[Paladin2]

I wouldn’t have any problem with Google and or Facebook getting virtually burned down.

[BenLurkin]

I have, yet another, dumb question: Can someone please explain how any President could have this kind of authority, legitimately?

[Husker24]

So what happens when they ignore it?

[cgbg]

This could start to get interesting....

[buckalfa]

And 3,2,1 an injunction is issued.

[Beowulf9]

Ooooh!

[Cold Heart]

will check back later for Freeper comments

[eeriegeno]

These companies should be regulated as all utilities are regulated. Nothing unique about them.

[devane617]

How is it enforced? Who with Feds know what the internals look like in Google/Facebook software? It may make a good sound bite, but this is virtually impossible to enforce.

[who knows what evil?]

GP? Lucy...football.

[Revel]

This is for show. It actually accomplishes nothing. Big tech can ignore it with impunity. There is no force of law.

[Greenpees]

I love the spirit within Trump, but I just realized - the Presidential EO has replaced congress. But I also realize, it’s congresses fault for not dealing with problems the way they should. Now the law goes EO- Courts - Law. Instead of Congress - Courts - Law.

[Steven Tyler]

On Monday, the Department of Commerce, as directed by President Donald J. Trump’s Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship, filed a petition to clarify the scope of Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. The petition requests that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) clarify that Section 230 does not permit social media companies that alter or editorialize users’ speech to escape civil liability.

I have one improvement: make it retroactive to 2015

[robowombat]

I really get tired of Jim Hoff’s ‘Huge’ for every article.

[conservative98]

President Trump promotes free speech https://t.co/7HAJ8gclvH— Mark R. Levin (@marklevinshow) July 30, 2020