Has America Imploded? (1 Viewer)

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,683
They didn't ban the tweets for saying the election was stolen. They were attaching labels that the information was disputed or false. The bans were the result of the rising threat of violence rumunating from his supporters thats his tweets were inflaming. How'd that work out?
So, simply based on some arbitrary undefined assertion of potential some entity can unilaterally enforce the "right" to censure someone. What about Cuomo statement that: "Where does it say in the Constitution that protests have to be peaceful". (paraphrased).

Pelosi's tweet was from 2017. She does not have a large following of militia groups and hasn't yet incited an insurrection.
Playing word games. By implication, you are saying that it is OK to call for violence, but because it has not yet occurred (potential) that it can be blithely dismissed. Maybe, Pelosi's statements did not result in immediate actual physical contact, but they set a theme of irrational hyperbolic hatred by a major political leader that has outraged many people through her irrational accusations.
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,914
I think I understand what you are saying. You believe Peloski's tweet that the election was hijacked was true and therefore did not require labelling, is that correct?

In 2016 Qanon was in it's infancy and the militia groups and white supremicists were still not "out of the closet" so to speak, and they didn't feel they had the support of the president. Nobody was storming capitols while armed to the hilt, nor threatening to kidnap and kill govenors.

Are you saying trump should have been banned back then?

So, simply based on some arbitrary undefined assertion of potential some entity can unilaterally enforce the "right" to censure someone.
Do you think Twitter doesn't know what is trending on their platform?

Cuomo statement that: "Where does it say in the Constitution that protests have to be peaceful". (paraphrased).
His actual statement was:
"Please, show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful," he said. "Because I can show you that outraged citizens are what made the country what she is and led to any major milestone. To be honest, this is not a tranquil time."

"Too many see the protests as the problem," he said. "No, the problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take the streets. Persistent and poisonous inequities and injustice."
Cuomo was discussing the riots due to the police killing of unarmed black men. The current civil unrest is due to the wounded ego of trump and his insistance that he won an election he lost. Do you really see those as equivalent?
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 16:34
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
7,388
In 2016 Qanon was in it's infancy and the militia groups and white supremicists were still not "out of the closet" so to speak, and they didn't feel they had the support of the president. Nobody was storming capitols while armed to the hilt, nor threatening to kidnap and kill govenors.

Are you saying trump should have been banned back then?
This is a classic case of whataboutism. Instead of stating whether or not you believe Peloski's tweet should have been labelled or not, you avoid answering this simple question for the second post in a row. I think I know why. Because if you answer that it should be labelled, you then have admitted Twitter has double standards, which is what Republicans have been complaining about forever. And if you think it shouldn't, you must believe it to be true, and you are no different to Trump saying the election was stolen. So instead, you don't answer, because you are afraid to clearly state what you believe.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 16:34
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
7,388
"Too many see the protests as the problem," he said. "No, the problem is what forced your fellow citizens to take the streets. Persistent and poisonous inequities and injustice."
Is that what forced Trump supporters to the streets too? Or is it only when a Republican says go to the streets to protest that its a problem, and not if a Democrat says it?
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,914
This is a classic case of whataboutism. Instead of stating whether or not you believe Peloski's tweet should have been labelled or not, you avoid answering this simple question for the second post in a row. I think I know why. Because if you answer that it should be labelled, you then have admitted Twitter has double standards, which is what Republicans have been complaining about forever. And if you think it shouldn't, you must believe it to be true, and you are no different to Trump saying the election was stolen. So instead, you don't answer, because you are afraid to clearly state what you believe.
Not at all. I doubt it should have been labelled but there is no context attached to it so hard to say. When I googled it all the results were from right wing websites simply stating to the effect "See Pelosi did it too" My point was it was a different time.

What is the context of Pelosi's tweet? That tweet is from the evening of Muellers appointment. Is it about trump or the russians? Do you disagree that The russians interfered?

I really dont care what Twitters standards are. To be honest I miss the memes he inspired. I do however understand their reasoning for banning him. Twitter may be big but they're not the only player in the game. Trump could snap his fingers and every TV station worldwide would jump to hear what he wanted to say. The only difference is he couldn't do it while sitting on the shi**er.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,683
@moke123: Word games. Cognitive dissonance. The "left" protests to address some claimed injustice, then it is considered acceptable and to be disruptive (cheered on) in the name of moral justice. However, when conservatives protest to address some claimed injustice and become disruptive, amazingly it is blasted as unsubstantiated and without merit with their actions being potentially criminalized. This anti-conservative trend to suppressing conservative thought (under false assertions that this is "hate speech" or other similar phrase) appears to be accelerating. Some of those on the "left", led by AOC as one example have floated the concept of an "enemy's list" and an actual government "Ministry of Truth". Frees-speech for the "left", but not conservatives.
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,914
@moke123: Word games. Cognitive dissonance. The "left" protests to address some claimed injustice, then it is considered acceptable and to be disruptive (cheered on) in the name of moral justice. However, when conservatives protest to address some claimed injustice and become disruptive, amazingly it is blasted as unsubstantiated and without merit with their actions being potentially criminalized. This anti-conservative trend to suppressing conservative thought (under false assertions that this is "hate speech" or other similar phrase) appears to be accelerating. Some of those on the "left", led by AOC as one example have floated the concept of an "enemy's list" and an actual government "Ministry of Truth". Frees-speech for the "left", but not conservatives.
You seem to think that all democrats walk in lockstep and that republicans are always a victim of something. Politicians on both sides say some pretty stupid shit but that doesn't mean all republicans or all democrats agree with it. Why are you so obsessed with AOC?
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,683
You seem to think that all democrats walk in lockstep and that republicans are always a victim of something. Politicians on both sides say some pretty stupid shit but that doesn't mean all republicans or all democrats agree with it. Why are you so obsessed with AOC?
Look at the voting, Democrats do march in lock step. No questions allowed. Queen Pelosi commands and they blindly obey.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
43,257
His quote to storm DC and "be wild"
Where exactly, in his actual comment did Trump suggest anything not peaceful? Just as a refresher -
Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild
You are taking this comment and making it something it is not. Trump says what he means and he means what he says!!!!!!! This has been his modus operandi for over FOUR YEARS. That drives the pundits crazy. They can't handle it so they have to "interpret" his remarks and tell you what he is REALLY SAYING! Otherwise, you'll think he's actually an OK guy.
Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!
Is not an incitement to violence! Have you not ever referred to a "good time" as "wild"? I'll tell you what Trump was really saying:

It will be fabulous to be with like thinking people and we'll have a great time and march to the Capitol so that the people in there voting will know we are outside and we are watching what they do so that hopefully, they will do the right thing.
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,914
Interesting article on trumps twitter ban ...

A Twitter user recently launched an experiment to see what action the platform would take if he started posting Donald Trump's controversial tweets word for word. It took only three days for Twitter to notice and suspend the user.

The account, @SuspendThePres, launched May 29 and started to post tweets identical to those sent on Trump's Twitter. The premise was simple, according to Bizarre Lazar, the Twitter user behind the account: see how long it would take Twitter to take action against him for violating platform policies.

It took just three days for Twitter to flag one of the tweets from @SuspendThePres for violating its terms of service. Twitter temporarily suspended the account and forced the user to delete the offending tweet. The tweet in question mimicked Trump's tweetin which he refers to protesters as "thugs" and says "when the looting starts, the shooting starts."

1610828936774.png


Twitter didn't completely ignore Trump's tweet. It gave the post a warning label for "glorifying violence" against police-brutality protesters. While Twitter gave Trump a slap on the wrist, @SuspendThePres received a 12-hour suspension for the same tweet, which demonstrated the discrepancies in how the platform's policies are applied to politicians and high-profile figures versus average users.


"My intention was to see if the things the president was saying, coming from a civilian, would be flagged," Bizarre Lazar told Business Insider. "Really I wanted to simply see if Twitter would play favorites on speech and their terms."

The president's active Twitter presence — and tendency to use it to make official announcements and launch attacks against opponents — has put the platform under increased scrutiny. Twitter has been forced to emphasize and clarify its policies around tweets from government officials and taken the stance that it won't take action against tweets that go against the policies in the name of "public interest."

Twitter took unprecedented action against Trump's account just last month when it fact-checked two of his tweets containing false claims about voting by mail. The move almost immediately prompted Trump to issue an executive order targeting Section 230, a statute that allows social-media companies to regulate the content on their platforms and protects them from being liable for what users post.

Trump's executive order is what prompted Bizarre Lazar to start his @SuspendThePres experiment, he said. It took three days for Twitter to flag the mimicking tweet from @SuspendThePres. According to a screenshot Bizarre Lazar shared online, Twitter required that the offending tweet be removed and implemented restrictions on the account for a 12-hour period.

11aa11111.jpg


Now @SuspendThePres is back online without any restrictions. A Twitter spokesperson told Business Insider in a statement that it was "misleading" to classify its action against the account as a "suspension" and emphasized that the account is now active.

Since the temporary suspension, Bizarre Lazar has continued posting Trump's tweets verbatim from @SuspendThePres.

"A lot of people's opinions are split on Twitters decision. I think Twitter is locked in a very tough position," Bizarre Lazar said. "Either way I'm pretty glad it isn't a decision I have to make. I'm bald enough already."
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
43,257
Now do Mitch.
So you think Mitch is on Trump's side? Ha, ha, ha. I'll bet you thought Paul Ryan was helping Trump also. Somehow I don't think Trump encouraged Mitch to go along with Nancy's joke impeachment and yet he did :)
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
43,257
And I assume you have facts to back that up?
I think they may by with the affidavits posted on Sydney Powell's website. But I'm sure they've been "debunked".
Trump and Biden doing the same horrible actions
When, exactly, did Trump sell out his country to the Chinese and the Russians? Or do you not think that selling "influence" to foreign states is treason? Um, my son takes money from China and I say nice things about China in public and vote for bills that will help them?
I know, Trump worshippers will never say something their Lord Trump does is wrong.
As per usual. You only see the comments you want to see. I might say "Trump haters will never mention something that the evil orangeman does right" But, I'm not going back to reread all your hate speech to find out if you ever said anything positive about Trump. I'm going to assume you haven't. Please correct me if I'm wrong. You have absolutely noting positive to say about anything Trump has done during his term, is that correct? If you actually paid attention, you would see dozens of negative comments that I and others have posted.
 

moke123

AWF VIP
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,914
Even though your quoting Vassago, I'll say something nice about trump.

He did keep his promise to Make America Great Again.

He gave Democrats the House
He gave Democrats the Senate
He gave Democrats the Presidency
 

Vassago

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,751
I'm not pro-Democrat. The density on this forum. You would know of you actually pay attention to what I say. I'm not a fan of Pelosi either. I just see the hypocrisy with justifying one person's bad actions with another person's bad actions. It's a Trump worshipper favorite.

I agree about Biden. He may not last the 4 years. At Trump's rate, he won't be sane enough in 4 years to run again. Hopefully, the next set of politicians from this horrible two party system will be better. I'll not hold my breath.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 11:34
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
43,257
Cuomo was discussing the riots due to the police killing of unarmed black men. The current civil unrest is due to the wounded ego of trump and his insistance that he won an election he lost. Do you really see those as equivalent?
I do believe that if you ask Hillary Clinton if she won in 2016, she would give you an unequivocal - "I would have won if Trump didn't collude with the Russians." Of course, it was Hillary that was colluding with the Russians not the Trump campaign and 3/4 "investigations" have not turned up a bit of actionable evidence against Trump or his campaign. All we have are some people who got caught in the crossfire and were persecuted for either old crimes that the State of NY did not feel were worth pursuing or got caught in some perjury trap. However, we absolutely refuse to prosecute Democrats for the exact same "lying to Congress/the FBI" "crime" as Trump supporters got charged with. That's hypocrisy. It is what has turned us into a banana republic. I'm also pretty sure that Stacey Abrams thinks she's the Governor of Georgia. I don't believe she ever conceeded.

Your OPINION of why Trump supporters are angry is completely off base. If the Democrats hadn't cheated Biden out of his presidential bid in 2016, I would have considered voting for him. Remember I voted AGAINST Trump in the primary. But Biden was a know quantity. A sleazy Washington insider and why would I vote for yet another of THOSE people?

The problem that Trump supporters have is NOT that Trump lost. That would have been a real disappointment. But, the Democrats cheated to win. They couldn't even win without cheating. We've endured four years of incessant ad hominin attacks on not only the President but on US. I for one am not taking it any more. The Democrats, the press, and social media have colluded to badmouth the President EVERY SINGLE DAY. EVERYTHING he has done during his term has been not just wrong but EVIL if you believe the media which it seems that many of you do. NOTHING the President done has been even benign let alone good. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? Even a broken clock is right twice a day. There must have been SOMETHING Trump did which was good. I strongly objected to Obama but even I thought he did a couple of things right. Taking down bin Laden was his best action. Of course, to succeed, he had to LIE TO OUR "ALLIES" but hey, that's OK right? Bush was too stupid to work that out but Obama didn't have any trouble at all with lying to our "ALLIES".

Speaking of the cheating. Sometime last spring, I laid out how the cheating would happen to a few of my friends. I even sent Trump a letter warning him that this was going to happen. And it happened just as I outlined. I didn't specify which precincts would be targeted because I didn't have detail information on the voting populations in the battleground states but everything I said would happen, happened. Except for that tractor-trailer full of filled in ballots getting hauled from NY to Pennsylvania. I didn't believe they would be that stupid. I also didn't believe they could get an American company to do the printing. Most of the reports are of ballots that were printed in China. But, Trump either didn't see my warning or he was too arrogant to believe it could happen and he was almost right. He increased his vote count so much that the cheaters actually had to stop counting votes in the precincts they were using to cheat in order to manufacture enough ballots for Biden to overcome the groundswell. Americans came out in force for Trump. All the statistics except for the actual Presidential vote tally support it. It's not easy to steal a Presidential election. You have to swing a lot of votes and no one had ever cheated on this scale before. The cheating was always limited to precincts or cities to swing Mayoral elections or law changes. That's why the media was able to convince so many people that the steal didn't happen. Most people don't have the technical or system knowledge to know how to steal an election. I do and I'm pretty sure that a lot of you do also. A lot of the mainframe applications I built over the years had to do with finance and one of our major tasks was always to come up with a plan to cheat the system. Get it to give you money or not charge you for something or whatever. Things like the banking app that distributed rounding amounts to your account. A half cent here, a half cent there adds up when you are processing millions of transactions. So you have to be able to take off your honest hat and think like a crook.

The one Presidential election in the past that might have been stolen was that of JFK. His father Joe was a bootlegger when liquor was illegal and apparently had contacts in the mob. Also, Frank Sinatra loved Kennedy and was a huge supporter so he introduced JFK to Sam Giancana who "might" be able to get out the vote in some big cities. At this point, it is just rumors but based on the biographies I've read, there is some plausibility to the claims.
Voter Fraud Is Nothing New: The 1960 Election of JFK - Helleniscope
This week in history: JFK and the 1960 stolen election in Chicago, Illinois - Chicago Sun-Times

The situation and allegations are eerily similar to the treatment Trump got by the justice department
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom