Twitter censored Tucker Carlson. Tucker's response?: " F*ck Twitter " T-shirts.
Hurry! You can get the combo pack--T-shirt and bumper sticker--for $35.
Tucker invited Twitter CEO, Parag Agrawal, to be on his show last night, but he refused. Tucker thought that was cowardly of him.
However, Tucker let his words from a podcast speak for him: " Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation...The kinds of things that we do work about this is to focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking how the times have changed...Most people can speak but our role which is particularly emphasized is who can be heard."
Can you believe what you just read? Is this still America?
This is a guy who came from India to attend school at Stanford. He must have been too heavily exposed to the woke, Silicone Valley pixie dust.
This one man, who is not concerned with our tradition of free speech, controls speech and who will be heard, on one of the most powerful social media platforms in the world.
Double your order of T-shirts!
Replies to: Twitter censored Tucker Carlson. Tucker's response?: " F*ck Twitter " T-shirts.
I’m always astounded at the extent of the misunderstanding of what the First Amendment protects.
A private company is not covered by the First Amendment—they can publish whatever they want to.
Congress shall make no law . .. abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.
In other words, the First Amendment protects Twitter from Government intervention about what they can publish—not the other way around.
.
Link: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/
This is a decent analysis but Congress can always regulate monopolies,
(no message)
Using 'monopoly' is a strawman reply. Twitter isn't stopping anyone else. It's like saying...
Microsoft is a monopoly. No, no one i stupid enough to enter the computer operating system world and think they can be on par with them.
Hmmm... you are being too coy. Twitter fits perfectly into the anti-trust definition of monopoly
And Congress can tweak the law to make it fit.
Link: https://www.justice.gov/atr/monopoly-power-and-market-power-antitrust-law
The government could prevent Twitter from merging with Facebook, or acquiring news outlets, but
I can’t see anyway to regulate their “speech” (content) under Antitrust jurisprudence.
I'm not going to read all of that. Summarize it based on Twitter's company practices.
(no message)
Twitter and Big Tech are extensions of the Democratic Party.
(no message)
Sure Partisan Patty!
(no message)
Comrade Tucker also donated $250 to fellow traitor MGT's campaign. Rupert M created a monster.
(no message)
Parag Agrawal will be spending a lot of time at Congressional hearings after the mid terms.
When you have a monopoly on the nation's political information distribution you are begging to be regulated.
Imagine, the ignoble Carlson gagged because he disseminates false and misleading info
to his lumpen nation turns it around as a money maker by selling Teeshirts and soon to be more Merch!
Eli and the rest of Trucker’s proles will soon be able to wear your starred sickle and hammer Ts with Carlson and Putin’s visage proudly emblazoned on the front without fear.
By the way, Twitter didn’t interfere with Carlson’s 1st amendment rights, they just corrected a problem in their product.
What is the false/misleading info? False to you or false to the truth? Details please.
(no message)
I look forward to all the who cares about Tucker responses I typically see.
(no message)
if only Tucker were a sponsor of terrorists.
(no message)