Trump Plans Legislation Targeting Social Media Immunity

By and | May 29, 2020

  • May 29, 2020 at 9:38 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 15

    While it is true that Trump has been criticized on the social media platforms, the authors of this hit piece does disservice to their audience by immediately implying Trump’s action is singular and personal.

    Trump is only one of millions of people posting online or speaking publicly who have been censored by liberal media or liberal member conversing on various public venues that claim to protect free speech, but which actually protect only the speech of those with whom they agree. And this certainly isn’t news to any Conservative posting on Insurance Journal.

    Case in point re: censorship of public posting of politically conservative opinions: the recent removal of the comments page of this IJ article on the same topic: https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/05/28/570150.htm

    Maintaining an informative, unbiased, and fair media site (website, public building, public venue, etc.) requires that the owners / operators diligently administer their site according to the Terms of Service they set aside, as well as respecting the Rights set out by the US Constitution and its Amendments.

    • May 29, 2020 at 10:07 am
      rob says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 7

      The difference between Trumps’ postings and something that you or I would post is that he has over 80 million followers who hang on every word of his and believe everything he says, whereas if you or I post something, not many people will notice or care that much. He and others in authority SHOULD be held to a higher standard. Personally, there are very few people on either side of the aisle I can stand right now.

      that comment section on the other article wasn’t shut down because of conservative opinions, it was shut down because of the constant nastiness and lack of civility that has been showing up on this INSURANCE forum. It has nothing to do with free speech: While the owners / operators are required to administer their terms and conditions consistently, it’s also up to the users to follow them. If you can’t play by the rules of the playground, get out of the sandbox.

      • May 29, 2020 at 10:21 am
        PolarBeaRepeal says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 13

        LOL at your suggestion that a politician should be held to higher standards. You imply a two-tier class structure for application of Freedoms and rights granted by the US Constitution. Nowhere in that document is it stated to be a two-tier set of rights.

        Did you hold the same stance regarding Obama when he said ‘the Harvard police acted stupidly’?

        • May 29, 2020 at 10:30 am
          rob says:
          Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 14
          Thumb down 2

          Actually, I never voted for Obama either term and was a registered Republican at that point, now a registered Independent.

          I never said politicians should be held to a higher LEGAL standard, but meant a higher standard of RESPONSIBILITY. It’s the same as a professional athlete who is seen as a role model by kids. Or we can break it down even further: if you’re a parent, you should hold yourself to a higher standard so that your kids can see an example of what it means to be a decent human being. Get it now?

          Keep being you, I’ll keep being me, and the sun will still set tonight and rise tomorrow. I’m not going to bother engaging with you any more, because frankly there’s absolutely no point, but I do wish you well. Have a great weekend, Yogi, and everyone else out there in InsuranceJournal Comment Land.

        • May 29, 2020 at 10:40 am
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 12
          Thumb down 7

          Honestly? LOL at your suggestion that a politician SHOULDN’T be held to higher standards. You do know how our government works, right? No one is talking about a two-tier class structure. You’re also being dishonest about “Censoring”. No one censored the president. The president told lies, and twitter put a warning that the statements he said were false, which they were.

          Saying the harvard police acted stupidly is an opinion statement. Saying laws about voter mail will lead to substantial voter fraud is false, and not grounded in reality. Keep trying to defend a liar, Polar.

          Remember the times you’ve been caught lying on these boards? Like when you posted about a YouGov poll from January and said it stated that 90% of Americans were more afraid of terrorism than global warming? And then it turned out since it’s SUPER easy to google “yougov poll january terrorism” that the poll was A. from four years ago and B. did NOT say 90% of americans were more afraid of terrorism than climate change? No wonder you defend the president’s ability to lie online, you do the same thing.

        • May 29, 2020 at 12:58 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 11

          Woosh! My key point went right over both responder’s heads…. their “higher standard” simply means censorship of people with whom they disagree.

          ALL US citizens should be held to the ‘standards’ allowed by the US Constitution. More important, NO US citizen or foreigner should be allowed to restrict ANYONE’S right to free speech by setting ‘higher standards of responsibility or Constitutional law’.

          • May 29, 2020 at 3:11 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 5

            You keep seeming to forget what free speech actually means. Free speech means the government can’t stop you from saying or publishing something. It doesn’t mean someone can’t call you a dirty name and beat you up in the street for spouting offensive material in a public place. It also doesn’t stop anyone from commenting on what you’ve said or published. Trump made a tweet that contained false information. He’s done this MANY times. He had a comment put on his post noting that it contained false information.

            This is not censorship.

            I also notice you didn’t respond to your called out dishonesty. Shock.

        • May 29, 2020 at 4:08 pm
          Bill says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 5
          Thumb down 3

          PBR, you do realize that the 1st amendment does not prevent a private institution from moderating their own comments section or what is posted on their sites…right? It prevents Congress from passing a law that prohibits an individual from speaking (writing) freely. What Trump is really trying to do is violate Twitter’s, and other internet company’s, 1st amendment rights.

          • May 29, 2020 at 5:28 pm
            Craig Winston Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 3

            Actually, what Trump is trying to do IS protect the Constitution’s First Amendment regarding free speech.

            The first Amendment does not allow people to slander other people under the guise of free speech. Newspapers can be sued for same. If newspapers could liable people, then free speech would be abused and rendered quite meaningless.

            Internet platforms have a carve out to that exposure under the assumption they are not publishers. But once they make EDITORIAL comments on the comments of others, guess what? They are publishers.

          • May 30, 2020 at 9:56 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            TOS for those social media sites state one thing about proper conduct but they do not enforce their rules consistently as regards political opinions. Freedom of speech isn’t guaranteed on a private website, but TOS must be upheld if it is published by the owner.

          • May 31, 2020 at 6:34 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            Again, were not talking about a “political opinion” we’re talking about a verifiable lie from the president. You can ignore me bringing up your repeated obvious lies on here, but literally the entire country saw the president lie. Your side keeps trying to explain it away, but you’re just adding a lie to a lie. He’s throwing a tantrum because Twitter called him out for lying. It’s simple bro lol

        • May 31, 2020 at 6:35 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          You claimed a yougov poll from January said 90% of Americans were more afraid of terrorism than climate change. Anyone can search “yougov terrorism January” and find that poll in three seconds. It said no such thing. You lied. And never acknowledged it, because you’re a coward. Now you’re defending another liar retaining his right to lie.

    • May 29, 2020 at 2:37 pm
      Caldude says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 8

      The difference between this “president” and the President before is that, while the other Leaders may have disliked what was said about them by the press, they did not move to eliminate First Amendment Rights. Facism starts slowly by convincing the masses things are being done to protect them. But look out! They are coming for your guns!

      • May 29, 2020 at 5:37 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 3

        Wow, your levels of delusion are astounding. You live in a world of denial, how do you get anything done?

        Russia is real. The president is a Russian assett. They interfered in the last election on his behalf and they’re doing it now. It’s not a “phony accusation” when it’s been proven to be real. The literal only thing you have is that they didn’t believe they had enough evidence to convict a sitting president.

        Keep arguing against the truth, Ivan. We all know your game.

      • May 31, 2020 at 6:36 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        LOL you still think Russia didn’t interfere in the election, clueless

  • May 29, 2020 at 11:13 am
    Jon says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 15

    The president is literally trying to incite violence with racist statements and throwing a tantrum because Twitter marked the post as such this morning. Think about who you’re defending instead of just blindly following Big daddy trump at every opportunity, sheep.

    • May 29, 2020 at 1:44 pm
      Agency says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 6

      The President’s support among blacks hit over 30% a number of times throughout his Presidency, He has people like Kanye West, former NFL players including Jack Brewer and even BET president has shown support for the President. Then you have the black political movement like Candice Owens, Diamond & Silk, Larry Elder and even college bound CJ Pearson. Of course you have Dr. Ben Carson and a number of other blacks in his administration that have great pull. The President got 8% of the black vote in 2016, which is better than the 6% Romney got in 2012. However if the President gets 12% of the black vote in 2020, which is very possible given a 30% approval rating, then it’s game over. Now with all these Black influences for President Trump and all the advances the President has done for blacks, including prison reform, can you agree he can only improve upon his number?

      • May 29, 2020 at 1:55 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 10
        Thumb down 6

        Your terminology is incorrect, for one. “Among black voters” would have been the respectful way to say that, white man.

        washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/trump-approval-among-black-voters-near-20-poll

        Where are you getting your information? Because mine says he’s barely near 20% and common sense says most black americans are smart enough to know he’s a racist. There are exceptions, but 30% is a joke. Kanye West has lost a lot of respect in the black community, and if you knew anything about black people you’d know BET is horrible and not respected. That’s why shows like The Boondocks have been lampooning them for years, but I don’t expect you to actually pay attention to black entertainment.

        The opportunists you mentioned and Dr. Ben Carson don’t really change anything either. I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make other than trying to prove that because the president knows of some black people and some black people love him he can’t be racist? That’s horrifically untrue.

        I cannot agree, no, because I’m actually a black man in this country and I see why people are rioting in Minnesota. A black woman in california just filed a lawsuit against the police department that dragged her, while pregnant, out of a vehicle and stomped on her belly causing a terminated pregnancy. This was a routine traffic stop and she was a passenger who warned them that she was pregnant.

        I don’t know what you’re trying to prove with your post, but suffice to say you do not seem to actually understand racial issues in this country. I would advise you to avoid sticking your foot in your mouth further.

        • May 29, 2020 at 7:29 pm
          Craig Winston Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 1

          Nailed it.

        • May 31, 2020 at 8:00 am
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 1

          @Jon; What’s “fredon of speech”?

          Is it related to “liability protections that Trump is seeking to reform”, per the subject of the article?

          You’re way off topic in your rants herein. But, please continue because it proves IJ staff is supportive of your attempt to silence your critics and posters on the other side of the political aisle…. ” If I had the chance I’d shut you up any way possible, you old hypocrite <3 "

          And, please continue to attempt to discredit those who you cannot convince IJ staff to silence by removal of posts that arise from the opposite side of the political aisle. ( generic quote: "your lies about something you previously wrote").

          PS Trump's action only removes LIABILITY PROTECTION for FREE SPEECH that is harmful to someone's or some entities' reputation. It doesn't prevent the perpetrator from speaking freely in public. Truth is protected. Lies are not protected from legal prosecution if there are damages.

        • May 31, 2020 at 8:19 am
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 1

          @Jon: Freon, which refers to a group of common refrigerant gases, will likely be (was?) banned in the US this year. But I’m certain that freedom of speech won’t be banned in the US anytime in our lives.

          But, rest assured, ‘fredon of speech’ is currently banned by the spelling police.

          @Agency: the ‘crazy talk’ by Jon won’t help re-elect Trump in November. It will be Trump’s multiple, hyuuuge successes in spite of illegal, treasonous opposition over the last 3 years.

        • May 31, 2020 at 6:38 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          Lol are you so lacking in an argument that you’re stooping to insulting my typos? Pathetic. Keep whining because people have eyes and have seen your president lie just like we saw him mishandle the pandemic and like we’re watching him fail the country and whine while cities are on fire. Your time is over LOL

      • May 29, 2020 at 1:56 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 11
        Thumb down 5

        Additionally, after your president quoted an infamous racist officer from Miami and yelled about THUGS in Minneapolis (Btw, we all know Thug is a racist term, the only people who try to pretend it’s not are racists) you’re foolish if you think his support among black voters is going to hit 30%.

        • May 31, 2020 at 6:39 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          Lol please try to deny that thug is a racist term dummy. And you’re totally beyond delusional about the black vote LOL do you even know any black people? Nevermind, I know you won’t be honest.

    • May 30, 2020 at 10:09 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 1

      Twitter is biased against Conservatives. Their assignment of ‘ratings’ is meaningless due to their TDS.

      • May 31, 2020 at 6:39 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 0

        Then maybe the big crybaby in chief should just leave Twitter?

  • May 29, 2020 at 5:40 pm
    Jon says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 2

    LOL tried to get out ahead of my argument? Putting 9/11 being an inside job next to the president being a russian assett is like comparing unicorns and rhinos. One of them isn’t real, and the other has enormous potential for destruction.

    You know Russia interfered. You can try and pretend the president isn’t an assett, Putin just interfered in the last election/is interfering in this election out of the goodness of his heart LOL get a clue

    • May 31, 2020 at 6:40 pm
      Jon says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      LOL weren’t you just whining a few posts off about my off topic posts but now you want to argue Russia? The evidence is out there, try somewhere other than your tin foil hat right wing extremist blogs, polar.



Comment have been closed for this article.