Did Facebook pay out over a hundred million bucks just to be rid of a Trump-supporter? – IOTW Report

Did Facebook pay out over a hundred million bucks just to be rid of a Trump-supporter?

AT:

It certainly looks like the prejudice against Republicans, conservatives, and especially Trump supporters, is so virulent that Facebook was willing to pay a hundred mill to rid itself od one. The company denies this is the case, but the Wall Street Journal is not convinced.

Facebook Inc.  executive and virtual-reality wunderkind Palmer Luckey was a rising star of Silicon Valley when, at the height of the 2016 presidential contest, he donated $10,000 to an anti-Hillary Clinton group.

His donation sparked a backlash from his colleagues. Six months later, he was out. Neither Facebook nor Mr. Luckey has ever said why he left the social-media giant. When testifying before Congress about data privacy earlier this year, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg denied the departure had anything to do with politics.

Zuckerberg was under oath, so I assume he has documentation of other issues that can be cited.

A Facebook spokeswoman said in an email: “We can say unequivocally that Palmer’s departure was not due to his political views. We’re grateful for Palmer’s contributions to Oculus, and we’re glad he continues to actively support the VR industry.”

Some people at Facebook say it is too simplistic to say Mr. Luckey was fired over his politics, and that his lack of candor during the episode involving the donation and his diminished role in Oculus operations were larger factors.

Luckey says otherwise:

6 Comments on Did Facebook pay out over a hundred million bucks just to be rid of a Trump-supporter?

  1. “Zuckerberg was under oath, so I assume he has documentation of other issues that can be cited.”
    -The Wall Street Journal

    …”Oath” means NOTHING to a liberal. There are no LEGAL consequences for ANY amount of obvious perjery (Cf. Hillary), and the deity they worship MOST is SELF.

    …yes, there may be SOME that worship what they consider a “higher power”, but everything THEY might worship, be it Hillary, Al lah, Moloch, the State, or the Devil (all pretty much one and the same) is totally OK with them lying in the service of evil…and in SOME cases (taqiyya, Hillary), their “higher
    power” DEMANDS it.

    …so, don’t put too much stock in “under oath” with these reprobates. It means NOTHING to them, OR to the REAL Lord, as they stopped listening to HIM long ago…

    11
  2. Being under oath doesn’t mean anything to the DOJ if it is a lib. Now if it was conservative, different story. Even if someone like Gen. Micheal Flynn was to appear in court and repeatedly say “I don’t recall”, the shit would hit the fan. Hillary Clinton, “I don’t recall”, ok, no problem.

    5
  3. He didn’t donate anything to Trump. He donated a speck of his vast wealth to an anti-Hillary PAC.

    A distinction with a difference.

    He was insufficiently enthusiastic with the only choice allowed.

    A positively ChiCom reaction from the Fakebook snowflakes.

    Women literally balling their eyes out in meetings that someone expressed a different opinion and that they might have to see them in the halls.

    Yea. Trust these people with your personal information.

    2
  4. Seems to me that liberals and Muslims have been reading from the same playbook: “whatever advances my cause – lying, cheating, stealing or killing – is permitted because my cause is JUST!”

    Time to recognize this and act accordingly.

    2

Comments are closed.