Now, this part of the argument just misses what the NYT v Sullivan standard requires: it's more than just passive publication. https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1266381424896114691 …pic.twitter.com/SVBMRz8TRr
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
There's a legitimate pro-free-speech argument that Section 230 should be changed to make platforms such as Twitter more of a content-neutral common carrier. As I've said repeatedly, however, I've yet to hear a way to do this without creating more problems than you solve.
The anti-free-speech case for 230 revision makes some sense if you're trying to stamp out, say, child porn. But "Twitter should not be able to publish libelous Tweets" is a terrible argument.
Given the context of the senator’s tweets I’d say the “criminal” aspect of the investigation is in twitter’s “willfull” violation of American sanctions against Iran. Willful violations of which can lead to criminal penalties. https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Sanctions/Pages/faq_iran.aspx …
Violation of Iranian sanctions?
I think they should be asking the FEC, not the FCC. I'm pretty sure there's enough for an antitrust investigation based on other behavior everyone knows about. Who cares if there's enough for a conviction? It's just that Trump is very bad at using the state as a weapon.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.