https://nypost.com/2020/10/15/emails-reveal-how-hunter-biden-tried-to-cash-in-big-with-chinese-firm/

My post title is obviously satirical. This is awful, just awful. Look out for this story and make sure to not share it.

Lol MAKE SURE NOT TO SHARE, thanks for the heads up guitareander you dolt

lol

first, it's the new york post.

second, it's Giuliani and Bannon (lol again)

third, it has nothing to do with Biden's ability to govern

fourth, even if it did, Trump's way worse in every way.

It's all descriptive claims and no normative claims from guitarguy.

"Facebook and Twitter are biased against Conservatives."

OK? So that's your descriptive claim, what are you going to do about it?

Im appreciating that theyre - hehe - not hiding it at least.

its truly, truly pathetic as well. Just gobsmackingly pathetic.

What we are watching -- the militarization of social media on behalf of Democrats, and the overt suppression of material damaging to Democrats to the cheering of the press -- is one of the single most dangerous political moments I have ever seen.


^This is what idiots are saying on Twitter! I personally think it's one of the most awesome political moments I have ever seen :)

Yes, the *Democrats* are the ones suppressing information.

Not the newly-politicized DOJ. The *Democrats*.

Trump talks about how stuff he doesn't like is "fake news." You say this is a threat to the press. Then you actually treat news you don't like as "fake news" and suppress it before fact-checking it. You are everything you supposedly despise.

The activists masquerading as journalists are honestly even more despicable than the social media types. Journalists are supposed to have an institutional predilection for free speech. These activists want to re-establish a monopolistic bottleneck on informational distribution.

^More idiotic ramblings from twitter I completely disagree with!

The issue is that is has been fact-checked, and the story is bull. That's the difference. The issue with Trump isn't that he disagrees with news stories, or whatever. It's that he gives his base an excuse to dispose of any information that isn't convenient to them. In practice, this means that if someone quotes any news article, they can just dismiss it out of hand. This is NOT the same as fact-checking something, which every other credible news organization did. Either way, you're dismissing the work of journalists. You don't get to be on your high horse just because you happen to agree with the message of this specific article.

Before saying that the activists are trying to stifle free speech, why not actually offer a solution to the problem you're arguing against? Then we can see who wants more freedom of speech.

Once again, I completely agree with the censorship enacted by Twitter and Facebook. This election is too important to follow previously set precedents about the role these incredibly influential disseminators of news and current events should play in our political process, if they should make decisions directly benefitting one candidate or the other. I love this because this election is not neutral. It is good versus evil. Anything that hurts Trump is good in my eyes.

OK, I understand that coreander agrees. What about the idiots on Twitter? What are they saying is a solution to the problem?

Idiots on twitter suggest that Twitter should not selectively enforce their rules in order to suppress information that might be damaging to the political left while not doing the same thing when the roles are reversed. Hence, they are idiots. Twitter is a private corporation and should be allowed to ban Trump for Life tomorrow!

Who would decide whether they are selectively enforcing their rules?

Or is this a "Twitter should do this" and not a "government should do this"?

According to these idiots, of course.

Very "interesting" how trolleander (and I'm sure tang, although I haven't read) supports media being able to serve whoever it wants, yet hates the idea of other companies being able to make their own such choices. Typical hypocrisy from a very atypical lunatic.

In terms of political affiliation, I've made it very clear that any company can discriminate.

I would also not be OK with Twitter banning black people from their website.