This came out of a lawsuit by Missouri against the senile pervert: https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2023/01/09/missouri-attorney-general-releases-more-documents-exposing-white-house's-social-media-censorship-scheme
Of course, this directly violates the First Amendment of the Constitution, which the pervert either ignores or has forgotten entirely in his demented mind.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-01-30 12:12, Tommy wrote:

This came out of a lawsuit by Missouri against the senile pervert: https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2023/01/09/missouri-attorney-general-releases-more-documents-exposing-white-house's-social-media-censorship-scheme
Of course, this directly violates the First Amendment of the Constitution, which the pervert either ignores or has forgotten entirely in his demented mind.

Let's take these one at a time:

'Exhibits include:

The White House asks Twitter to censor Robert Kennedy, Jr., a known
critic of the White House’s COVID-19 narrative'

Sorry, but asking that a single tweet be taken down doesn't violate the
first amendment.

Asking Twitter to act on its own COVID-19 misinformation policy doesn't
violate the first amendment.

Oh, and the tweet WASN'T taken down:

<https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1352748139665645569>



'The White House directs Facebook to shut down conservative voices
Tucker Carlson and Tomi Lahren'

Again, this is the administration asking why Facebook's own policy
wasn't being applied.


'White House Digital Director Flaherty scolds Facebook, saying that he “really couldn’t care less about products unless they’re having measureable impact” at suppressing speech'

That is literally a lie.

He said he "really couldn’t care less about products unless they’re
having measureable impact" on implementing the policies that Facebook
has put in place.

Again: private companies are allowed to decide what information gets
published on their platforms.


'Flaherty informs Facebook that “misinformation around the vaccine” is
“a concern shared at the highest (and I mean highest) level of the WH”'

And such misinformation should be a concern.

Next!

<snip>

This is government DOING ITS JOB, Sunshine.

Is there a single item presented there that shows the government doing
anything but talking with private entities?

Anything about the government using any form of threat to coerce the cooperation of Facebook or Twitter?

No.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 1:05:50 PM UTC-8, Alan wrote:

On 2023-01-30 12:12, Tommy wrote:

This came out of a lawsuit by Missouri against the senile pervert: https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2023/01/09/missouri-attorney-general-releases-more-documents-exposing-white-house's-social-media-censorship-scheme
Of course, this directly violates the First Amendment of the Constitution, which the pervert either ignores or has forgotten entirely in his demented mind.

Let's take these one at a time:

'Exhibits include:

The White House asks Twitter to censor Robert Kennedy, Jr., a known
critic of the White House’s COVID-19 narrative'

Sorry, but asking that a single tweet be taken down doesn't violate the first amendment.

Asking Twitter to act on its own COVID-19 misinformation policy doesn't violate the first amendment.

Oh, and the tweet WASN'T taken down:

<https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1352748139665645569>

'The White House directs Facebook to shut down conservative voices
Tucker Carlson and Tomi Lahren'

Again, this is the administration asking why Facebook's own policy
wasn't being applied.

'White House Digital Director Flaherty scolds Facebook, saying that he “really couldn’t care less about products unless they’re having measureable impact” at suppressing speech'

That is literally a lie.

He said he "really couldn’t care less about products unless they’re having measureable impact" on implementing the policies that Facebook
has put in place.

Again: private companies are allowed to decide what information gets published on their platforms.

'Flaherty informs Facebook that “misinformation around the vaccine” is “a concern shared at the highest (and I mean highest) level of the WH”'

And such misinformation should be a concern.

Next!

<snip>

This is government DOING ITS JOB, Sunshine.

Yes, at BREAKING THE LAW!

Is there a single item presented there that shows the government doing anything but talking with private entities?

The FBI paid Twitter THREE POINT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS, Fool!

Anything about the government using any form of threat to coerce the cooperation of Facebook or Twitter?

No.

The US government colluding with private companies to SHUT DOWN free speech is a CLEAR and OBVIOUS violation of the First Amendment. PERIOD! It doesn't matter if it is just ONE piece of speech, or if the colluder agrees or disagrees with the government.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-01-30 22:46, Tommy wrote:

On Monday, January 30, 2023 at 1:05:50 PM UTC-8, Alan wrote:

On 2023-01-30 12:12, Tommy wrote:

This came out of a lawsuit by Missouri against the senile
pervert:
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2023/01/09/missouri-attorney-general-releases-more-documents-exposing-white-house's-social-media-censorship-scheme

Of course, this directly violates the First Amendment of the
Constitution, which the pervert either ignores or has forgotten entirely
in his demented mind.

Let's take these one at a time:

'Exhibits include:

The White House asks Twitter to censor Robert Kennedy, Jr., a
known critic of the White House’s COVID-19 narrative'

Sorry, but asking that a single tweet be taken down doesn't violate
the first amendment.

Asking Twitter to act on its own COVID-19 misinformation policy
doesn't violate the first amendment.

Oh, and the tweet WASN'T taken down:

<https://twitter.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1352748139665645569>



'The White House directs Facebook to shut down conservative voices
Tucker Carlson and Tomi Lahren'

Again, this is the administration asking why Facebook's own policy
wasn't being applied.


'White House Digital Director Flaherty scolds Facebook, saying that
he “really couldn’t care less about products unless they’re having
measureable impact” at suppressing speech'

That is literally a lie.

He said he "really couldn’t care less about products unless
they’re having measureable impact" on implementing the policies
that Facebook has put in place.

Again: private companies are allowed to decide what information
gets published on their platforms.


'Flaherty informs Facebook that “misinformation around the vaccine”
is “a concern shared at the highest (and I mean highest) level of
the WH”'

And such misinformation should be a concern.

Next!

<snip>

This is government DOING ITS JOB, Sunshine.

Yes, at BREAKING THE LAW!

Nope.

Is there a single item presented there that shows the government
doing anything but talking with private entities?

The FBI paid Twitter THREE POINT FIVE MILLION DOLLARS, Fool!

Nope. They paid for lawful search expenses.

Anything about the government using any form of threat to coerce
the cooperation of Facebook or Twitter?

No.

The US government colluding with private companies to SHUT DOWN free
speech is a CLEAR and OBVIOUS violation of the First Amendment.
PERIOD! It doesn't matter if it is just ONE piece of speech, or if
the colluder agrees or disagrees with the government.

Sorry, but you're wrong.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)