Yes Donald. Twitter has the right to fact check you

Well, that's different!!!!

 

Nope.

 

Not when it editorializes, but when it censors - as it now has - it destroys itself.

So sad.

 

If the forum here started adding fact check links to your posts, and not to other posters, you'd soon see it as a violation of free speech. The only fact I see here is the fact that you and twitter are using your partisan bias as a motive to censor the free speech of others. Such actions represent an assault on our constitutional liberties, and are tyrannical in nature.

 

Twitter censored Trump.

Twitter: Done

 

In censoring him, they did.

Try following along.

 

They've censored him now, so they're done.

This is the case we've been waiting for.

 

^^^Doesn't understand the issues.

 

They can attack him, but they've now silenced him.

Twitter: Done

 

So astonishingly incorrect on so many levels...

 

They cannot except under certain extreme circumstances.

 

I don't see Biden distracting anyone. Try to stay focused.

Obviously you failed to read the link.

Your loss.

 

Im sure your intellect amazes you.

 

Really?

What action, SPECIFICALLY, did the private entity, Twitter, take that violated the President's 1st amendment rights?

I'm curious to see you defend the claim that a private entity, a person to the SCOTUS, violated the government's free speech right.

You have the floor.

Start dancing.

 

^^^^
Apparently can't read or understand written English.

 

Odd isn't it, how those who are most factually challenged think it's others that should be fact checked.

 

I read it. You just can’t comprehend

Biden is focused on this too , he agrees with the president..
Hey...go get that law degree

 

Where in the first Amendment does it say that a public forum can censor free speech if it is based on the liberal agenda? So, in the interest of fairness to conservatives, which liberals are attempting to silence, this Executive Order was signed. Remember, unlike Obama's Executive Orders, this one is not making new laws. It is merely clarifying how an existing law is going to be enforced to protect conservatives, liberals, third party and independents. Of course, that does not follow the liberal adage that everyone is equal, but they will decide who is more equal. ( I cite Affirmative Action and how the Public Accommodation laws are used to violate the First Amendment Right to Religious Freedoms as two prime examples.)

 

Yup.

 

They censored him.

 

I would knock off the personal attacks.

 

Dunning Kruger alas.

 

I have no idea why this is addressed to me.

Twitter: Done

 

Strange, I quoted your post to me where you said:

"They can attack him, but they've now silenced him.

Twitter: Done"

I was pointing out that they can not "attack him". To do so is a violation of the President's First Amendment Right to Free Speech. Remember that what Twitter was attacking was about his tweet against mail-in voting, and made the false correlations to absentee voting. The President has never attacked absentee voting for those that are not resident in their home state when voting is conducted, but that the process should not be open to every voter. This opens the process to more fake and illegal votes being cast. The White House Press Secretary made a perfect example of that fact. In LA, after purging their voter lists, there are still 125% of the number of residents of the voting age registered to vote. So, if a ballot is sent out to all these registered voters, and are filled out and mailed back, how do you determine the legal votes from the fake or illegal votes? Answer: you can't. So, do you certify a vote with 25% of illegally cast votes? Or do you scrap the whole thing?