Make no mistake, the new law is an overwhelming victory for Floridians and for all who favor free speech. Immediately following the passage of this law, opponents were quick to claim that this legislation will not stand in court because it is unconstitutional.

These arguments provide quick soundbites and may sound legitimate for anyone who is not familiar with the Communications Decency Act of 1996. However, on their face, these arguments are simply untrue.

Under the Communications Decency Act (CDA), there is a provision for state-based legislation. Specifically, section (e), subsection (3), allows state legislatures to enforce respective state laws so long as they are consistent with Section 230 of the CDA. This is the case with Senate Bill 7072.

The state-based exemption component of Section 230 has practically been begging for a state to pass a law such as the one in Florida. It is evident that the issue of Big Tech censorship and content moderation is unlikely to be addressed federally. Hence, the solution lies in state-based legislation that challenges these practices. Naturally, Big Tech will counter with lawsuits. //

When this case is likely heard, the Supreme Court will be grappling with the complex question of whether these social media platforms maintain First Amendment rights as a corporation. And if so, do those rights supersede the First Amendment rights of American citizens?

This very same question was posed to lawmakers in Florida with each step regarding Senate Bill 7072. When the legislation was up for consideration in its assigned committees, and when it hit the floor of the House and the Senate, Florida lawmakers had to ask themselves the same question. Which comes first: The First Amendment rights of Twitter, Facebook, etc.? Or the First Amendment rights of their constituents?

Let’s start this update with signs of panic in the Democrat-media complex, as no matter how hard they try, they will never suppress the deeply held suspicions by many Americans about the lack of integrity of the 2020 election. For example, in a recent Ipsos/Reuters poll whose results were released on 21 May:

“56% of Republicans believe the election was rigged or the result of illegal voting, and 53% think Donald Trump is the actual President, not Joe Biden. Only 30% of Republicans feel confident that absentee or mail-in ballots were accurately counted, compared to 86% of Democrats and 55% of independent.

I would wager that this poll is about as “accurate” as the election polls, too, in that the Republican numbers are in reality much higher while lower percentages of Democrats and independents believe mail-in ballots were “accurately counted.” And NOBODY believes that The Hologram received 81 million legal votes! //

Conclusion. It sure does seem like there is a lot happening after “the most secure election in US history,” doesn’t it? The legacy media continue to carry water for Democrats by not investigating or covering any of this other than to disparage the Arizona audit, but the above may explain why the likes of Rachel Maddow and Chris Cuomo are getting emotional on the subject! Stay tuned.

Except that it was deceptive to make it appear that Gaetz was threatening Silicon Valley.

Gaetz was speaking about the First Amendment — about Silicon Valley, Big Tech censorship and cancel culture.

“Let us use the Constitution to strengthen our argument, and our movement. We have a First Amendment right to speak and assemble, and we better use it. The internet’s hall monitors out in Silicon Valley, they think they can suppress us, discourage us. Maybe if you’re just a little less patriotic, maybe if you just conform to their way of thinking a little more, then you will be allowed to participate in the digital world. Well, you know what? Silicon Valley can’t cancel this movement or this rally or this congressman.”

He then started a separate point about the Second Amendment with, “We have a Second Amendment in this country, and I think we have an obligation to use it.”

But the deceptive clip left out the context that those were two separate thoughts, with that last sentence being that start of a discussion of the Second Amendment, as the longer Youtube clip reveals.

one Australian media figure, in particular, was particularly incensed at what he viewed as young folks being spoiled and brainwashed and took to the airwaves to voice his frustrations over the hypocrisy of those young climate activists, many of who are actually pampered snobs being shamelessly used and carefully manipulated by adults who should know better.

Video of that segment in which the man – conservative commentator Alan Jones – reads a piece called “Growing up” that someone sent to him going off on Thunberg and other youth climate change activists //

“To all the school kids going on strike for climate change, you’re the first generation who’ve required air conditioning in every classroom. You want TV in every room and your classes are all computerized. You spend all day and night on electronic devices.

More than ever you don’t walk or ride bikes to school, but you arrive in caravans of private cars that choke suburban roads and worsen rush-hour traffic. You’re the biggest consumers of manufactured goods ever. And update perfectly good, expensive, luxury items to stay trendy. Your entertainment comes from electric devices.

Furthermore, the people driving your protests are the same people who insist on artificially inflating the population growth through immigration, which increases the need for energy, manufacturing, and transport. The more people we have, the more forest and bushland we clear, the more of the environment that’s destroyed.

How about this? Tell your teachers to switch off the aircon, walk or ride to school, switch off your devices and read a book, make a sandwich instead of buying manufactured fast food.