Correct. They're moving it from December to January

Jan 6th I thought is what some are arguing

Yes. Most are and it is probably the correct Date IMO.

I don't know exactly what day but maybe they're doing it for NV to be able to have theirs around the same time.

@BoxyPunkChick, you just advanced to level 3!

It's hard because one place can give one date, and another source can give another. 😂

I think SCOTUS will rule before this coming Mon (including not even taking the case) and it won't be in TX's favor ... that will pretty much be the end of it ... it's possible that there is an objection in Congress on Jan 6th but I can't see Congress failing to certify the electors vote

anyone seen any evidence that trump is moving troops?

Jan 6th is the actual Date that the designation of "President Elect" is determined.

I have not heard of any action to do that. I heard people asking him to. If there is evidence I would not doubt that would be censored immediately.

You may be correct.

@BoxyPunkChick yes the censorship is annoying

What's more annoying is that they claim to be a platform not a publisher. Yet they still do it.

Makes me wanna slap them. 😂

"National Security" can be a fancy title for censorship!

"Patriot Act" isn't for spying on US Citizens. It is for finding the enemy.

Worst thing is that its so blatant, they don't even try to hide it anymore

Well we still were spied on.

They don't care to.

Why would they? Anyone speaks out, they close their accounts. They sue them for slander.

It's disgusting, especially when it comes to the election.

Has anyone seen the new rules on YT for discussion involving the election?

covered in Wed's livestream ... right at the beginning

They added to it.

oh wonderful ... of course they did

I love how You Tube has stated this is their "Historical" Policy on Presidential Elections. They didn't follow that in 2016.

I don’t think the details of their rules are important. They remove who they want and don’t have to answer to anybody.

One of the major problems with the Law in 230. Is it gave then all of this Protection without assigning any Responsibilities to it. IMO

I personally think we need a constitutional amendment to extend free speech to privately owned public digital spaces. And I think it’s justifiable as humanity merges conscious experience increasingly into privately owned digital spaces.

For example, in 200 years there could be people who spend 75% of their conscious life in a cloud virtual experience owned by Amazon.

Yeah but look at tiktok, it came from almost nowhere. parler is also only a few years old and it has come so far too

Yeah, it is true that competitors will arise, it just takes a few years.

Oh snap Barr is sending the FBI to give subpoena to Paxton. Will the Texas AG be in jail before the scotus picks up this case? The plot thickens.

Sorry but I disagree. Private is private and the private owners get to determine what is and is not allowed on private property by the same token private owners assume liability for their actions.

I think there is a threat from a company like Google who is creating an entire digital universe in which everyone exists, and has the power to do whatever it wants to you in its new universe.

Google should have been broken up years ago

Right. This was updated this election, then the other half that they emailed directly to some media outlets is the rest. Yet they refuse to send to created.

It could be an easy fix. If a Company wants the Liability Protections as established by Law (a Government Action). Place on it some type of First Amendment Requirements. The Protections given make you a Quasi-Government Actor.

Creators*

In such a scenario its imaginable that one might not even be possible to survive without Google

the mypillow guy is going to create a rival to amazon 🙂