• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is this ok with you?

One example.


In October 2016, Hagmann claimed, he “communicated” with a friend who knows someone affiliated with the NYPD. The friend of the friend had been on the “task force” that secured Weiner’s computer and had copied documents onto a thumb drive “proving” Clinton and her associates were involved in pedophilia.

On Breitbart radio, Prince painted a picture sure to stir the far right. “Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating,” he said. “They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money-laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times.”


And by the way, such stories damaged not only politicians but also common people like the owner, employees anddd customers of the Pizzaplace


Pizzagate Nearly Destroyed My Restaurant


That would be Alex Jones and Facebook. Not Bretbart, Hannity or Qanon
 
There is the fact that neither Hunter or his dad have denied the accuracy of the signature. I guess they don't need to with all of you doing it for them.
Trump has yet to deny the accuracy of many things against him....so, does that make them true? I haven't seen any signature. I saw a bill with his name at the top, that isn't a signature.
 
Trump has yet to deny the accuracy of many things against him....so, does that make them true? I haven't seen any signature. I saw a bill with his name at the top, that isn't a signature.

Willful blindness.

34598700-8857893-image-a-1_1603167359156.jpg
 
That would be Alex Jones and Facebook. Not Bretbart, Hannity or Qanon

The link shows how Breitbart radio pushed such outrageous stories

On Breitbart radio, Prince painted a picture sure to stir the far right. “Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating,” he said. “They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money-laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times.”

And there are other stories too. like the supposedly murder of Seth Rich


Fox News retracted a story about Seth Rich’s killing after an outcry over sharing conspiracy theories about the murder, connecting it to then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Hannity, however, later said he personally "retracted nothing."
 
Last edited:
So they would only need to step back 5 feet away from the stores entrance and would be able to exercise their free speech rights in the rest of the mall

The point is that the laws about freedom of speech are not so black and white as you imply.
 
No matter how polemically I describe leftist thought and behavior, I can never quite match the absurdity of the real thing.

I know the feeling. I try to get into the headspace of conservatives, and none of it makes sense.
 
The point is that the laws about freedom of speech are not so black and white as you imply.


The point remains that a shopping mall cant exclude people from exercising their rights to free speech in the public areas of a mall. It is viewed as a public forum. Time to view twitter/facebook as the public forum that it is.
 
The point remains that a shopping mall cant exclude people from exercising their rights to free speech in the public areas of a mall. It is viewed as a public forum. Time to view twitter/facebook as the public forum that it is.

I just gave you a case where freedom of speech WAS restricted based on ambiguity regarding what place is considered a public forum

The defendant, appearing in pro per, argued (via a declaration that was not signed under penalty of perjury and thus was found inadmissible by the trial court) that these areas were a public forum because there were benches and seating near the entrances which encouraged members of the public to stop and congregate for conversation and relaxation. The appellate court found that the trial court was the finder of fact and that the evidence supported the trial court’s finding that the sidewalk and apron areas wherethe solicitation activity was conducted was not a public forum area in which the private shopping center was obliged to permit members of the community to exercise their liberty of speech rights under the California Constitution.

The point remains that what you see as self-evident is not so self-evident, and when all people require to have a device, pay for internet connection and subscribe (and get approval to activate their account) by a corporation before they start interacting with others in Facebook or twitter using tools that were developed by private companies, it s hard to claim that both should be considered as "public forum" and compare them to a place like a shopping mall where even a poor beggar can go and interact with others.
 
I just gave you a case where freedom of speech WAS restricted based on ambiguity regarding what place is considered a public forum

Yeah, restricted from the entries to individual shops while the other 90% of the public mall was open for the exercise of free speech.
 
Back
Top Bottom