Posts: 29,292
Threads: 289
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
01-13-2021, 04:47 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-13-2021, 04:52 AM by LP.)
(01-13-2021, 02:27 AM)Baggers date Wrote:Exactamundo. I get the feeling those complaining are doing so mostly out a fear those social media services will treat this as a precident, and they'll get cut off for peddling the same shizen!
Free speech is a right, but as Malcolm Turnbull stated freedom of speech doesn't include "freedom from having responsibility for one's statements", and it's clear some think they can speak and write whatever they like under freedom of speech without having liability or responsibility. That never was and never will be the case, but I bet people like Andrew Bolt scream bloody murder anyway!
Sensible people need to make sure the debate is framed in the correct and viable context!
What happened to Trump is neither a threat to free speech or democracy, it's a threat to despotism!
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Posts: 12,204
Threads: 37
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
(01-13-2021, 04:47 AM)LP link Wrote:I get the feeling those complaining are doing so mostly out a fear those social media services will treat this as a precident, and they'll get cut off for peddling the same shizen!
Free speech is a right, but as Malcolm Turnbull stated freedom of speech doesn't include "freedom from having responsibility for one's statements", and it's clear some think they can speak and write whatever they like under freedom of speech without having liability or responsibility. That never was and never will be the case, but I bet people like Andrew Bolt scream bloody murder anyway!
Sensible people need to make sure the debate is framed in the correct and viable context!
What happened to Trump is neither a threat to free speech or democracy, it's a threat to despotism!
Im choosing to think of things differently.
The media has gone down social media street.
With Social media showing such a strong hand in banning content, they open themselves to a bit more scrutiny with respect to how they view the public and are viewed by the public. Could he in theory call them out for defamation with respect to this "incitefulness" if Trump is indeed proven to have been guilty, could the action of banning him have caused a prejudiced Jury?
Does this open many avenues of future lititation and regulation and perhaps a change in how these platforms are perceived??
I dont know those answers, they are broader than Trump, and its only an example of something that might be.
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Posts: 29,292
Threads: 289
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
01-13-2021, 09:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021, 12:06 AM by LP.)
(01-13-2021, 06:36 AM)Thryleon date Wrote:Does this open many avenues of future lititation and regulation and perhaps a change in how these platforms are perceived?? This is inevitable, once the big social platforms decided they were going to chase and replace mainstream media's advertising dollar, they needed regulation, in my opinion it's already taken too long to happen as they have used fat wallets to prevent it!
They've become the digital version of The Truth, you wouldn't leave that sort of rubbish unregulated, why the feck should FakeBook, Instatwerk or Twatty escape the same fate?
They are defacto broadcasters, they need regulation.
By the way, I agree the media have gone down the path of inciting the public, but they are a corporate entity not an individual despot! However that issue also needs to be addressed, but I doubt the gutless politicians will do anything about it, you can already see the piss-weak garnishing media favour, even here in Australia our Deputy Prime Minister is brown-nosing the media looking for favours by lauding it's freedom under a veneer or free speech, again free speech isn't free of responsibility. Make them responsible, they use to be held accountable it wasn't always like it is now, that seems reasonable! Part two make them pay their way, eliminate the free ride!
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Posts: 20,141
Threads: 165
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
Posts: 12,204
Threads: 37
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
(01-13-2021, 10:26 PM)PaulP link Wrote:https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-ameri...56ty0.html
Amazing
Correct me if wrong, wasnt trump acquitted the first time of his impeachment?
Why do they say he is impeached again when it didnt hold the first time?
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Posts: 12,204
Threads: 37
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
On another note, I did some reading and found this interesting too.
https://theconversation.com/impeaching-t...ork-152965
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Posts: 29,292
Threads: 289
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
01-14-2021, 01:14 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-14-2021, 01:29 AM by LP.)
(01-14-2021, 12:21 AM)Thryleon date Wrote:Why do they say he is impeached again when it didnt hold the first time? I believe Trump wasn't impeached because the even though The House and Senate majority voted for it, the 2/3rds Senate threshold wasn't achieved because of voting along party lines.
Same will apply again today, he won't be impeached by the Senate because you need about 1/2 the Republicans to cross the floor, and so they will get a small majority decision of guilty but not enough to act on it.
I believe Murdoch media back in 2019 reported the inability to get the 2/3rds Senate threshold as Trump being acquitted, but it's hardly the same as a unanimous no vote! It's a bit like a Joe Average being found guilty by 7 out of 12 jurors and then being set free, and obviously some charges require the jury to be unanimous, but not all, many charges are just covered by a majority verdict with a similar threshold like 9/3 or 10/2. Depends on the jurisdiction, it's not universal.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Posts: 10,710
Threads: 117
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
Posts: 29,292
Threads: 289
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation:
0
(01-14-2021, 01:34 AM)madbluboy date Wrote:https://www.politico.com/interactives/20...e-results/ Yes sorry, I had the Senate count back to front in the first impeachment.
For/Against
House = 230/197 and 229/198
Senate = 48/52 and 47/53
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"
Posts: 5,437
Threads: 168
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation:
0
(01-14-2021, 12:21 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:Amazing
Correct me if wrong, wasnt trump acquitted the first time of his impeachment?
Why do they say he is impeached again when it didnt hold the first time?
The 'impeachment' is the House of Representative's responsibility.
So he's been impeached for a second time by the House.
It's the 'charge' part of the process.
It then goes to the senate where the 'trial' takes place
|
