That is some pretty solid trolling.

So, does Bash submit her questions in advance or does the Harris team just give her a list of approved questions to ask?

It's also pathetic that she can't do a solo interview.

" It came from the WHITE HOUSE, not 3 letter agencies (that Trump's people were in charge of).

It's in the damn headline even.

#139 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT AT 2024-08-29 01:39 PM | FLAG: "

The powers that be at the FBI were clearly working against the Trump administration despite technically answering to the Trump administration. Look up: New York Times "Anonymous" it's all about how the bureaucracy constantly sought to undermine Trump. Do you have anything other than thoroughly disproven Dem talking points?

Here you go:

"my guess is you're too stupid to know the difference."

---- you.

"The idea of plonking your lying ass gets more attractive every day."

Tell you what, I'll pre-empt you and do plonk you first. Your serial dishonesty is ridiculous and you are a shameless hack. As I am plonking you I will do so on this final note: I hope you and your wife are doing very well in your personal lives and are in good health and are prospering....

Here is a link regarding all of this, since Lamplighter wants a link...

Why in the hell do you support a government-private censorship regime? WHY? Even setting aside 1A prohibitions of it - why do you view it as some kind of great thing?

"Are you drunk? These are the EXACT SAME goalposts I've had since day one: Show me where the editorial board disagreed with the government, and the government overrode the editorial board's decision. "

That is so INCREDIBLY stupid and naive. "You have a nice family. It would be a shame if anything happened to them."

THAT is how it works and it's been exposed every which way possible. Yet, here you are, skipping along holding tulips in your hand praising the almighty government for their endless wisdom and benevolence and trusting them with limitless powers over the flow of information in this country.

It's been said numerous times but is perfectly applicable now - Orwell never intended 1984 to be a how-to manual.

You continually move the goalposts. You ignore well-established SCOTUS precedents regarding the government being prohibited from engaging in activity through a private sector conduit that the Constitution prohibits, like 1A.

Shortly after the 2020 election, Jack Dorsey admitted that Twitter was wrong to suppress the laptop story at the behest of the 'deep state' and whatnot. Musk exposed all sorts of government heavy-handedness with opening up to real journalists what was going on behind the scenes at Twitter during that period. First during a Joe Rogan interview and now with this letter, Zuckerberg is admitting the same thing.

This has grown circular. Again, I don't understand why you so strenuously support all of this without a hint of skepticism regarding our government's actions. Not even a scintilla.

Not only is it not the government's job to police what is being posted on these social media sites, 1A prohibits the government from doing so. As to the ridiculous and extreme examples you conjure up (as if those were the ONLY posts the government was applying pressure to censor)....those types of issues are normally handled in the legal system under laws like false advertising, or libel.....on a case-by-case basis.

"So... your current has links, then?

#92 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER"

EVERY time I supply links all anyone does is google some hit piece and try to attack the source. Every. Time. And then, when I do supply links some on this site attack me for not making my own arguments but hiding behind those of others.

So, other than embracing Communism anything I try to do will be attacked in the most stupid manner possible. But, here we are.

How do they OVERRIDE it? They apply pressure and the platform caves.

I cannot believe you are defending this crap. Especially to the degree that you are doing so.

Two. Percent. Net. Profit. Margin.

This is so ridiculous.

Kroger's net profit margin is right around 2%.

Just stop with this nonsense.

Overrode? Are your shoulders absolutely destroyed by moving those goalposts?

Based upon what is publicly available, the government applied all sorts of pressure and has plenty of regulatory powers over these tech companies.

Seriously, why do you defend this so vociferously? Why do you think this is all good? Why do you display ZERO skepticism of our government's actions when evidence of censorious activity is clearly laid out?

Most of you clowns are just pathetic.

At least Yav puts in some work and tries to respond beyond banalities.

"That is an insane description of what Musk did. Utterly insane. When you have to lie to make a point, maybe you don't have a point in the first place?

#75 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2024-08-28 09:54 PM | FLAG: "

That's exactly what he did.

But at least we've clearly pivoted back to the government in no way attempted any kind of censorship using tech giants as a proxy.

"What is your current alias saying then?

#44 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2024-08-28 09:30 PM | FLAG: "

That Walz has repeatedly told lies about his past for political gain. Is it scandalous? No. Is it noteworthy? IMO, yes it is, hence the creation of this thread.

So, your position is Zuckerberg is lying as is Musk?

Musk certainly provided receipts and gave old-school journalists unprecedented access to what was going on at Twitter.

And yes, I would love to see Zuckerberg go before congress and testify under oath.

Further, the parents of those 13 who were killed approved in advance a photographer and videographer.

You can see it here:

See this thread, Lamplighter.

Any time the Twitter Files have been brought up it's been sloughed off as a vast right wing conspiracy. Now, Zuckerberg is saying the same actions were applied to Meta and all of a sudden it was a good thing.

Jack Smith doesn't meet the qualifications for special counsel and Congress didn't create a new statute. This was pointed out long before this case even approached trial.

41. I'm not saying any of this is scandalous.

Jim Jordan has in no way applied any pressure to Meta regarding censoring content. You people suck at equivalence. Further, read what Zuckerberg is actually saying.

So we went from it never happened. It's is racist right wing conspiracy theory to, okay, I guess it happened but it was a good thing.

" Your incessant Trump apologetics are sickening.

#10 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2024-08-28 12:36 PM | REPLY"

What I said was factual.