Comments by "Huwhite Cavebeast" (@huwhitecavebeast1972) on "Clarence Thomas Demands Example Of SCOTUS Saying The 1st Amendment 'Protects The Right To Censor'" video.

That is what is going on.
7
@douglasbockman2772 Your word salad tells me you are an AI bot.
5
I'm concerned with both, but obviously one is much worse than the other (FBI).
2
That's a rhetorical question. Obviously it is.
2
@douglasbockman2772 You absolutely posed a question, even if you didn't use a question mark. So are you pro 2nd amendment?
2
Could you give an example of where they let CP stay up after discovery? I have never seen such a case, nor seen evidence of such a case, presented by anyone. The rest of what you say is correct, the CP charge rings hollow.
2
You must be joking about the attorney. That was a terrible, not compelling argument that actually proved his clients 230 protections should be stripped. Arguing there is a right to censor by the attorney is about as far from perfect as you can get.
1
@ceb1970 IF they are a publisher, but not as a platform. You gotta pick one buddy, and the government is directing the CENSORSHIP, not "content moderation". Try again.
1
@douglasbockman2772 Yep you are def a dysfunctional bot.
1
Because that was what the lawyer was arguing. Do try to keep up.
1
The government is deciding and directing the censorship. So I wouldn't call that private. It is the government deciding what is bad, and outsourcing it's violation of the 1st amendment to big tech.
1
His arguments sucked. Not compelling in the slightest, in fact he kept digging his hole deeper. When the government is directing the censorship of these so-called "private companies", is that not the government outsourcing it's censorship of it's own citizens, in violation of the 1st amendment? I sure hope that point gets brought up.
1
Exactly.
1
Yes, and none of his arguments were compelling in the slightest.
1
Well you haven't listened to many communists then.
1