[ Editor’s Note: Trump loses another big court case, this one with Twitter. But from his viewpoint, it’s only a loss if he has to pay for it out of his pocket. The last I heard, he had free rein with his campaign funds to pay all of his legal expenses under the cover that “it’s all political”. He does love being ‘Da Judge’.
I am still waiting for Congress to fund beefing up the federal court infrastructure, i.e., the physical part, with more judges and more staff, otherwise the justice delayed quandary will continue indefinitely, with more people dying of old age before their cases are ever resolved.
The fun part of the Insurrection and The Steal litigation will include seeing the plotters exposed via all of their conspiratorial communications, in paper, audio and video, and live testimony, in quantities that will make Watergate look like a bump in the road. Trump might croak before it is over, which would be a shame.
I watched some campaign video on him yesterday, in Pennsylvania. It was scary, with Trump acting like he was in a dementia comedy movie… saying things about a candidate running for the Senate, Dr. Oz, that his wife was going to make a wonderful ‘first lady’. It went on and on.
One of the best weapons to deal with Trump is to keep getting him in front of campaign crowds. This venue had people leaving in ankle deep mud when it was over, having been an ‘inexpensive venue’ in a field somewhere. We all need to pace ourselves for the long haul here, as I see no end in sight… Jim W. Dean ]
Jim's Editor’s Notes are solely crowdfunded via PayPal
Jim's work includes research, field trips, Heritage TV Legacy archiving & more. Thanks for helping. Click to donate >>
First published May 7, 2022
A federal judge in San Francisco on Friday dismissed a lawsuit filed by former President Donald Trump against Twitter over its decision to permanently kick him off the social media platform following the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Last July, Trump filed separate cases against Twitter, Facebook and Google’s YouTube service over similar decisions to limit or eliminate his ability to use their sites to spread his messages about election fraud and other issues.
The suits contended that the social media companies were essentially acting as government agents when they banned his speech and that doing so violated the First Amendment, which applies only to government action, not that of private companies or individuals.
“Plaintiffs offer only ambiguous and open-ended statements to the effect that ‘we may legislate’ something unfavorable to Twitter or the social media sector,” wrote Donato, an appointee of former President Barack Obama.
“There is no way to allege with any degree of plausibility when, if ever, the comments voiced by a handful of members of Congress might become a law, or what changes such a law might impose on social media companies like Twitter. … Much of what plaintiffs challenge fits within the normal boundaries of a congressional investigation, as opposed to threats of punitive state action.”
Jim W. Dean is VT Editor Emeritus. He was an active editor on VT from 2010-2022. He was involved in operations, development, and writing, plus an active schedule of TV and radio interviews. He now writes and posts periodically for VT.
ATTENTION READERSWe See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.
About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Publishers have the right to edit or not publish.
Under section 230 social media companies are not supposed to edit content.
You really have a perverse sense of humor Dean. Obviously the judge who threw out the lawsuit wouldn’t know the 1st Amendment if it bit him is the ass. Funny how you call angry Trumpers with the help of the CP, CIs, Antifa and BLM agent provocateurs an “insurrection” while ignoring the actual Insurrection that has been ongoing since Trump was elected and even prior to that when they spied on his campaign which has been well documented by Durham.
Well that is what the Appeals process if for. In the end someone will win and someone will lose, and they case might be become a precedent, or add to one. And then we go on to the next case. I am actually trying to make time later to actually police up all the print outs of the cases I have here, all with yellow highlights to make them quicker to review with quotes. VT commenters do a lot of this work, too, and share, and that helps us all. I hate to quote Hillary, but my favorite is “It takes a village”.
Comments are closed.