4 ms·
You might be right. The article says they were "pressured", it doesn't seem to to say how that pressure was applied. To me, it reads as though compliance was n
by stevenAthompson 2y ago
You might be right.
The article says they were "pressured", it doesn't seem to to say how that pressure was applied. To me, it reads as though compliance was not mandated, just requested. Without more info, I suppose it could be taken either way.
- philwelch 2y agoAny request from the government can be characterized as pressure.
- SV_BubbleTime 2y agoFurther, there is already precedent that this is in fact, a first amendment violation. The Biden Harris government is guilty of censorship via a third party.
- shadowgovt 2y agoIf Zuck has a real problem with that, he can sue (as per the SCOTUS ruling on standing vis-a-vis First Amendment protections against government coercion). He isn't suing, and it's up to the rest of us to make our decisions based on how we feel about that.
- SV_BubbleTime 2y ago>https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1828485808023539967 https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1828485808023539967 He is making sworn statements to the house judiciary committee. Are you saying he is lying and the BidenHarris admin is telling the truth? Why would he do that? And why does all the evidence of censored accounts on Facebook match up with the Twitter Files and what everyone saw happening?
- shadowgovt 2y agoNo, I'm not saying he's lying. I'm saying he might have found the circumstances distasteful but he didn't find them a violation of his rights worthy of a lawsuit.