Trump Threatens To Defund The Military Unless He Can Sue Twitter

Donald Trump threw yet another Twitter Tantrum this week when he threatened to veto a defense spending bill unless it included a complete repeal of Section 230 protections for web hosting and social media outlets. In short, the President wants to punish Twitter for fact checking his idiotic claims. Farron Cousins explains what's happening and why both outcomes could be good for the country.

Don't forget to like, comment, and share! And subscribe to stay connected!

Connect with Farron on Twitter

*This transcript was auto-generated. Please excuse any typos.

So Donald Trump is once again throwing yet another Twitter tantrum this week, as he has threatened to veto

The military budget, essentially. Um, if they don't include a provision in the bill

Appealing section two 30 protections

For internet companies, because Trump is tired of being fact-checked by Twitter,

Which he had said over the weekend, uh, that Twitter fact checking him was actually a threat to national security, but here's what Donald Trump tweeted out. This was a Tuesday evening, uh, section two 30 is a serious threat to our national security and election integrity. Therefore, if the very dangerous and unfair section two 30 is not completely terminated as part of the national defense authorization act, I will be forced to unequivocally veto the mail.

Wow. Twitter,

Twitter has off the president of the United States so bad that he is willing to say, you don't get them military next year, which, Hey, look, we have the most over bloated military on the planet.

It, I have no problem with this. Like

If you do what you say, you're going to do fantastic. On the other side, I have no problem. If you get rid of section two 30 protections, but you see that actually wouldn't do what you think it would do. Like just because you get rid of section two 30, doesn't mean that Twitter is going to stop. Fact-checking you. If anything, it's going to make the lives of conservatives hell and that's what these idiots don't understand.

So

Whenever we need to explain something in a way that conservatives can understand it, we go to our good friend. And

Now mr. Sloths,

All right, mr. Slaughter, you got it. Explain what section two 30 is. Whew. Section two 30 was put in place way back in the 1990s. Well, hold up now, you didn't have Twitter and Facebook and all this back in the 1990s. So, so how does two 30 even apply to those? Well, section two 30 juices that an internet provider cannot be held liable for woods posted on their hosting services. And as the internet evolved, social media outlets began to use section two 30 to say that they weren't responsible for what people posted on their sides. But that protection, if it ended would mean that conservatives would be censored more for their lies because Facebook and Twitter and parlor and any other website there is, could be held legally liable for letting their crap stay on.

Oh wow. You know,

It's always funny because I don't think conservatives typically think things through in this way, but that is exactly what would happen. If you got rid of section two 30 protections and suddenly Twitter or Facebook or LinkedIn, if you're still there, they could be held accountable for what you post.

So don't you think that they would then be more

Likely to delete your stuff more likely to shadow ban people and sensor people? If it meant that, Oh crap, Matt Gates just said something horrifying. We don't want to get sued. We're banning Matt Gates. We're banning Trump. We're banning Newsmax. We're banning Farron cousins who cares. They say things that could get us in trouble. So we're banning them folks actually abolishing section two 30 would both be good and bad. It would absolutely lead to more censorship. But at the same time, uh, having section two 30 protections has allowed a lot of these social media outlets to not take action against a white supremacist organizations who use these to organize rally, you know, other hate groups, uh, human trafficking, uh, has, as you know, social media outlets have not cracked down on that the way they should because of the section two 30 protections. So it is a double-edged sword.

It's something that could absolutely help the country, but it could also lead to massive censorship across the board. But Trump doesn't understand that he thinks if we get rid of section two 30, suddenly he's going to be able to Sue them, but that's not what it is. It doesn't mean you, the poster gets more rights. It means them. The host sister gets to take a little more control over what stays and what goes because they would now be legally liable for every bit of it.