in links.

Nitter gets rid of spyware, ads, javascript, and shadowbanning. You can see anything published and Twitter takes a hit on their servers but gets nothing in return.

And stop using the service. Go elsewhere or do something better with your time.

WindsOfWinter 3 points ago +3 / -0


Dudewho 3 points ago +3 / -0

Fuck revoking it, just sue. And if in court they claim they are immune cuz of 230 or whatever, say otherwise. They've clearly acted as a publisher for some time now, and thus they are able to be held liable for everything on their site. Any judge worth a shit would see that. I know they'd be scared under threat to not rule that way, but find a good judge..

rush 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is BULLSHIT , they are filling gambling that they can alter their platform enough to get Biden in and skirt regulation

QueensOwn 3 points ago +3 / -0

Do we even have a Justice Department anymore?

Flipbarryfromreddit 3 points ago +3 / -0


TheDonWon 3 points ago +3 / -0

They win if you delete it

deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
Peacebears 3 points ago +3 / -0

Omg image censoring journalist

shovels3 3 points ago +3 / -0

These faggots are pissing me off

mugatucrazypills 3 points ago +3 / -0



Oskar 2 points ago +2 / -0

Enjoy your fun while it lasts, twitter, facebag, etc. Make all your mistakes, accidentally erase people. Fuck with the one of the oldest Newspapers in the country.

Do it quick though. Your time is running out

Dominick 2 points ago +2 / -0

But Trump is a threat to freedom of the press.

PoppinKREAM 2 points ago +2 / -0

Didn't they claim that hacked materials are okay if they're not sourced from hackers?

The fact that it wasn't hacked aside, how tf does that not clear the Hunter story?

deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
AdeptTrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

Twitter can be fucked on the horse they rode in on.

XSRRIDER 2 points ago +2 / -0

it starts at home.. keep them off these terrible platforms. they used to say "TV rots the brain" but they ain't seen nothing like this. go outside and play.