EXACTLY 7 years ago, Nunez filed a lawsuit against Twitter regarding content published against him.

Ultimately the judge determined that "content" by a 3rd party could not be held against Twitter under 47 U.S. Code § 230 (twitter was not the "creator of the content") and the case was dismissed.

https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/nunes-v-twitter-inc/

My question is: If Twitter cannot be held responsible for posts made by a 3rd party, per this court ruling, then is "shadow-banning" or deleting of a person's Twitter account a first amendment violation? Note that the majority of accounts closed were those of people who had an alternate opinion than that of Twitter and/or the Narrative that was being pushed.

I ask as I had 2 Twitter accounts blocked/removed/shut down.

>>24400768

>>24400768

There is no Step Five

>>24400961

One might ask why these microwave antennas were spaced to where a one inch movement might cause this effect to begin with?

Too sketchy.

Too "iffy"

Seems like a problem waiting to happen.

POTUS-TIPPY TOPin conversation with journalist….

Q1783 on the clock

>>24401263

>golden tie

SIDE NOTE: in MELANIA the movie, FLOTUS hosted a very large and elaborate dinner party. Obviously, everything was Top shelf. Including the appetizer: A Golden Egg

The Goose that laid the Golden Egg - comes to mind.

Kinda befitting the current sitchiation.

>>24401270

>>24401312

Does this suggest that the countries that sent the most illegals here are the countries that received a kickback from our govt?

Can DOGE track, trace and confirm this?

>>24401286

What a tremendous endorsement of Trump's world vision from Japan!