Posted on 12/04/2022 9:55:39 AM PST by DFG
A stern letter...
I choose “F” for the stern letter. As in, “F”!
True as an abstract value, but the legally enforceable part is only in cases of government interference. The corporate part is not yet fully defined in its scope by the courts. Legal cases still pending.
Sadly, AG Merrick won’t do anything.
Why are people not immediately being picked and charged?
sued and tried
18 usc 242
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
ok- now what?
It’s one thing for Joe or Trump’s campaigns to request review but given the bias of Twitter employees given their personal preferences it’s problematic for an entity that claims to be the internet public square to collude with campaigns.
Without knowing what tweets were deleted or censored, it’s hard to know whether or how often they crossed the line and acted as a defacto agent of a particular campaign, party, or government entity.
If Hobbs office ONLY objected to deliberate misinformation about when or how voters could exercise their rights there’s no issue with asking Twitter to review tweets.
Sos should be limited to one term if just for this reason alone. State attny general too...
P
I think in this case Hobbs should have recused herself simply because she was running for governor, not reelection for the SoS job. Perhaps the current governor should have directed a deputy SoS to oversee the election process.
Lord, PLEASE remove the crooks from office and install the rightful winners.
The internet is forever.
Kari was calling for her to continue her duties but step aside from the election process
Twitter violated its terms of use and passed for an open forum, which it was not not…. should have been called democrat Communist Underground
It's not a 'suggestion'. It's the law that must be complied with in order to have a LAWFUL election. So yes, she had to suspend her election duties in 2022, and if she is permitted to ever hold office again, she has to follow the law.
The thing about Kevin McCarthy being speaker is that he will run interference and prevent these investigations from happening.
lock her up
Just another fine public/private partnership to benefit the fine citizens of Arizona.
/s (in case someone reads that straight)
Stepping back for a minute from all the details, doesn’t it seem as though Musk has everyone right where he wants them?
If the Dems make a big case of it and say it was fine to tilt Twitter the way they did, and they get some kind of approval somewhere, by the legislative or the judicial branch, then Musk can do whatever he wants also and make Twitter biased in HIS favorite direction if he wants to.
If it goes the other way and free speech prevails, that is what Musk is all about in the first place. That is why he’s doing this, not to tilt things the opposite way.
Win win.
And people wonder why he’s the richest person in the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.