American🇺🇲. Atheist. Progressive. First Amendment/Section 230 advocate. Death Metal/Metalcore/Punk enthusiast. Drag me to Hell with Heavens lies.
- Tweets 127,145
- Following 1,050
- Followers 2,577
- Likes 115,613
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
That opinion piece is retarded. Social media companies have 1st Amendment rights to censor what they want and SCOTUS already said the government can’t do anything about it. 230 can’t be revised to change that.
3
39
The Twitter files does NOT show the government in control of Twitter.
Twitter said the same thing to a federal judge in 2023 when Donald Trump attempted to weaponize those stupid Twitter files versus Twitter to cry about him losing his Twitter account.
The state still acted.
The Twitter files showed that this was routine before Elon bought it and now it’s back (if it ever went away).
1
2
2
170
O’Handley v. Weber is a great case to read if you’re being a cry baby commie that a private company took action against content that was flagged to them by the government.
1
84
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
Christians always hate freedom of expression when it’s not their own.
1
4
110
6,492
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
Twitter is a private company with first amendment rights to censor tabloid trash from the New York Post
Donald Trump was the president of the United States when Twitter used their rights to censor trash from the New York Post
2
14
89
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
This grown man had a complete meltdown on LinkedIn because he’s unable to explain to his four-year-old daughter that a Halloween decoration is not real 💀
649
605
18,472
1,006,004
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
Section 230 protects content moderation. The title of the law literally says it is protection for content moderation
1
1
44
" if you censor, set guardrails, or curate you have 100% liability"
That is a Section 230 repeal. 230 shields content moderation.
You pay Elon Musk for a FREE website that curates content the way he wants, and he does not lost 230 when he does it.
1
1
1
176
A request from the gov is not coercion.
The MAGA chud @DC_Draino lost in every single court, and was rejected by the Supreme Court when he argued that the gov in California snitching to Twitter that he was a liar, and asking Twitter to enforce its rules is "coercion"
The request cam from a government office in New Hampshire to terminate the account. While private companies have and should have freedom of association, this was clearly coercion.
1
1
2
162
Here is the letter and nothing in the letter has a threat from the government or a bribe to censor the account @HoppeanJuuzou
This is not state censorship, you are just a cry baby that X agreed with the government request.
Have you heard about free enterprise before, comrade?
1
59
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
twitter is a private company
they have the right to allow or not allow whoever they want on their platform. its called freedom of association
11
4
38
798
Pressure is not always coercion. A court said the same thing to RFK Jr when his anti vax organization sued Facebook, and cried about the gov applying pressure.
The judge even used an analogy to point out that the gov applies pressure all the time on Facebook to censor porn.
Remember this if Governor Jared Polis ever pressures Twitter to suspend LPCO's account.
I guess that depends on if you guys are still doing effective strategies like the Liberty Pledge, otherwise you wouldn't ever even be a sufficient political threat to warrant it.
1
1
125
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
These Twittter Files?
Twitter's lawyers told a federal court yesterday that nothing in the "Twitter Files" cited by Donald Trump actually show that the social media platform was a tool of government censorship.
storage.courtlistener.com/re…
2
2
33
You have no Constitutional right to use Twitter because Twitter is not the government.
Courts said the same thing to Donald Trump when he lost his Twitter account and he tried to claim it was a First Amendment violation because he did not read the Twitter Terms of Service.
Okay? What does that have to do with Trump being pro constitutional rights and ending NFA and Elon restoring our constitutional rights to free speech on Twitter?
1
5
190
The government writing a letter is not always coercion.
Federal courts said the same thing to RFK Jr when RFK JR whined like a cry baby that Elizabeth Warren wrote a letter to Amazon calling RFK Jr a lying bozo.
It should guarantee the right for us to not fear being de platformed by sitting officials. If that letter was never sent this would be a whole different situation if he got banned. Or you support that?
75
Sergio Vengeance 🇺🇲🎮🤘 retweeted
The first amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to a twitter account. Sorry.
3
2
9
1,167
The spirit of the Constitution? The Constitution says the gov can't form an establishment of religion. This means the gov can't label Satan as "evil" because it would require the gov establishing Christianity as a religion. Since Satan is "the bad guy" in Christian fairy tales.
So this is your whole argument on Charlie opposed free speech? Because he had strong views on a mock religion and thought allowing the pro-choice side of Satanism to gain footing was a prelude to worse ideals that ruin the spirit of the constitution. Boring argument
1
70