“Saagar Enjeti gives his thoughts on how Republicans are repeating history by distancing themselves from President Trump in case of a presidential defeat. He also explains how this may hurt the GOP in the future, despite a Joe Biden victory.”
“Blogger Who Falsely Accused Army Colonel Of Rape Learns Her Fate. Col. David “Wil” Riggins was on the verge of promotion when he learned that campus was “provably false,” and that she wrote two blog posts and a Facebook Accused of rape by a blogger who attended West Point with him, he sued”
Trump said, “I call the head of Exxon. I don’t know. I’ll use a company. Hi, how, how are you doing, how’s energy coming? When are doing the exploration? Oh, you need a couple of permits, huh? Ok, But I call the head of Exxon, I say, ‘you know, I’d love you to send me $25m for the campaign’” Absolutely, sir, why didn’t you ask? Would you like some more?”
” Where the confusion has arisen is in the use of the term “publisher” in another context as courts have interpreted Section 230. Sometimes the term “publisher” itself means “facilitator” or “distributor” of someone else’s content. When courts first started thinking about Section 230 (see, e.g., Zeran v. AOL) they sometimes used the term because it helped them understand what Section 230 was trying to accomplish. It was trying to protect the facilitator or distributor of others’ expression – or, in other words, the platform people used to make that expression – and using the term “publisher” from our pre-Section 230 understanding of media law helped the courts recognize the legal effect of the statute.
Using the term did not, however, change that effect. Or the basic operation of the statute. The core question in any Section 230 analysis has always been: who originated the content at issue? That a platform may have “published” it by facilitating its appearance on the Internet does not make it the publisher for purposes of determining legal responsibility for it, because “publishing” is not the same as “creating.” And Section 230 – and all the court cases interpreting it – have made clear that it is only the creator who can be held liable for what was created.
There are plenty of things we can still argue about regarding Section 230, but whether someone is a publisher versus a platform should not be one of them. It is only the creator v. facilitator distinction that matters.”
“Atlantic editor Adrienne LaFrance discusses QAnon, the conspiracy theory that claims President Trump is battling a deep state child sex trafficking ring, run by high-profile democrats and celebrities.”
“Take an in depth voyage into the sci-fi masterpiece ALIEN with the visionary filmmakers who created it. See how one of the most terrifying movies of all time burst to life 40 years ago, inspired by ancient mythology and our universal fears.
Directors: Alexandre O. Philippe
Cast: Tom Skerritt, Ridley Scott, Veronica Cartwright”
“PART 1 – Former Dateline NBC journalist, Chris Hansen, has made a return…to YouTube. But his dramatic entrance to the YouTube community has not been met without controversy. From scamming his Kickstarter backers to abusing the copyright system, he’s truly done it all. So why don’t you take a seat and learn all about it in this dramatic 3 Part Series.
03:17 The Case of Louis Conradt
07:26 Chris Fired from NBC
09:57 Hansen Starts his Kickstarter
14:16 Hansen vs. Creditor
15:20 Chris Hansen’s YouTube Channel
19:35 New Investigations Coming Soon!
21:22 Hansen Misuses the Copyright System
25:26 The Onision Investigation Begins
28:45 Hansen Manipulates the Narrative
31:00 Vincent Nicotra Exposed
32:40 Who is Mike Morse?
34:20 Hansen Confronts Onision”