[semimojo]

It has been removed from various platforms because it is political and Google is admitting to bias and intending to break FEC law.

Great. Go after the various platforms if you think they don't have the right to police what's posted using their property.

In Vimeo's case the standard is clear, prominently posted and facially neutral.

If you're really a Conservative, stop sounding like a Dem operative.

If you're really a Conservative stand up for the Constitution and for property rights - even if it's inconvenient politically.

[DiogenesLamp]

If you're really a Conservative stand up for the Constitution and for property rights - even if it's inconvenient politically.

It isn't "inconvenient", it's deadly.

We won't survive this modern day book burning.

[DJ MacWoW]

The 203 rules are clear. They've been made clear by court decisions. They cannot remove content because they dislike it.

For your argument to be valid, Vimeo must remove all video filmed in public without passersby permission. No public recordings would be allowed on their platform. The owner of Vimeo is a rabid leftist and Trump hater.

I am defending free speech according to court decisions. While the First Amendment generally does not apply to private companies, the Supreme Court has held it “does not disable the government from taking steps to ensure that private interests not restrict . . . the free flow of information and ideas.”