Trump threatens to veto Military budget

[Manwon Lender 16,217]

• President Donald Trump tweeted late on Tuesday night that he would veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) unless it included a repeal of Section 230.
• Even in the most optimistic scenario any final rule will be challenged immediately in court and be put on hold," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics at Indiana University. "Plus, any executive action in this context cannot fundamentally change Section 230, not without Congressional action."  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-is-threatening-to-veto-dollar740-billion-in-military-spending-unless-congress-revokes-section-230-—-the-internet-law-he-hates/ar-BB1bytYD

•  
• President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday seeking to crack down on social-media companies over allegations of bias against conservatives.
• Trump's executive order seeks to empower federal regulators to amend a statute that gives social-media companies broad authority to moderate speech on their platforms.  https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-signs-executive-order-threatening-twitter-facebook-conservative-bias-2020-5?r=eo-landing

 

[RoofGardener 17,276]

This seems to be a bit confused ? The President can veto ANY bill, though Congress can subsequently over-ride the veto. I don't know what the comment about "executive action" is all about ? Or indeed, the refference to the courts ? 

[Tiggs 7,034]

Guess we're not funding the military, then.

[RAyMO 5,494]

does this make sense from a Trump perspective. Defunding the military will hit him hard in voters perceptions. However, unless he can repeal 230 then once his term ends he could find himself banned on twitter et al. effectively silenced. 

[RoofGardener 17,276]

6 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

does this make sense from a Trump perspective. Defunding the military will hit him hard in voters perceptions. However, unless he can repeal 230 then once his term ends he could find himself banned on twitter et al. effectively silenced. 

I think he was just objecting to the section that calls for the renaming of military bases named after Confederate generals ? (or anybody who upsets tender liberal SJW feelings ? )

[RAyMO 5,494]

9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I think he was just objecting to the section that calls for the renaming of military bases named after Confederate generals ? (or anybody who upsets tender liberal SJW feelings ? )

• Section 230 is the part of US law that grants broad protections allowing tech companies to moderate their own platforms.
• Trump has been trying to roll it back since Twitter first applied fact-checks to his tweets in May.

"Section 230, which is a liability shielding gift from the U.S. to “Big Tech” (the only companies in America that have it - corporate welfare!), is a serious threat to our National Security & Election Integrity. Our Country can never be safe & secure if we allow it to stand....." - trump 

this is another one of those strange things about the US - you can have a bill about 1 thing say the military in this case and tack something totally different onto it - as in social media companies. 

or  bill on housing and tack on something about stock car racing - weird system. 

Edited December 2, 2020 by RAyMO

[Manwon Lender 16,217]

33 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

does this make sense from a Trump perspective. Defunding the military will hit him hard in voters perceptions. However, unless he can repeal 230 then once his term ends he could find himself banned on twitter et al. effectively silenced. 

That's the enigma of the Trump, but you summed it up in the first four words, you said sense!! Well we all know that Trump has no sense common or otherwise, and that he is an emotionally, unstable, and hate fill human being. Who has no impulse control. so nothing surprises me, he is liable to do anything on nothing but a whim!!

Take care my friend

[South Alabam 7,905]

Make our nation less safe thru a lack of military funding, so he can rant on Twitter.

[Buzz_Light_Year 4,027]

FCC has the authority to interpret Section 230.

[Manwon Lender 16,217]

2 minutes ago, South Alabam said:

Make our nation less safe thru a lack of military funding, so he can rant on Twitter.

Yes that's exactly what he is trying to do, he has never cared about America or even the people who support him. In that sick mind of his everything is me, me ,me and nothing else. I honestly beleive he is one of the most self centered people on this planet. Now that may seem harsh, but look what he has done since November 3rd when he lost the election. Since that day, he has done nothing for the Nation or its people, we have more than 1000 people that have died in just one day. The medical personnel are running out of PPE, and no stimulus package has been passed and the day after Xmas more than 100'000 more people are going to lose their bennifits, and what has the Big Fat Jackass done, not a dam thing.

How can anyone be more of a belly crawling Scumbag than that peice of flagellant and incontinant peice of Camel Dung, dam where is a Herd of Dung Beatles when you need them!!

Sorry for the rant, just had to get it off my chest! Take Care my friend.

[South Alabam 7,905]

7 minutes ago, Manwon Lender said:

Yes that's exactly what he is trying to do, he has never cared about America or even the people who support him. In that sick mind of his everything is me, me ,me and nothing else. I honestly beleive he is one of the most self centered people on this planet. Now that may seem harsh, but look what he has done since November 3rd when he lost the election. Since that day, he has done nothing for the Nation or its people, we have more than 1000 people that have died in just one day. The medical personnel are running out of PPE, and no stimulus package has been passed and the day after Xmas more than 100'000 more people are going to lose their bennifits, and what has the Big Fat Jackass done, not a dam thing.

How can anyone be more of a belly crawling Scumbag than that peice of flagellant and incontinant peice of Camel Dung, dam where is a Herd of Dung Beatles when you need them!!

Sorry for the rant, just had to get it off my chest! Take Care my friend.

It is always me, me, me when it comes to Trump and being in the spot light. In fact he is one of the greatest, if not the greatest man that ever lived, with the highest IQ of course, so high it could not be measured - This is the delusional world of Trump

[RoofGardener 17,276]

I'm really confused. Is this 'Section 230' part of the 2021 defence authorisation act ?   I can't find the text of it anywhere ? 

There WAS a 'section 230' of the Communications Decency Act 1996 that seems to cover this sort of thing ? 

[Tiggs 7,034]

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

I'm really confused. Is this 'Section 230' part of the 2021 defence authorisation act ?   I can't find the text of it anywhere ? 

There WAS a 'section 230' of the Communications Decency Act 1996 that seems to cover this sort of thing ? 

That's the one.

It's removal would render sites with user content (such as UM) legally responsible for that content.

As much fun as that might sound -- I suspect it would result in those sites just blocking all US access.

[aztek 24,041]

block us access, and loose all that  ads revenue paid by us companies, as well as data mining and selling?? sure,   i'd like to see it happen, lol

what i would support is USA blocking some sites that promote and sup[port anti American views,  

Edited December 2, 2020 by aztek

[Tiggs 7,034]

14 minutes ago, aztek said:

block us access, and loose all that  ads revenue paid by us companies, as well as data mining and selling?? sure,   i'd like to see it happen, lol  

You'd have to ask @saru for UM in particular, but I can't imagine the revenue for most sites would cover sustained legal fees.

[and then 46,608]

5 hours ago, RAyMO said:

does this make sense from a Trump perspective. Defunding the military will hit him hard in voters perceptions. However, unless he can repeal 230 then once his term ends he could find himself banned on twitter et al. effectively silenced. 

The platforms are growing, no longer do you have to put up with Dorsey or the Zucker to state an opinion.  Parler is growing explosively.  Rumble and Bit Chute are taking off as well.  Trump won't be silenced.  If it were going to be THAT easy, these hate-filled zealots wouldn't be losing their minds over putting him behind bars.  For those who think that allowing a handful of people, all of the same ideology, to silence free speech that opposes them is a positive thing, they'll deserve the future they're building for their children.  Chaos isn't exactly a good path forward.

[Cookie Monster 8,030]

6 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

• President Donald Trump tweeted late on Tuesday night that he would veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) unless it included a repeal of Section 230.
• Even in the most optimistic scenario any final rule will be challenged immediately in court and be put on hold," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics at Indiana University. "Plus, any executive action in this context cannot fundamentally change Section 230, not without Congressional action."  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-is-threatening-to-veto-dollar740-billion-in-military-spending-unless-congress-revokes-section-230-—-the-internet-law-he-hates/ar-BB1bytYD

•  
• President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday seeking to crack down on social-media companies over allegations of bias against conservatives.
• Trump's executive order seeks to empower federal regulators to amend a statute that gives social-media companies broad authority to moderate speech on their platforms.  https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-signs-executive-order-threatening-twitter-facebook-conservative-bias-2020-5?r=eo-landing

 

I think for once this is a tactical mistake by Trump.

He should say we are going to double the size of the army, double military wages, and if you want it to stay that way you best be loyal to me.

[RAyMO 5,494]

2 minutes ago, and then said:

The platforms are growing, no longer do you have to put up with Dorsey or the Zucker to state an opinion.  Parler is growing explosively.  Rumble and Bit Chute are taking off as well.  Trump won't be silenced.  If it were going to be THAT easy, these hate-filled zealots wouldn't be losing their minds over putting him behind bars.  For those who think that allowing a handful of people, all of the same ideology, to silence free speech that opposes them is a positive thing, they'll deserve the future they're building for their children.  Chaos isn't exactly a good path forward.

Happy to see him move to whatever platform he likes. Hell he can set up his own for that matter. 

[RAyMO 5,494]

1 minute ago, Cookie Monster said:

I think for once this is a tactical mistake by Trump.

 

yes big mistake, Americans won't  make the connection of defunding to 230. They'll just see Trump as one of last acts defunded the military - which is why I suspect he will not do it. Twits are easy action is much harder. 

[and then 46,608]

1 minute ago, Tiggs said:

You'd have to ask @saru for UM in particular, but I can't imagine the revenue for most sites would cover sustained legal fees.

The impact of such changes to 230 could be completely avoided if these pompous asses at the top of the social media platforms would stick to providing content without obvious political censorship.  After what we've seen in this election cycle, it's foolish to still say there is no censorship.  It's bold, out there and in the faces of Conservatives every day.  If they want to censor for reasons other than to suppress actual calls for violence, then they have taken on the role of publishers.  It's pretty simple.  

I've also noticed Twitter and FB using language against these competitors that accuses them of being "Far Right" or extremists.  IOW, anyone who refuses to submit to Dorsey and the Zucker are potentially dangerous to America.  

[and then 46,608]

4 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Happy to see him move to whatever platform he likes. Hell he can set up his own for that matter. 

Now THAT is a completely reasonable and fair-minded outlook.  The answer to "offensive" speech has always been MORE speech, not less.

[Golden Duck 11,744]

7 hours ago, Tiggs said:

Guess we're not funding the military, then.

That's one way of reducing Government debt, right?  That's good isn't it?

Go Trump?

[aztek 24,041]

1 hour ago, and then said:

Now THAT is a completely reasonable and fair-minded outlook.  

maybe but it is no longer relevant in USA,  as showed by gaycake, why could they not find another bakery?

[the13bats 11,936]

5 hours ago, and then said:

Chaos isn't exactly a good path forward

Then please stop condoning and promoting it.

[President Wearer of Hats 34,752]

9 hours ago, and then said:

  Chaos isn't exactly a good path forward.

No, it’s eight paths to follow