Posted on 10/29/2020 12:44:22 PM PDT by knighthawk
During a hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee yesterday, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey alleged that his platform had never censored President Trump, a claim which is provably false.
Yesterday, during a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, the CEO’s of Facebook, Twitter, and Google discussed their various platforms and allegations of censorship. During the hearing, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey alleged that his platform had never censored President Donald Trump.
“We have not censored the U.S. president,” Dorsey echoed. “We do not take down the tweets but we add context around it.” However, numerous examples of the President being silenced on Twitter can easily be found.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Can he be charged with perjury or contempt of Congress?
Maybe little jack’s nose ring was too tight, and cut off oxygen to his brain...
More to the point, "Will he be charged with perjury or contempt of Congress?"
And the answer is: "When pigs fly!"
“Lied”
He lied.
The motto of this Congress should be
“NO ACCOUNTABILITY”
‘
He committed perjury on numerous counts.
They won’t do a thing.
He opposes Conservatives, so no one will do a thing.
Comey and Yates lied to Congress - nothing.
Roger Stone was raided by 33 agents for lying to Congress.
‘
Dorsey is a Junkie
The SENATE should have had him Taken into Custody by the Sergeant of Arms immediately upon the first LIE, and then held in Solitary Confinement in the Congressional Jail until the Next Hearing in January
“U.S. CODE
TITLE 2—THE CONGRESS
CHAPTER 6—CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMITTEE PROCEDURE; INVESTIGATIONS
Sec. 193. Privilege of witnesses
No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.”
Simply look up Hinds Precedents, especially chapters 53 and 51, and Cannon’s Precedents, especially chapters 184-185. You’ll find numerous detailed cases of Congress asserting its power, arresting people, holding them until they agreed to answer questions, and then releasing them. Some of these people did not refuse to appear, but simply failed to satisfactorily answer questions.
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
In 1857, a New York Times reporter refused to say which members of Congress had asked him to get them bribes (protecting his “sources” just as various Judith Millers today protect the people who feed them proven lies that costs thousands of lives), so Congress locked him up until he answered and then banned him from Congress.
In 1924 an oil executive appeared but refused to answer certain questions, so the Senate held — literally held — him in contempt. Senator Thomas Walsh of Montana argued that this question of contempt was of the gravest importance, and that it involved “the very life of the effective existence of the House of Representatives of the United States and of the Senate of the United States.” The matter was taken to court, and the witness fined and imprisoned.
AG Barr, please pick up the white courtesy phone........
Don’t some people get put in jail for lying to these bast.....er...senators?
I’m sick to death of this loser with a catchy name. Nobody ever heard of this guy before he became the CEO of twitter in 2017? Screw this blowhard. Drudge constantly puts his picture on his site so Americans are supposed to believe he is important or his opinions matter? If anything he looks like the the damn king of antifa and their goonsquad. WTF is wrong with this country”!?!
He also said Twitter wasn’t influencing voters / the election.
Then why do they care about tweets “lacking context” or tweets about the “safety” of vote-by-mail?
He must have missed the Congressional hearing several years back that said social media can influence (change) 8-65% of votes. This was stated in sworn testimony.
Not certain if these bastards were sworn in. If so, Dorsey perjured himself.
To be a leftist, your truth and your lie can be both true at the same time; it is part of the mental disorder.
“If anything he looks like the the damn king of antifa and their goonsquad.”
I think he’s trying to emulate the Russian revolutionary Rasputin. Pull up his photo and see what you think.
Man, I hate getting into tyrant's heads while they are obfuscating.
I was at the dentist office yesterday and a tv is playing while they drill and fill. It had the news on and Jack Dorsey face came on the screen. That long ragged beard and unkempt hair and a nose ring.
The dentist said he looked like a homeless person.
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.