thephan wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

thephan wrote:I the first amendment

Trump cannot block political adversaries on twitter, so says the courts.

This is so stupid

Back to my question, now that the Court ruled, and Trump ignored the ruling, which part is the dumb part? If policy edicts were not being blazed off of a private twitter handle I might view it differently as any complaining by the public might be troll tastic, but since the official POTUS twitter is ignored in favor of the hyperactive person account, it slides into a strange place. Oh, and maybe a relevant question is if the official account can/has ever blocked any one.

Twitter is a private company and this ruling should be invalidated by a higher court. Responding to Trump on Twitter is not 'public' space as the law currently stands, I don't think.

If you mesh that up against the fact that tweets are recorded as official public record it seems to wobble. I guess it is a strange discussion over all, but is it really that different then news outlets/network which are mandated to give equal time?

<rabbit hole>

if it were up to me I'd crush these tech companies into a fine paste

i'm not sure how exactly to write up that statute

I don't think that Twitter being a private company matters. Twitter is a private company providing a public forum. A public figure in a public forum is trying to block people from speaking in public. Maybe?

No, it's more like people are talking to him and he plugs his ears for the "La la la, I can't hear you!" gambit.

Beyoncé is part of the illuminati!

The GOP nominee for an Illinois House seat,Bill Falwell, touted conspiracy theories that the September 11, 2001, attacks were an inside job, and that the pop star Beyoncé has ties to the Illuminati

Trump one that district by 1%

He’s good to go with t swift being in the big I club too.

Random question. My employer requires us to disclose any donations we make as individuals to the company. Can they do that? I’m not really into informing my company of my political affiliations

To what company?

sorry that was shitily worded. If I make a political donation I have to disclose it to my employer which doesn't seem legal.

I know when you make a political contribution independently you have to list your employer. I wonder if they have some sort of mandatory reporting??

The Washington Post is reporting that Trump is demeaning to minorities and immigrants in meetings and private discussions in the halls of the White House. The post also reports that the Republicans do not seem to care. I'm waiting for a headline that actually shocks me

Bill McNeal wrote:sorry that was shitily worded. If I make a political donation I have to disclose it to my employer which doesn't seem legal.

Two points: First, political donations are public information. (Fun weekend activity--go to Opensecrets.org, enter your zipcode, find out who your neighbors support--I did this once in class as a demonstration, and the was surprised to see a student's mother had made a substantial political contribution. The student was even more surprised, and a little irritated, as he felt she should have used that money to increase his allowance or something I guess).

Second, it may not be as invasive as it looks, since many companies match charitable contributions. (I doubt they'll match political contributions though.)

Bucky wrote:https://stateandfed.com/lobbycomply/campaign-finance-2/ask-the-experts-employee-personal-political-contributions/

That is the dumbest answer I've ever heard. It is not 'smart' to control your employees' personal opinions.

TenuredVulture wrote:the was surprised to see a student's mother had made a substantial political contribution. The student was even more surprised, and a little irritated, as he felt she should have used that money to increase his allowance or something I guess

talk about feelin the bern

Alternate facts are back! Rudy with the our facts, and their facts, and facts are flexible.

FBI obtained wiretaps of Putin ally who met with Trump Jr.

“Just a few months ago, the wiretaps of these telephone conversations were given to the FBI,” Grinda said in response to a question from Yahoo News during a talk he gave at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington. Asked if he was concerned about Torshin’s meetings with Donald Trump Jr. and other American political figures, Grinda replied: “Mr. Trump’s son should be concerned.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-son-c ... 15529.html

The FBI has obtained secret wiretaps collected by Spanish police

José Grinda spearheaded investigations into Spanish organized crime fwiw. No need to worry little Don.

thephan wrote:

The FBI has obtained secret wiretaps collected by Spanish police

José Grinda spearheaded investigations into Spanish organized crime fwiw. No need to worry little Don.

that's pretty clearly what we're dealing with. It's organized crime and money laundering, or that's where it started.

pacino wrote:

Bucky wrote:https://stateandfed.com/lobbycomply/campaign-finance-2/ask-the-experts-employee-personal-political-contributions/

That is the dumbest answer I've ever heard. It is not 'smart' to control your employees' personal opinions.

Doesn't sound dumb at all to me IF your company is involved at all with government contracts. Do think it needs to be reciprocated, as plenty of companies have tried to get around donation limits by ascribing them to individual employees, plus I'd like to know what my company is using the dollars earned off my labor to support. Can also think of instances where the donations of higher-ranking employees to causes contrary to the interests of the company might cause a media backlash.

If not involved is possible contracts or conflict of interest, then, yeah, you should ask why they want to know.