[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Alf

Because it protects political speech, and if someone is being silenced for their political speech, let's say Alex Jones, then it should protect him. Dorsey should be getting questioned on why he's taking away Jones, freedoms. So that means Dorsy's company isn't compatible with the freedoms on the American people, it's anti American.

Except... he hasn't silenced anyone.

It's no different to the preacher not being permitted to book certain venues around the country. He's not being silenced, those venues are privately owned and they're free to choose who and what they want to be a platform for.

It's basic common sense.

Your suggestion, to force platform owners to host anyone and everyone is the exact opposite of freedom of speech.

You literally want it when it suits you and not any other time.