Danforth,

Yet they backed off. Why is that? These are terrorists, right?

Why would the FBI back off on terrorists?

Maybe because these people weren't terrorists?

Political and cultural thought to the right of Stalin is t terrorism.

Speaking out at school board meetings isn't terrorism.

They are need up backing off because they got caught engaging in an intimidation campaign.

You lefties are not required to be boot lickers. Sometimes things are simply wrong. And they will always be wrong.

" The FBI did investigate parents. Because they were making terrorist threats."

They didn't have jurisdiction. And the original directive was far more broad than that.

And I am not trying to change the subject.

You chose to make it personal so I'm rubbing your nose in your own shht

" So it is stupidity and not simple dishonesty, then. Gotcha.

#114 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-01-09 03:01 PM | FLAG: "

It happened.

I remember you getting seriously pissed off at any suggestion that Biden has dementia.

Have you ever adjusted your view?

I know full well you'd never acknowledge you were wrong.

They are pissed because he's been drawing attention to the grooming gangs in the UK and the government's scandalous and hideous manner in which they've dealt with it.

Cockroaches despise a spotlight.

" Harris never embarrassed herself on the level of Sarah Palin"

I can provide a montage of word salads if you'd like. The fact that Harris was more out of depth than Palin is t a defense of Palin. She was awful.

Here is a short video of Harris's speech writer:

" So I am gonna need a link for that to determine just who or what you think a "fact checker" is."

Glen Kessler is a self proclaimed fact checker and he's at best mediocre at what he does.

" And you claim the FBI was after parents for "speaking out" at school board meetings"

It's an accurate claim, nimrod.

Time magazine produced a multi thousand word article about a cabal of Democrats, media and tech oligarchs (not a complete list) that all colluded to swing the election to Biden. And they were giddy in their reporting.

" You also have a bad habit of claiming CENSORSHIP if the government reminds the platform of its own Terms of Service, and the editorial board agrees.

#103 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2025-01-09 12:06 PM | FLAG: "

No. That's what you tell yourself to make yourself feel superior.

What I've been harping on is the government working with tech platforms to control messaging. It's something the government is prohibited from doing on its own due to 1A. More than 1 SC ruling forbids the government from using the private sector as its surrogate to do what the Constitutuion prevents it from doing on its own.

Do you honestly want the Trumpcadministration partnering with these platforms to control messaging.

You love it when the left benefits but fail to understand that the pendulum does swing the other way. It reminds me when Dems nuked the filibuster for presidential nominees and twocyearsclatervwerecmortified when Trump was able to reap the benefits of their folly.

" fact checking is not censorship.

#100 | POSTED BY ALEXANDRITE AT 2025-01-09 12:04 PM | FLAG: "

It's used as a rationale to justify censorship.

Keep in mind, the so- called fact checkers admonished us that Biden was sharp as a tack.

Danforth,

Do you disagree with the reasons Zuckerberg cited for making this change?

The left's new-found love of censorship is very troubling.

Y'all used to oppose this type of thing.

I misquoted DeSantis. My bad.

My memory failed. It was graduate degrees, not masters degrees.

Here is what I was referencing.

Vote busting = vote buying

" You obviously hate fact-checking for the same reason Trump does.

#83 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2025-01-09 01:07 AM | FLAG: |"

Piss off. Who fact checks the fact checkers?

When Biden first started his vote busting gambit of cancelling student loans DeSantis during a presser said almost 60% of those with student loans have masters degrees. Politifact emailed his press secretary at the time (Pushaw) asking where he got that number. Her reply was: (Paraphrasing) your parent company (Poynter) produced a study that revealed that 56% of those with student debt hold masters degrees. And from our perspective 56% is synonymous with "almost 60%".

In her response she provided a link to the study.

What did Politifact do? Rated Desantis's claim mostly false' and shut off replies to the fact check.

That is but one of countless other examples of fact checkers being partisan hacks.

Community notes isn't perfect but it's more accurate than our current slate of so- called fact checkers.

The only reason you like fact checkers is due to their extreme ideological bias.

"Yeah, Mr Zuckerburg apparently kissing the ring, or, more likely, the most ample derriere of Pres-elect Trump.

#81 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2025-01-09 12:22 AM | FLAG: "

The "fact checkers" were coordinating with and acting at the behest of the Obama/Biden/Harris regime.

I agree with Zuckerberg's rationale for making this change. I agree with everything he said.

However, I don't trust he was being honest. Given his track record.

Going independent with fact checking with the changing of the guard?

All, in all - a great move regardless of the timing. Much needed. But part of me believes this change was made because a continuation of what they were doing would mean working with the Trump Team to censor stuff.

"This isn't a failure of interest or partisan gridlock -- it's the reality of human limitations against a massive, complex problem. "

Given what you've produced (and thank you for doing so) I'm inclined to agree, at least to a certain extent.

Sometimes catastrophic events are just that - they happen.

"234 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11 "

Thank you for sharing all of that. Give me a bit to digest it...

#228

SO, are you actually blaming this on Trump? This site already has Zed. It doesn't need a clone.

Redial,

If you are trying to be funny (I just flagged Laura Mohr's #227 as funny) you are failing.

If you are trying to make some kind of a point, you are also failing. Maybe try a different tack.

"Then why is rsty saying otherwise?

#220 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2025-01-08 11:44 PM | REPLY | FLAG:"

Hopefully he will provide an answer.

"I forgive you

#213 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2025-01-08 11:37 PM | FLAG: "

Akin to: "Swallow it"

Great adaptation!