No, and for two reasons.
Firstly, the universe is expanding symmetrically - all points are moving away from all other points. Any 'outside' force causing that would have to be symmetrical, but since gravity is an inverse square force, a spherically symmetrical amount of mass outside the sphere of the observable universe would have zero net gravitational effect on anything in that sphere. e.g., if the earth was a hollow sphere, you would feel no net gravitational force inside it because the gravity from one side would cancel the gravity from the other side.
Secondly, just as the light from outside the observable universe will never reach us because that region of space is expanding away from us faster than the speed of light, so will any gravity from outside never reach us, since gravity also moves at the speed of light. Everything outside the cosmic horizon is causally disconnected from our region of space. But the expansion of the universe is uniform everywhere, from regions far distant (and closer to the cosmic horizon), to regions closer to us that are causally disconnected from anything outside the observable universe.
Well, that's my understanding of it anyway..

Except that Biden wants it revoked in favour of more editorial responsibility by the platforms. Pretty much the opposite of what Trump wants.

Because he has golf resorts there?

In a normal world we could laugh this off as mud-slinging cynicism, but the fact that we can’t rule out that motivation from the president of the United States just underlines how insane the world has become.

The headline reads;

"A petition is calling on the site to prevent non-consensual videos being posted – and highlights the lack of industry regulation"

And you're conjuring up visions of "busloads of little girls in chains salacious victimized by hidden cameras."

The headline seems proportionate and accurate - the only one being triggered here is you. And your characterization of people as 'so-called' victims, 'silly people' demonstrates your agenda rather clearly.

Let's be clear, if I want to tape myself shagging someone, multiple people or my pot plant that's our business alone, and your opinion of it is neither here nor there.

".. and then for whatever reason objected to their videos ending up on Pornhub.."

And why would you dismiss the obvious and compelling reasons why I wouldn't want personal videos of me to made public against my will? If I've given no implicit or explicit consent, and if some POS steals them and puts them up on pornhub, then they are a criminal. And a POS.

Your 'diversity is the problem' theory doesn't even pass the smell test. Which is more liberal, New York or Alabama? And which is more diverse? The one study you cite that looks at this even states, right there in the abstract;

"The results suggest that ethnic polarization and ethnic dominance rather than diversity are what matter for personal security measured as homicide rates."

And

"It seems that the heavy emphasis placed on ethnic diversity for explaining social dislocation and violence, in so far as it relates to a country’s homicide rate, seems to be misplaced."

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”
Anatole France

Since the Greenland ice sheet has been there since the Miocene, a long time before human language, or even humans were a thing, I'm going to keep wondering.

Didn't really need to google anything to form an idea why you might be struggling with relationships. Your post pretty much sums it up.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you might want to spend some time away from the mgtow forums and talk to someone who can help.

There is plenty to criticize about the EU, but if all you do is lazily repeat right-wing propaganda then don't whine if people lazily lump you together with the right wing.

No, the job of the IRS is to gather data, then calculate and collect the tax due. It's already doing all those things. It's self-evident that allowing people to send their data directly via a web interface rather than using humans to transcribe paper submissions would save money.
And forcing people to use private third parties to collate the data electronically, duplicating processes that the IRS already has in place, is corporate welfare, pure and simple.

I don't know about the US, but here in the UK, legislation does just that. 'Hate crimes' don't exist as separate crimes but as aggravating circumstances in the sentencing of already existing offences.

There are very good reasons. The algorithms are tuned to increase engagement and time on platform, and they have learned that funnelling people down a gradual but psychologically compelling rabbit hole from vaccine scepticism all the way through to 'the government wants to kill your children!' keeps them more engaged for longer. Simply giving people a science documentary about vaccines would end engagement at the first video, or more likely, a few minutes into the video before they get bored. Leading people into an emotionally charged echo chamber of fear, paranoia and anger will have them coming back for more.

.

Motive and state of mind have always been part of legal determinations. If I shoot you dead, the severity of the punishment will vary wildly depending on my motive, from
'I'm a dumbass who doesn't know how to handle a gun'
  through
'I shot you because you punched me'
  to
'I've hated you a long time and I've been planning to shoot you all week'.

As for hate crimes, the theory behind that is nothing to do with the 'value' of the victim. It's addressing the secondary effects; punching people hurts those I punch and is assault, but punching people because they're Jewish causes harm in the Jewish community, causing them to live in fear, increasing marginalization and generally causing wider social harm beyond the immediate act. This is analogous to terrorism. If I kill 10 people purely to watch them die, then I'm a plain vanilla mass murderer. But if I kill 10 people because they're infidels and I want to bring on the global caliphate then that elevates me to a terrorist, and brings with it a commensurate increase in the resources wielded against me and in the severity of the response. That's why we call it 'terrorism', the harm caused is much wider than the immediate effects of the act.

A non-blasphemous, flawless Jesus would be, pretty much by definition, both preachy and boring.
Not quite sure why you would even list blasphemy as a 'trap'. Even though it's been done before, a blasphemous, flawed, kick arse Jesus would be the only hope of making any Jesus story even vaguely interesting. At the very least it might garner enough outrage to sell a few copies.

Stop Sarah Connor killing you?