Trump declares himself Emperor - his supporters storm the Capitol!

[BrilloPad]

The best one so far, BTW, the little guy on the right is a few braincells short. You'll notice he has his work ID card hanging from a lanyard around his neck. He's now been sacked...

Why has he got a tattoo of a penis on his stomach? Is it so he knows hes a knob? I think we all worked that out already. Even Simple Simon.

[Eirikur]

Why has he got a tattoo of a penis on his stomach? Is it so he knows hes a knob? I think we all worked that out already. Even Simple Simon.

It's Thor's hammer Mjölnir
( I did think the same as you in first instance)

[jamesbrown]

[d000hg]

These are private companies. Like any private company they have the right to bad members. CUK does it too. As do real bricks and mortar companies. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

And government has the ability to legislate over that. CUK could probably not ban someone for being gay, for instance.

[darmstadt]

[Whorty]

And government has the ability to legislate over that. CUK could probably not ban someone for being gay, for instance.

erm, yeah, exactly, which is why I said within the law of the countries they operate in (the bit you forgot to quote )

[Uncle Albert]

If this is true then it's brilliant.

https://twitter.com/EmmaKennedy/stat...59425%3Fs%3D20

[darmstadt]

Here's another good one, first major court case against a Trump nutter, the lawyer Powell: Sidney Powell Sued by Dominion for $1.3 Billion Over Vote-Fraud Claims

The complaint filed Friday by Dominion Voting Systems Inc. seeks $1.3 billion from Powell, who filed numerous unsuccessful court cases seeking to overturn the election results. She was dumped by the Trump campaign not long after a Nov. 19 press conference in which she claimed that agents from Iran and China infiltrated Dominion’s voting machines to help Biden, and that the software had ties to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, who died in 2013.

The actual complaint makes good reading: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/...5699.1.0_2.pdf

[d000hg]

erm, yeah, exactly, which is why I said within the law of the countries they operate in (the bit you forgot to quote )

And laws can change. Such as when a private company has too much power/influence over society, for instance. It's probably not ideal if privately owned companies whose products become generic communication platforms exercise significant political bias to who can post. Should Twitter and Google dictate what is acceptable to discuss?

[Whorty]

And laws can change. Such as when a private company has too much power/influence over society, for instance. It's probably not ideal if privately owned companies whose products become generic communication platforms exercise significant political bias to who can post. Should Twitter and Google dictate what is acceptable to discuss?

erm, yes, like I said, within the laws of the countries they operate. I never said laws can't / don't change, that's your narrative. Laws change for many reasons, often because of influence from powerful corporations and institutions. Not just Twitter/Google, but over the centuries religious organisations have, and still do, have far too much influence over laws across many nations.