Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1493351)	10/14/2024 3:06:23 PM
From: i-node	2 Recommendations Recommended By Bill longz Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576775

No they didn't. You still haven't proven to me how Twitter was "forced against its will" to censor right-wing speech. Ten, the FBI (i.e., The "government") collusion with Big Tech was a violation of the First Amendment, worse, in pursuit of modifying the outcome of a presidential election. You can have a free country. Or you can have government controlling what is free speech. But you can't have both. A quote from Newsweek says it well: "This is the part in the play when some rowdy voice shouts from the cheap seats that "Twitter is a private corporation, it's not government." True enough, but the government can't enlist a private citizen or corporation to undertake what the Constitution precludes it from doing." and, later: The U.S. Supreme Court settled that decades ago with what's known as the law of agency, which allows a "principal" to assign an agent to do something on the principal's behalf. It's a limited transfer of power. And what the government is forbidden from doing it is also forbidden from subcontracting to an agent. Newsweek, The FBI Colluded With Twitter to Suppress Free Speech. Where Is the Outrage? Yes, government DID interfere and it wasn't a close call.