Nunes sues Twitter, some users, seeks over $250M

Because it is someone he likes filing it. If it was someone her perceived as Liberal, they would be thin skinned pansies.

 

Well that's exactly why you should be allowed your day in court, to prove actual slander and libel. For liberals who are so into lawsuits, you'd think they would love the idea.

But let's say I started a rumor that Beto O'Rourke is a rapist and it caught fire on the internet, should he not be able to defend himself against such a slander?

 

I'm bipartisan on this, both sides should not be subjected to #FakeNews that is libelous or slanderous.

 

As long as you were careful to state it as opinion, the suit should never make it to court. And if it did, it should be laughed out.

 

If you have no basis for the "opinion" and are merely smearing a person because of your own political or other bias, then you should be found liable.

 

So you are of the opinion ( pun intended ) that no one can legally hold and express any opinion they wish?

 

No, I am not of that opinion. My opinion is you cannot slander and libel people under the guise of an opinion.

 

Thankfully the men who wrote our Constitution were smarter than you. They recognized that critique of our political leaders, without restriction is ESSENTIAL to freedom.

You are likely a fascist and hater of Freedom and America.

Please leave America.

 

This coming from the guy with this on his signature "Bill Clinton is a rapist & Danney Williams is his illegitimate son"

Are you serious, or really this obtuse to what you are saying?

 

Ouch, nice ad hominem. Free speech doesn't mean the right to commit slander and libel. We have laws against that. And because I believe in the Constitution and the rule of law they should be enforced.

 

And if this is not true then he can sue me. I welcome the opportunity to adjudicate that.

 

Where's your line for "basis"? Opinions formed from Network news? Life experience? Russian trolls? Rush Limbaugh? Hannity? Family?

 

Well that is something for the courts to determine on a case by case basis.

 

I´ve been called a pedophile on here twice, The only ¨evidence¨ that was presented is that pedophilia is a defining feature of liberals.

 

You think the court can handle another million libel cases each year?

 

I was just called a fascist! Bottom line though if it doesn't harm your reputation or harm you financially there's no foul, No court will rule against an offender unless harm can be shown. It may be against forum rules but personally, I don't care what they say.

 

You plucked a million out of thin air, right?

 

Yup - and I've been censored by the mods several times ... guess I would have a lawsuit if this stupid Nunes thing pans out.
I personally think the owners and mods have the right to pick which posts they leave up - but hey, if conservatives want to be able to sue for private censorship, who am I to disagree.

 

Have you ever read what people post on the large social media sites? A million would be conservative.

 

Some of it is... all of it should be ignored by anybody with skin thicker than tissue paper..

You wanna get positive stuff said about you on Twitter? Dont behave badly...

May not stop it, but it should mitigate it..

Cmon, the line about Ted Cruz WAS funny..

 

What is stopping them now? Anyone can file a lawsuit today amirite?

 

As a follow up to this post (and I am still hoping that you can provide a link to the whistleblower claim you mentioned earlier), Nunes has a bigger problem with filing a lawsuit based on the alleged shadowbans.

They are not illegal.

Twitter is a private entity and, as such, the First Amendment does not apply. They are free to implement bans in anyway that they deem necessary using whichever unilateral and unbiased justification that they want. The only potential punishment they could suffer from unilaterally shadowbanning every conservative that they wanted is the free market punishment from people abandoning them.

 

"Legality" is not a distinction and being a lawyer does not mean that I am aware of every aspect of the law, let alone your discussion of the law.

 

how about we sue politicians every time they lie publicly, for causing us a distrust of government

as far as this case, no one pays for the service, twitter is free to do as they like, if he does like hate speech being banned, go use another service

can we sue fox for not letting every dem that wants to post a show there post

the fact that Trump is allowed to post his nonsense there is proof they are not anti-republican

 

I've got to ask the conservatives posting on this thread - what did you think would be the result of the cake baker being able to pick and choose who, and what, service he would provide for different individuals based on their beliefs? You applauded that court ruling. Why do you think a private company should have to give every customer service if you didn't think the baker needed to?

Wasn't your basic argument that the gay couple could simply go down the road to someone else? There are other service providers on the internet.