Parler urges U.S. judge to order Amazon to restore its platform

Parler urged a U.S. judge on Thursday to order Inc to restore the company’s account, saying Amazon had no evidence the social media platform was used to incite last week’s storming of the U.S. Capitol.

Parler urges U.S. judge to order Amazon to restore its platform

Elizabeth Culliford and Jonathan Stempel for Reuters:

At a hearing in Seattle federal court, Parler’s lawyer, David Groesbeck, said the company would suffer irreparable harm if forced to close and that keeping it alive served the public interest.

“Millions of law-abiding Americans have had their voices silenced,” Groesbeck told U.S. District Judge Barbara Rothstein. “There is no evidence, other than some anecdotal press references, that Parler was involved in inciting the riots.”

Amazon Web Services cut off Parler on Sunday night, saying Parler had shrugged off repeated warnings to remove violent content… Parler said Amazon had no contractual right to pull the plug and did so in a politically motivated bid to benefit Twitter Inc, a larger Amazon client that Parler said did not censor violent content targeting conservatives.

Parler wants a temporary court order that it be restored to Amazon’s servers while it litigates. Rothstein said she would rule “as quickly as possible.”

MacDailyNews Note: Judge Barbara Rothstein is a Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. On December 3, 1979, Rothstein was nominated by President Jimmy Carter to a new seat on the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. She was confirmed by the United States Senate on February 20, 1980.

In February 1990, Judge Rothstein famously struck down as unconstitutional a law enacted by Congress that forbade any desecration of the flag, intended to outlaw flag burning.

In her decision, Judge Rothstein wrote, in part, “The freedom of speech enshrined in our First Amendment is the crucial foundation without which other democratic values cannot flourish.”


  1. What did Amazon’s counsel argue? Or don’t you care about balanced and fair reporting?

    I give you an “F” for this story – including an “F” for effort

    I also smell an agenda and bias.

    1. Since you haven’t given an example of anything you know of that “incited violence” it seems that sight unseen you “want to believe” Amazon has a defensible position which makes you biased and having an agenda.

      …of course you will prove me wrong by giving us an example of why this article is biased for not revealing what doesn’t exist. Go ahead. Your turn. Are you biased and just declared that Amazon “must have a reason” because you are biased and want it to be true, or do you know the reason?

      1. Confused,

        The point Mr. Goldberg was making is that someone who reads the excerpt above of the Reuters story on the hearing only gets one side of the story. For example: “[Amazon said] Parler had shrugged off repeated warnings to remove violent content Parler said Amazon had no contractual right to pull the plug.” The ellipsis (…) in the excerpt omits the following from the original Reuters article:

        “That content included calls to assassinate Democratic House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, Amazon Chief Executive Jeff Bezos, Facebook Inc CEO Mark Zuckerberg and members of the media. Ambika Doran, a lawyer for Amazon, said Parler violated its contract by allowing such content and had not shown it could effectively monitor content. ‘Amazon made the only real choice that it could, which was to suspend the account.'”

        The excerpt is not biased because it does not reveal what doesn’t exist, but because it does not reveal what *does” exist—the fact that Amazon presented a defense in court and did not just stand silent in the face of the Parler accusations. The judge might ultimately reject that defense, but at least he got to hear it… which those who relied on the excerpt above did not. Mr. Goldburg suspects an agenda and bias, but I prefer to just blame it on an innocent editorial error.

          1. Yet again, an example of Trump Supporters trying SO HARD to copy the actions of the weak minded libruls. Is there anything libruls would do that Trump supporters wouldn’t copy?

        1. TxUser
          I hope you’re right about no bias or Agenda. Time will tell.

          As a student of history and the law I find these Social Media developments fascinating.

          In any case you were right about my critique. Both sides should have been reported.

          … when it isn’t you get a form of Fake News.


        2. “Only one side of the story”. That is a funny comment from a person who applauds an entire industry when it uses market power to squash everything except for “one side of the story”. You, and Apple and Amazon and Twitter are demanding that censorship be done, and damn anyone who tries to assert a right to free speech. You are Nazi/Communist goons, so your words are based on pure evil, but Apple and Twitter and Facebook have much market power so Evil can run wild. And it is. And trained seals like you cheer.

    2. Amazon argued that, through its subsidiary the Bezos Post, it now owns the democratic party and together with his brethren, including Timmy Xie, further declares all who resist will soon be burned at the stake, or worse have their internet service cut off for giggles.

        1. The incursion into the Capitol Building began BEFORE President Trump finished speaking that day. There’s no evidence that the president’s words urged unrest.

          11:57 AM: President Trump is introduced at the rally to the tune “God Bless the USA.”

          12:00 PM: President Trump begins speaking

          1:00 PM: Rioters burst into the Capitol Building

          1:12 PM: President Trump leaves the stage after dancing to “YMCA” with the crowd

          President Trump was still on stage 12 minutes AFTER the Capitol Building breach started.

          The Capitol Building mob was a mile away as Trump spoke. There was no cell service – overloaded or for some other reason – those pushing into the Capitol Building could not hear him.

          At the end of his remarks, Trump clearly stated, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

          When all is said and done, Crazy Nancy will be 0-2 in convictions with her sham impeachments.


          Even CNN managed to completely undermine the entire case Democrats made for impeaching Trump.

          “Evidence uncovered so far, including weapons and tactics seen on surveillance video, suggests a level of planning that has led investigators to believe the attack on the US Capitol was not just a protest that spiraled out of control, a federal law enforcement official says.” – CNN, Investigators pursuing signs US Capitol riot was planned, January 14, 2021

          This contradicts everything the left has alleged about the violence at the Capitol and totally undermines the justification for impeaching Trump.

      1. No hypocriticality here. I was actually waiting for MDN to post this story (after I read it elsewhere 3 days ago) and, frankly, still wondering why they never did. It seems the kind of thing that they would WANT to report to their readers at least as much as the current goings on with Parler.

        Facebook should NOT be allowed to shirk their responsibility in this matter and I’m hoping that more information comes from their rank and file workers that show how Facebook KNEW about this going on, yet did the same as Parler and did nothing about it.

        If they knew hashtags like #StopTheSteal and #FightForTrump were being used to organize a riot, then they should answer why they didn’t do anything about those hashtags.

    3. Balanced Fair Reporting?
      No Agenda or Bias?

      Here In USA… seriously!??? and this liitle snippett on MDN is irritating you…
      How do you survive out there without having a total breakdown?

    1. MacDailyNews offers no (zero) commentary on this article. They offer a note which only states facts as to who the judge is, who appointed her, her most notable and applicable case decision, etc.

      Now, can you guess who’s really “revealing their colors here,” genius?

      1. You don’t need to add a commentary to have an editorial point of view. Merely choosing to include the article does that. The Drudge Report offers no commentary on the articles they publish, but they certainly express an editorial point of view. Same thing here.

      2. As you admit, MDN listed Judge Rothstein’s opinion in the flag burning case as “her most notable and applicable case decision.” The point JC was making is that this is not a First Amendment case, so a First Amendment case from thirty years ago is not applicable. This is a contract case. It is not a First Amendment case for at least two reasons:

        First and foremost, Amazon is not a government actor, so it is not subject to either the First Amendment rules on not infringing free speech or to the Fourteenth Amendment rules on providing due process and equal protection. In the absence of a law or a contractual provision that says otherwise, both parties in this case can do whatever they like. Parler is asserting that AWS broke its contract with them, and AWS is asserting that Parler is the contract violator. The dispute will be determined on contract law principles, and I can promise you that Judge Rothstein has written hundreds of case decisions on contract law during her forty-one years on the bench. Each of them is more applicable to this case than an opinion from 1990 on flag burning.

        Second, as JC points out, the First Amendment might have allowed AWS to throw Parler off its platform even if it were a government actor. Since 1969, the “Brandenburg test” has provided, “The constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press permit a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or of law violation where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

        AWS is alleging (and says it can prove) that Parler was allowing exactly such advocacy, which violates not only federal law but state laws everywhere Amazon operates. The AWS contract specifically required Parler to moderate its site because AWS—and not just Parler—might get prosecuted or shut down by the government if the advocacy of imminent lawless action did not cease forthwith.

    2. I’ve forgotten more about Brandenburg v. Ohio than you’ll ever know.

      🚨🚨🚨 Breaking News:

      Black Lives Matter and Antifa activist John Sullivan has been arrested and charged with federal crimes after attending the riot at the U.S. Capitol last week.

      Here’s John Sullivan’s mugshot:

      According to an official affidavit released by the Department of Justice Thursday evening, Sullivan had a knife and dressed in body armor. He told others who breached the building that they should start a fire and burn the U.S. Capitol building down.

      “Sullivan stated that he was at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, when scores of individuals entered it. Sullivan stated he was wearing a ballistic vest and gas mask while there. He showed the interviewing agent the ballistic vest. He further stated that he entered the U.S. Capitol with others through a window that had been broken out. Sullivan stated he followed the crowd as the crowd pushed past U.S. Capitol Police and followed the crowd into the U.S. Capitol,” the affidavit states. “Sullivan further stated that he had been present at the shooting of a woman within the U.S. Capitol by a U.S. Capitol Police officer and that he had filmed the incident.”

      “After the crowd broke through the last barricade, and as Sullivan and the others approach the Capitol Building, Sullivan can be heard in the video saying at various points: ‘There are so many people. Let’s go. This shit is ours! F-ck yeah,’ “We accomplished this shit. We did this together. F-ck yeah! We are all a part of this history,’ and ‘Let’s burn this shit down,'” the affidavit continues.

      Last summer, Sullivan organized a BLM protest with other leftist groups, including a local ANITFA chapter. The event became violent and one person was shot. He was arrested at the time.

      July 10, 2020: Organizer of Provo protest arrested, accused of rioting, making threats

      One of the organizers of a protest in Provo that resulted in a motorist being shot was arrested on Thursday.

      John Earle Sullivan, 25, of Sandy, was booked into the Utah County Jail for investigation of rioting, making a threat of violence and criminal mischief.

      On Facebook, its event page was originally titled End Police Brutality but was later changed to Marching for Racial Equality. The Facebook pages listed the event’s hosts as the groups Insurgence, Solidarity for Justice, Salt Lake Equal Rights Movement and the Salt Lake Antifascist Coalition. [ANTIFA, not just an idea, after all.]

      [Facebook, not Parler. Facebook remains in Apple’s App Store. Untouched.]

      “The protest traveled on the roadways blocking motorists who have the right of way. John Sullivan blocked vehicles from freely moving lawfully. During the course of the protest, two handguns were brandished and two shots fired toward a motorist traveling to Home Depot. Vehicles were damaged by protestors as well as by John Sullivan,” the affidavit states.

      “As a protest organizer John Sullivan is heard and seen as he is promoting protesters to block roadways, keeping motorists from traveling lawfully and freely.”

      Sullivan was also captured on video threatening to beat a woman in an SUV, according to the affidavit, and then kicking her door, leaving a dent.

      Sullivan was seen with Jesse Taggart — the man charged with shooting the motorist — throughout the protest, the affidavit states.

      “As a protest organizer, John Sullivan is heard talking about seeing the shooting, looking at the gun and seeing smoke coming from it. John did not condemn the attempted murder nor attempt to stop it nor aide in its investigation by police.”


      Have a nice day.

        1. Didn’t you hear? When it’s convenient ALL Trump Supporters are Antifa 🙂

          And again, this is why I’m glad Democrats have the Presidency, the Senate and the Congress at this critical time. Democrats are fickle. If there’s anything illegal going on or a credible threat to our democracy, (D) or no, they’ll turn on that person in a MINUTE.

          Republicans don’t critically think about anything with an (R) attached. If anyone wants to turn Americans against America, and, say, have them attack the seat of our government, all they have to do is don the mantle of (R) and you’ve got millions of people ready to turn off their brains and do it.

          At least with Democrats in charge both Democrats AND Republicans will be holding the government accountable.

      1. Of course, the story is not nearly this cut-and-dried, and the pathetic attempts to make the right-wing riot in the Capitol anything but the end result of Trump’s demagoguery and lies is just as bullshit as Trump’s scripted videos now calling for peace.

        If you want to hear the other side of the story — Sullivan’s side — you’re going to need to spend about five seconds and do a quick internet search. I found this:

      2. Sullivan was in the Capitol building, which he knew was restricted. That clearly is a crime. He says that he was there to observe and record what was happening and that he felt obliged to say what he did to avoid having the crowd turn on him, as the only non-white civilian in sight. The Government will have to prove otherwise, having the burden of proof to show intent to participate in illegal activities beyond his mere presence. I have no doubt he will be convicted of something.

        In any case, nobody has credibly named any other left-leaning individuals who were in the building illegally that day with the hundreds of right-leaning individuals. Everybody else who has been arrested has a long track record of participation in rightist groups. As somebody asked on another thread, “Do you really expect us to believe that hundreds of bulked-up and battle-equipped white nationalists were duped into invading the Capitol by one skinny black man with a camera?”

  2. Ok, let’s be clear. Wrong is wrong.

    One person’s wrongs does not justify other peoples’ wrong.

    First Then you argue like a child that wants to deflect blame. No, you are odd, but you are not alone. Hate, and I mean hate is nothing new.

    Anyone that went pass those barriers, any one that went into the capital, here’s a qualifier, not being part of the press, and even those that make that claim should have to prove it, should be arrested, charged, and face justice. They all, in my mind, share in the responsibility of that officer’s death, those officers’ injuries, that damage, the stealing, and the illnesses incurred by members of congress.

    First Then do you understand that.

    Any person you bring up, having a different point of view then yours, does not excuse donald trump’s traitorous act. We all saw and heard trump direct people to the capital. We all heard him tell people never accept. We all heard have say fight. If you are an American, and I really have my doubts, I believe you to be part a of the russian miss direction information team, but anyway, if you would answer these question please.

    Trump was telling them to fight who on Capital Hill?
    Trump was asking them to fight with?
    Trump told them if they did not fight they would not have a country, what did he mean if they lost?
    After they fought, what was suppose to be the victory?
    How was that going to work, when 80 plus million people have their votes discarded in such a fashion?

    Whether you believe or not, lawful preceding were taking place.

    Trump the chief law officer of the United States told these people to break the law. Trump, nor any president, is a law maker in the United States. See this is why I think you are a foreign actor, you don’t seem to know this. No manner, what trump feels, the law is still the law. If one does not like a law in America, one runs for a legislative office, ah but that’s not all, you need to win that office, and still, you must convince a majority of other legislative office holders, legit, who have won a legislative office, that what you say has value and …

    I have no problem with each and every person that invaded the US Capital claiming as a defense the President of the United States told them to do it, so they did what the President of the United States told them to do. That allows the dismissal of all charges, right? It would be just like a cop, lol, tells you to move your car, you move it, or you are standing on the sidewalk and he/she, the representative of the law, tells you to move along and you move. Those people, even the ones you claim are BLM and Antifa, carried out the orders of the president, the head cop. So, they were all every last one acting on orders from donald trump.

    1. You offer no proof. Just regurgitation of the MSM lies.

      In order to draw the conclusion that President Trump was “inciting a riot,” one would need to hold the absurd and contradictory position that his figurative speech (“fight like Hell”) is literal and his literal speech (walk “peacefully and patriotically”) was figurative.

      The same poor idiots who take one of Trump’s statements literally are the same who thought President Trump was referring to literal coyotes.

      Like the last sham impeachment, this is simply not an impeachable offense.

      As with the leftist Norwegian Nobel Committee’s “Nobel Peace Prize” and Time Magazine’s “Person of the Year,” U.S. Democrats has abused impeachment to the point of making it meaningless and laughable.

      The base isn’t leaving Trump. In fact, it wants GOP politicians to be more like the president.

      Republicans across the U.S. are siding with President Trump. Large majorities of Republicans believe Trump was right to challenge his election loss, support him, don’t blame him for the Capitol Building mob, and want him to be the Republican nominee in 2024.

      Source: Ipsos/Axios poll, Jan. 11-13, 2021


        Proof, all you have to do is look at the video of trump speaking.

        I know you know better.


        CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, BBC, … just ask them for the video.
        Just ask the traitors why they went to the capital.

        You know, maybe you didn’t hear what the rest of us heard. Perhaps, we should think of your hearing like the game kids play when you, you know, when you whisper into the of a child on one end and after ten or twelve kids the last kid says what was passed down to him/her. Maybe you just don’t hear the same, that’s fine.

        As, I suggested look for the video, use more than one outlet, write down what you think you year, then show it to a close friend and ask them is that what they heard. Maybe they can help you.

        You know the Republicans impeached Bill Clinton, I’m no fan, but at least be fair. Their claim was he lied, and that was good enough. We won’t go into what he lied about or whether pursuing that line of questioning had anything to do with White Water. ( just an aside I thought they should have removed him over the lie, but should it, sex, have come up, the sex thing, no) Trump did tell those people what to do. Trump told the country four years ago he could get away with murder and his supporters would stand by him. That is a shame. That is exactly what you are doing.

        Now, I know any American that loves democracy hates that these folks, traitors all, attacked their nation’s capital. Many of those democracy loving Americans wonder why there are not a bunch of dead bodies and on the steps of the capital and in the halls. I would only offer my humble opinion, God’s grace. This was an act of war. Think about how fast the nation’s capital was taken and the outcome of the attackers. Think how they could have held congress hostage and placed demands on the military to surrender. Or think about how these people where used to demonstrate how to take the capital. (use white skinned people), well, you saw what would happen if dark skinned people show up. (all offensive right, sorry couldn’t at this moment think of a better way to say that). Or, anyway, a foreign power has just tested the system. I’ll as you, how did we do?

        I would say to others don’t let trump use you.

        1. Again: In order to draw the conclusion that President Trump was “inciting a riot,” one would need to hold the absurd and contradictory position that his figurative speech (“fight like Hell”) is literal and his literal speech (walk “peacefully and patriotically”) was figurative.

          1. You can rest easy, trump was not charged with “inciting a riot”, well not by the United States Congress of Representatives. He is charged with a far greater crime, “incitement of insurrection”. For this kind of treason, sedition, I see why Barr was in such a rush to leave and to bring back death by firing squad.

            I know Mrs. Clinton would have been a better President, I don’t think Bill would have been good in his role.

            but, maybe Bill was answering figuratively, I see First Then.

            Man! President Obama was a good man and a good president.
            I hope Biden calls on him a lot for counsel.

            It’s so nice not to hear that crazy trump tweet first thing in the morning.

          2. What about the “election fraud” he claimed with such certainty but had no proof.

            Ext step.. now that the protection of the office is gone more truth will come out.

            Could it be money laundering? Could it be emoluments? Could it be kickbacks? Could it be campaign fraud? Treason? Obstruction? Sedition? Could it me nothing? We’ll see.

        2. @Bob,
          I admire your effort to discuss with FT but you must realize that he drank so much of the Trump is God koolaid that he is 100% convinced that the election was stolen, the riot was not insurrection by any Trump followers but rather the crowd were all leftist pedophiles, communists and BLM protesters that previous destroyed all white US cities.
          My advice? Just call him a seaming pile of dog poop and then go find someone you can actually have an intelligent discussion with.

    2. “One person’s wrongs does not justify other peoples’ wrong.”
      Unfortunately, this is the Trump Supporters calling card and will continue to be so. I feel that the Republican party is going to have to root out those folks like the Democrats did. After passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Southern states flipped from Democrat to reliably Republican. This is, of course because those people didn’t see Democratic leaders sharing their ideas on racism and white supremacy and the Republican party was more than happy to accept those folks.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.