That’s a traditionally conservatives viewpoint. It’s not that he wasn’t robbed, it’s that he was naive.

Lol the “that sentence is redundant” comment actually made me snort. Took me a second to get it.

@RobertGrulerEsq this meme made me think of you, Merry Christmas!

@WaffleWaffle I don't really blame Trump, he was too busy campaigning to realize he was being backstabbed by the GOP. If the Party had his back at all they would have been challenging this election starting on election night when any fool could see fuckery coming. But Trump gambled he could win big enough to make fraud impossible to achieve on the sly. He achieved that goal, but they just did the fraud right out in the open and agreed not to mess with the down-ticket races (a tacit agreement I assume). There won't be any cheating in the Georgia runoff because the GOP is totally in on the steal.

so...he didnt drain the swamp?

The swamp is vast and deep

Just like the "Curse of Oak Island"

so no drain?

Promises were made. I have questions.

The drain is more of a trickle at the moment. Its like ridding your lawn of weeds. You got a lot of work to get it all out. Some mask themselves to blend in as much as possible

To be fair, he's done a good job of shedding people he hired. 👍

Yes as I stated you can rid the noticable ones, but there are ones well hidden

Sounds hard. Maybe not the most responsible promise to make, kinda like repealing Obamacare. No one knew it was so complicated...except everyone.

Part of obamacre was good, but others not good. As Trump an admin have looked at every aspect of that package. So taking out the individual mandate was good while keeping the pre-existing conditions being protected

Obamacare*

Also price transparency is a good step also

I was expecting a drain and a lock up.

I got neither.

@Zuluzeit that is a great point. the swamp draining started with his own administration!

he actually tried and started with the most corrupt people he could see!

I feel like there should be mandatory demagogue loyalty tests. That's the only way we can know for sure.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-740.html

@Liberty or Death, you just advanced to level 6!

I hadn't even heard of this case. I was just looking for updates on other cases. They are supposed to respond by today, so we will see.

SOooooo you think that Twitter is a "defacto government" interesting thought

smh

Twitter Terms Of Service have replaced the Constitution as our founding document. LOL.

They might qualify seeing as they are a gatekeeper for communication

@Darkangael, you just advanced to level 11!

I think that is why Sen Ted Cruz was trying to get Twitter and Facebook CEOs to admit that they were digital public squares in one of the hearings over the last 4 years. If Twitter and Facebook were considered a kind of digital public square then it could potentially be argued that Marsh v. Alabama would apply. But without a statement like that I think it would be difficult. But as I am not a lawyer I don't know for sure. It is interesting to think about though.

Its just not a Free Speech issue. It WOULD be a Free Speech issue if Congress created a law that prohibited Twitter, FaceBook and the like from suspending or canceling account.

once they've allowed the president to have a voice, they're not allowed to delete or cancel his account, those are official government records.

eh it's just your 1st right my 2nd one already needs a permit. Hey I can drive a car in all 50 states but my "permit" doesn't let me protect myself in all 50 states. What's up with that?

driving a car is a privilege. breathing air is a right.

i'd say the 2nd amendment has been under attack for some time, and i hope the backlash to the next couple years is a huge reversal in policy via scotus

Do not hang a future on scotus or any elected body.

My thought process is that Marsh v. Alabama might apply, if they were a "digital" public square. Its a stretch but then again some of the more interesting court cases involve a bit of a stretch. Marsh v. Alabama, the courts ruled that a private company acting like a pseudo government entity is bound by the Constitution. So, could FB/Twitter because of their size and the number of users be considered the digital version of a public square, in a similar way.

@AntiFish03 Agreed. Marsh can apply if a public forum is established, good cases to look at: Knight v. Trump, Packingham and Pruneyard. Knight and Packingham both recognize digital public forums. Knight confirms that interactions between citizens and government accounts/officials are protected the same as the physical counterparts.

@AntiFish03 Packingham is cited in the Knight decision and recognizes social media writ large is the modern town square/public space. Pruneyard is similar to Marsh in that even within privately owned structures (a mall) if there are spaces set aside for public speech, viewpoint discrimination protections can be applied and enforced by the courts.