Category: freedom of the press

It’s nice to see how often a member of the press is wrong; however, it’s not nice to see State Department bias


Nicolle Wallace: the Typhoid Mary of disinformation

With a hearty thanks to Glenn Greenwald and a hat tip to Dan Bongino, I present the compilation of Mr. Greenwald that shows the incorrect proclamations of Nicolle Wallace and the press citations (often from left-wing sources) correcting her idiocy. Hopefully, you will enjoy this 26 minute, 20 second exposé.

To see a 2 minute, 20 second trailer, refer to the video below.

__

Let’s remember that Freedom of the Press includes their freedom to be total idiots and drive their employers into insolvency.

However, let’s also remember their hold over those who read and believe everything that comes out of the main stream press.


…

U.S. State Department funds groups hauling in cash to secretly blacklist conservative news

The Washington Examiner reports how the U.S. State Department has funded a group that has blacklisted conservative news and promoted liberal outlets.

Major ad companies are increasingly seeking guidance from purportedly “nonpartisan” groups claiming to be detecting and fighting online “disinformation.” These same “disinformation” monitors are compiling secret website blacklists and feeding them to ad companies, with the aim of defunding and shutting down disfavored speech, according to sources familiar with the situation, public memos, and emails obtained by the Washington Examiner.

Brands, which have been seeking to promote products online through multiple websites to expand their digital footprint, are turning to corporate digital ad companies keyed into global markets. In turn, some of these companies are contracting “disinformation” trackers to obtain private information about which websites they should purportedly “defund.”

The Global Disinformation Index, a British group with two affiliated U.S. nonprofit groups sharing similar board members, is one entity shaping the ad world behind the scenes. GDI’s CEO is Clare Melford, former senior vice president for MTV Networks, and its executive director is Daniel Rogers, a tech advisory board member for Human Rights First, a left-leaning nonprofit group that says disinformation fuels “violent extremism and public health crises.”

“It’s devastating,” Mike Benz, the State Department’s ex-deputy assistant for internal communications and information policy, told the Washington Examiner. “The implementation of ad revenue crushing sentinels like Newsguard, Global Disinformation Index, and the like has completely crippled the potential of alternative news sources to compete on an even economic playing field with approved media outlets like CNN and the New York Times.”

GDI’s mission is to “remove the financial incentive” to create “disinformation,” and its “core output” is a secretive “dynamic exclusion list” that rates news outlets based on their alleged disinformation “risk” factor, according to its website. There are at least 2,000 websites on this exclusion list, which has “had a significant impact on the advertising revenue that has gone to those sites,” Melford said on a March 2022 podcast episode hosted by the Safety Tech Innovation Network, a British government-backed group.

Along with similar organizations, GDI has been raking in cash as funding pours into disinformation tracking. Its charity in San Antonio, Texas, posted $345,000 in revenue in 2020, while its affiliated private foundation saw its roughly $19,600 revenue jump in 2019 to over $569,000 in 2020, according to tax records.

One influential ad company that has subscribed to GDI’s exclusion list to defund outlets purportedly spreading disinformation is Xandr, which Microsoft bought from AT&T in 2021 for $1 billion, according to emails leaked to the Washington Examiner.

Xandr informed companies in September 2022 that it would begin adopting GDI’s exclusion list to punish content that is “morally reprehensible or patently offensive,” lacking “redeeming social value,” or “could include false or misleading information,” emails show.

“To enforce this change, Xandr is partnering with the Global Disinformation Index (‘GDI’) and will be adopting their exclusion list,” Xandr wrote to other companies, linking to an appeal “webform” for publishers to complete if they disagree with their “risk” rating.

This exclusion list is developed with oversight from GDI’s “advisory panel,” which counts journalists, professors, and data scientists, according to GDI reports. Three advisers include Ben Nimmo, global lead for threat intelligence at Facebook’s parent company Meta, journalist Anne Applebaum, who said Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings are not “interesting,” and University of Washington professor Franziska Roesner.

One source close to ad-buying operations in right-leaning media told the Washington Examiner that the outlet is on GDI’s exclusion list, citing communications with ad companies. But the Washington Examiner was never contacted by GDI or informed of how it failed to meet GDI’s standards.

But GDI, which did not reply to several requests for its exclusion list, discloses in reports which outlets it identifies as the “riskiest” and “worst” offenders for peddling disinformation. These 10, which all skew to the right, are the American Spectator, Newsmax, the Federalist, the American Conservative, One America News, the Blaze, the Daily Wire, RealClearPolitics, Reason, and the New York Post.

“The American Conservative had one of the lowest scores in the study for bias, indicating that almost all of the content sampled was either somewhat or entirely biased,” said GDI, which did not clarify how its ratings may differ for websites publishing news or mostly opinion articles.

GDI’s “disinformation” tracking efforts, however, have even resulted in opinions being flagged. The organization alleged in an October 2022 memo that a Washington Examiner commentary article titled “The Left’s gender-bending obsession is tiresome and absurd” was “anti-LGBTQ+” disinformation.

That same memo singled out Amazon for hosting ads in the Washington Examiner.

(Read on at the Washington Examiner)

Consider this: Nicolle Wallace and her network are on the State Department’s “good” list

Consider two things when you mull this over in your mind:

  1. Just as the White House cannot direct Twitter or Facebook to restrict the free speech rights of private citizens, neither can the State Department organize an effort that ends in the restriction of a free press.
  2. As noted in the headline above, Nicolle Wallace and MSNBC remain on the State Department’s “good” list. Brietbart, the Washington Examiner, the New York Post (of Hunter laptop fame) do not enjoy such a promotion.

…

The week in review

A childhood book I won’t get

At least Captain Smith went down with the ship

Hunter and Joe won’t need handcuffs

Joe incommunicado

What the EPA fire illustrates:

…

 

Where is the outcry?


Do you remember the outcry at the White House and the press when both assumed that horse-mounted border agents were whipping illegal aliens?

When it turned out that the agents were using the reigns to direct the horses, the cry did not subside

Reuters reported with a full throated cry in a 20 September 2021 article on the White House reaction to the imagined mistreatment of illegal aliens.

 The White House on Monday criticized the use of horse reins to threaten Haitian migrants after images circulated of a U.S. border guard on horseback charging at migrants near a riverside camp in Texas.

The mostly Haitian migrants in recent days have been crossing back and forth between Ciudad Acuna in Mexico and the sprawling camp across the border in Del Rio to buy food and water, which was in short supply on the U.S. side.

Reuters witnesses saw mounted officers wearing cowboy hats blocking the paths of migrants, and one officer unfurling a cord resembling a lariat, which he swung near a migrant’s face.

A video showing a border guard apparently threatening migrants with the cords was shared on social media.

“I don’t think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

“I don’t have the full context. I can’t imagine what context would make that appropriate,” she added.

Some on social media commented that the image of fleeing Black men chased by white officers on horseback had echoes of the historical injustices suffered by Black people in the United States.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said the incident was being investigated to make sure there was not an “unacceptable” response by law enforcement. He said officers were operating in a difficult environment, trying to ensure the safety of the migrants while searching for potential smugglers.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said the long reins are used by mounted officials to “ensure control of the horse.”

“But we are going to investigate the facts,” he said during a news conference in Del Rio.

The camp under a bridge spanning the Rio Grande has become the latest flashpoint for U.S. authorities seeking to stem a flow of migrants fleeing gang violence, extreme poverty and natural disasters in their home countries.

The camp was a temporary home to more than 12,000 migrants, though Texas Governor Greg Abbott said the number reached as high as 16,000 on Saturday. Many had traveled from as far south as Chile, hoping to apply for asylum in the United States.

On Monday, as temperatures soared to 104 degrees Fahrenheit (40 Celsius), migrants complained about continued shortages of food and water in the camp. Some of those crossing back into the U.S. could be seen balancing large bags of ice on their heads as they waded through the water.

During the day hundreds of migrants had returned to the Mexico side, including families with young children, hoisting backpacks, suitcases and belongings in plastic bags above their heads.

“This treatment they are giving is racism, because of the color of our skin,” said Maxon Prudhomme, a Haitian migrant on the banks of the Rio Grande in Mexico.

 The White House on Monday criticized the use of horse reins to threaten Haitian migrants after images circulated of a U.S. border guard on horseback charging at migrants near a riverside camp in Texas.

The mostly Haitian migrants in recent days have been crossing back and forth between Ciudad Acuna in Mexico and the sprawling camp across the border in Del Rio to buy food and water, which was in short supply on the U.S. side.

Reuters witnesses saw mounted officers wearing cowboy hats blocking the paths of migrants, and one officer unfurling a cord resembling a lariat, which he swung near a migrant’s face.

A video showing a border guard apparently threatening migrants with the cords was shared on social media.

“I don’t think anyone seeing that footage would think it was acceptable or appropriate,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

“I don’t have the full context. I can’t imagine what context would make that appropriate,” she added.

Some on social media commented that the image of fleeing Black men chased by white officers on horseback had echoes of the historical injustices suffered by Black people in the United States.

U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz said the incident was being investigated to make sure there was not an “unacceptable” response by law enforcement. He said officers were operating in a difficult environment, trying to ensure the safety of the migrants while searching for potential smugglers.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said the long reins are used by mounted officials to “ensure control of the horse.”

“But we are going to investigate the facts,” he said during a news conference in Del Rio.

The camp under a bridge spanning the Rio Grande has become the latest flashpoint for U.S. authorities seeking to stem a flow of migrants fleeing gang violence, extreme poverty and natural disasters in their home countries.

The camp was a temporary home to more than 12,000 migrants, though Texas Governor Greg Abbott said the number reached as high as 16,000 on Saturday. Many had traveled from as far south as Chile, hoping to apply for asylum in the United States.

On Monday, as temperatures soared to 104 degrees Fahrenheit (40 Celsius), migrants complained about continued shortages of food and water in the camp. Some of those crossing back into the U.S. could be seen balancing large bags of ice on their heads as they waded through the water.

During the day hundreds of migrants had returned to the Mexico side, including families with young children, hoisting backpacks, suitcases and belongings in plastic bags above their heads.

“This treatment they are giving is racism, because of the color of our skin,” said Maxon Prudhomme, a Haitian migrant on the banks of the Rio Grande in Mexico.

(Read more of this original, slanted article at Reuters)

Rather than taking the stance of the article writer (sympathetic to the illegal aliens and hostile to the law), remember these things

When reading the above article, it would be good to remember the following items:

  • Despite the fact that Joe Biden has openly invited illegal immigration, neither he nor the other Democrats have changed the law. Illegal immigration is still illegal and these Haitians that the article mentions so lovingly are criminals.
  • As a law enforcement official, it is the job of a Border Agent to stop illegal acts (especially smuggling, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and illegal immigration). That, in part, was what these agents were about during this event.
  • Horses are domesticated work animals. As such, they need direction. One means of providing that direction is to twirl reigns on one side or another of the horse’s head (causing the horse to move in the opposite direction).
  • Listed among the complaints, you hear of “whip like.” However, you don’t hear of “trampled” or “maimed” or “killed.” These horses were well controlled by their riders.

Oh, and never mind that the photographer (not a videographer, as claimed in this article) debunked the claims also.

…

However, with freedom under assault in Canada, the White House backs Trudeau and remains silent

Ottowa Police Horses Trample Demonstrators

National Review provides details of how Trudeau’s forces swooped in and trampled the rights of Canadian protesters.

Canadian law enforcement is reaching the final stages of its push to clear out anti-Covid-mandate protesters from Ottawa’s Parliament Hill, advancing toward the main stage — the heart of the trucker convoy — this morning. The full-scale press against the convoy began on Friday morning, with large numbers of militarized police units in full riot gear surrounding the protest and methodically pushing inwards, dismantling encampments and making arrests as they went.

Yesterday’s push was met with minimal violence from protesters inside the convoy. While truckers and their allies lined up and linked arms in an effort to stop the encroachments, law enforcement made relatively easy work of overpowering the physical resistance, and there were no visible attacks on police outside of some shoving during struggles at the front line. (Although today, the Ottawa police reported that “one protester launched a gas canister and was arrested” this morning).

https://twitter.com/njhochman/status/1494712995901067265

But police in Ottawa were seen at times engaging in aggressive crowd-dispersal tactics, and have drawn criticism from some corners for their use of horses, batons, and pepper spray in yesterday’s sweep of the protest encampments. Toronto Sun columnist Joe Warmington called the tactics “grotesque,” pointing to a number of instances of police aggression caught on film throughout the day. “Trudeau must be asked to answer why [it was] necessary to make the front of the parliament [look] like a civil war Friday,” Warmington wrote. “It is true the protesters were a nuisance, but it wasn’t them who were violent.”

In simple visual terms, the armored cars, riot units, and armed officers perched on the roofs of surrounding buildings appeared out of proportion against the largely peaceful encampments from which the most notable offense over the course of the past three weeks has been loud and sustained honking.
https://twitter.com/njhochman/status/1494731739238789120

Ottawa – Canadian law enforcement is reaching the final stages of its push to clear out anti-Covid-mandate protesters from Ottawa’s Parliament Hill, advancing toward the main stage — the heart of the trucker convoy — this morning. The full-scale press against the convoy began on Friday morning, with large numbers of militarized police units in full riot gear surrounding the protest and methodically pushing inwards, dismantling encampments and making arrests as they went.

Yesterday’s push was met with minimal violence from protesters inside the convoy. While truckers and their allies lined up and linked arms in an effort to stop the encroachments, law enforcement made relatively easy work of overpowering the physical resistance, and there were no visible attacks on police outside of some shoving during struggles at the front line. (Although today, the Ottawa police reported that “one protester launched a gas canister and was arrested” this morning).

But police in Ottawa were seen at times engaging in aggressive crowd-dispersal tactics, and have drawn criticism from some corners for their use of horses, batons, and pepper spray in yesterday’s sweep of the protest encampments. Toronto Sun columnist Joe Warmington called the tactics “grotesque,” pointing to a number of instances of police aggression caught on film throughout the day. “Trudeau must be asked to answer why [it was] necessary to make the front of the parliament [look] like a civil war Friday,” Warmington wrote. “It is true the protesters were a nuisance, but it wasn’t them who were violent.”

In simple visual terms, the armored cars, riot units, and armed officers perched on the roofs of surrounding buildings appeared out of proportion against the largely peaceful encampments from which the most notable offense over the course of the past three weeks has been loud and sustained honking.

Footage also captured several examples of what appeared to be overzealous policing tactics against the protesters. (These tactics, it’s worth noting, were only made possible by Trudeau’s invocation of the Emergencies Act, which the interim Ottawa police chief credited for “the work we are doing today” on Friday.) Police smashed the windows of RVs and trucks, breaking in to remove protesters holed up inside and searching the cars afterwards. Protesters were beaten and pepper sprayed, as seen in at least one widely circulated video clip that appeared to show (from multiple different angles) an officer repeatedly beating a seemingly unarmed woman on the ground with the butt of his gun.

At one juncture, police on horseback rode their horses directly into the crowd, trampling at least two protesters underfoot. One of the protesters appeared to be handicapped and was knocked off a motorized scooter by one of the police horses.

(Read more at National Review)

As opposed to the situation at the American border, remember these facts

When you consider this article, remember these facts:

  • These were legal residents of Canada. Most were vaccinated and, therefore, compliant with the government’s demands. They just wanted to voice their concern over the government’s policy.
  • The beat-down by police was unwarranted.

Watch out. If Biden is not condemning this, he is encouraging it and waiting to do it to America.

If Biden’s and Trudeau’s Far Left is ready to do this to truly peaceful protesters (who hugged the police, fed one another, had bouncy houses, and displayed other peaceful proofs — as opposed to the Black Lives Matter folks who burned businesses, killed people, and resisted the law), what will both do to us?

…

 

Censorship in Joe Biden’s America


Biden’s Microsoft influencers want to destroy online privacy

Breitbart reported in a 25 February 2021 article how Microsoft leadership has pushed to create a system of tracing content around the Internet that could destroy online anonymity and even shut down computers of those who convey unapproved messages.

MicrosoftAgainst stiff competition, the alliance of tech and media giants has devised a plan that may constitute Big Tech’s most brazen power-grab yet.

According to Microsoft’s press release, it has partnered with several other organizations to form the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA).

Put simply, the purpose of this organization is to devise a system whereby all content on the internet can be traced back to its author.

The press release states that it will develop these specifications for “common asset types and formats,” meaning videos, documents, audio, and images.

Whether it’s a meme, an audio remix, or a written article, the goal is to ensure that when content reaches the internet, it will come attached with a set of signals allowing its provenance — meaning authorship — can be detected.

Consider the companies that have signed on to this initiative. Leading the pack is Microsoft, which operates Word, Paint, Notepad, Edge, and the Office Suite. If you create a .doc or a .jpg, a Microsoft service is probably involved in some capacity.

Then there’s Adobe, the company behind Photoshop, Illustrator, Acrobat, and Premiere Pro, as well as several other market-leading applications for publishing photos, videos, and documents.

There’s also Truepic, a company that has developed technology to track the provenance of photos from the very moment they are captured on a smartphone.

Finally, there’s Intel, which dominates the market in laptop and desktop central processing units (CPUs). The CPU is responsible for processing virtually all information on computers. Whether you’re typing a sentence or taking a screenshot, it’s the CPU that is processing that data.

Accessing the CPU is the ultimate form of digital surveillance. Even if you’re disconnected from the internet, the CPU still sees what your computer is doing.

The combination of these forces creates the potential to track and de-anonymize information from the moment it is created on a computer. Signals could be attached to information to ensure it is censored and suppressed wherever it travels online. Even if someone else is sharing the information, it could be suppressed simply because of its point of origin. And, of course, the signals could be used to identify the creators of dissident content.

Nowhere in Microsoft’s press release is there any indication that these are not the ultimate goals.

And, in fact, the press release gives several indications that these are precisely the ultimate goals.

According to Microsoft, the coalition was created for a single purpose: to stop the spread of “disinformation” — which, in modern establishment journo-speak, means information that challenges establishment narratives. Disinformation, based on how the word is used today, might as well be called dissident information.

According to Microsoft’s press release, the coalition has been established “to address the prevalence of disinformation, misinformation and online content fraud through developing technical standards for certifying the source and history or provenance of media content.”

Naturally, the mainstream media, which is most threatened by dissident information, is heavily involved. The precursor to this coalition, Project Origin, included the New York Times, the BBC, CBC, and Radio Canada.

Project Origin’s mission statement declares:

Misinformation is a growing threat to the integrity of the information eco-system. Having a provable source of origin for media, and knowing that it has not been tampered with en-route, will help to maintain confidence in news from trusted providers.

The goal has been stated up front. The establishment media wants to trace the origin of all digital content so that “trusted providers” can be distinguished from non-trusted providers.

We all know what this means by now. The difference is that instead of doing it via the censorship of online social media platforms and search engines, they are now going to do it at the level of offline software and hardware, most likely down to the most fundamental unit of computer hardware – the CPU.

In other words, there will be nowhere to hide.

(Read more at Breitbart)

Let’s be frank. The “misinformation” they mention would include conservative thought.

As during the election, the cyber giants want to block any information that disproves their narrative. Photos, videos, and written testimony will not be allowed.

…

House Democrats try to censor free political speech with HR 1

The Washington Examiner discusses the censorship potential of HR1, the “For the People Act,” which displays the potential to threaten the First Amendment guarantees to free speech and free association.

FirstAmendmentThe Orwellian H.R. 1 “For the People Act” threatens the very existence of our First Amendment right to speak and associate freely.

The bill proposes a radical expansion of government control over political speech, including provisions that would force 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations to disclose their donors, force private digital companies to release customer lists, and broaden the definition of a lobbyist to include even the most basic political action.

Democrats are calling this an anti-corruption bill. It’s not. The H.R. 1 “For the People Act” is one of the most brazen assaults on free speech we’ve seen in decades. Passing this legislation would have a devastating and permanent chilling effect on political speech.

Political donations and speech are classified as protected speech under the First Amendment. There is no constitutional requirement for the source of that speech to reveal itself. In today’s hyper-polarized political climate, linking your identifying information to political speech comes with very serious risks.

We all know the business of politics is ugly. The public face of an organization or a set of values is made vulnerable to online harassment at best, and physical harm at worst. Putting yourself out there is dangerous. That’s why votes are kept private, charity donations can be made anonymously, and reporters enjoy the right to keep their sources anonymous.

A reasonable expectation of privacy for political speech exists to protect our safety. It’s been less than five years since conservative groups were targeted and persecuted by Lois Lerner and the IRS, and since then, the political climate has only become more toxic.

In the past few years, Americans watched in horror as a madman attempted to assassinate members of Congress during a baseball practice. They watched high school students wearing MAGA hats go viral online, resulting in death threats, doxxing, and bomb threats called into their school. Social media predators released the locations of the students’ parents’ workplaces in hopes the deranged would show up to do them harm.

Americans watched congressional Democrats drag the reputation of public servants like Brett Kavanaugh through the mud in front of his loved ones and the world. They watched a Democratic socialist threaten to bring a gun to a MAGA event in Trump International Hotel, tweeting, “I am coming with a gun and I expect to get numerous bloodstained MAGA hats as trophies.”

The list goes on. Search the Internet for “Trump supporters beat up” and watch the results come pouring in.

This is what civic engagement looks like in 2019. People hack into your phone, they show up at your house, they leave horrific messages and images in your children’s social media feeds, and attempt to run your business out of town. Do you honestly think the average family would subject itself to this level of scrutiny and peril for a $100 donation or a Facebook ad? It’s just not worth it.

Our Founding Fathers understood the importance of anonymity in a free society. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay composed the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym Publius. Judge Robert Yates defended the ratification of the Bill of Rights using the pseudonym Brutus.

This right has been protected throughout our history. In 1958, the Supreme Court ruled the state of Alabama could not publicize the membership rolls of the NAACP. They knew that without the NAACP v. Alabama decision, thousands of black Americans would have been targeted by hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

Now, Democrats have decided they have a right to your privacy.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will tell you that grassroots organizations like FreedomWorks oppose H.R. 1 because we don’t want to lose donations. I hate to break it to you, but if America reaches a point where citizens cannot express political views without fearing for their lives, the FreedomWorks balance sheet will be the least of our worries.

Free speech is what separates the United States from third-world juntas.

(Read more at the Washington Examiner)

As I suggested in the last bullet point of yesterday’s mention of HR1, the “For the People Act” can be interpreted to kill a number of freedoms

As I mentioned yesterday, questioning election officials on their practices could (under HR1) be interpreted as harassing those officials. Under other clauses of HR1, it seems that we also lose our right to speak freely or associate freely within this Democrat junta (pronounced “hoon-ta” to those not familiar to the language commonly used in banana republics).

If you disagree with my calling this a junta, then please explain the presence of the National Guard and the construction of the barbed-wire fence around the capitol since the installation of Joe Biden.

…

More shades of 1984 as Twitter bans accounts for going against the preferred narrative on NATO

Reuters repeats the party line in a 25 February 2021 article on the banning of accounts that went against the preferred narrative (bolding was introduced by me for emphasis).

TwitterFlashTwitter said on Tuesday it had taken down 373 accounts which it said had ties to Russia, Armenia and Iran and had breached its platform manipulation policies.

The company said it had taken down 238 accounts operating from Iran for various violations of its policies.

Twitter said 100 accounts with Russian ties were removed for amplifying narratives that undermined faith in NATO and targeted the United States and the European Union.

Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow planned to look into the grounds for Twitter blocking the accounts, TASS news agency reported.

Twitter also said 35 accounts with ties to Armenia were taken down, adding that they had been created to target Azerbaijan.

“The 373 associated accounts across the four networks were permanently suspended from Twitter for violations of our platform manipulation policies,” the company said in a blog post.

(Read more at Reuters)

Can the de-platforming of Fox, Newsmax, and One America News Network be far behind?

If you read the next article, then you will see that this de-platforming may be closer than you think.

…

Congressional Democrats bully cable providers to drop Fox, Newsmax, OANN

The Washington Times reported in a 23 February 2021 article on how Democrat Representatives Eshoo and McNerney wrote a letter questioning why cable companies would broadcast Fox, Newsmax, and OANN.

Democrats, for the past four years, were absolutely horrified by President Donald J. Trump’s pending authoritarianism and assault on this nation’s First Amendment rights.

The Washington Post lamented: “Trump keeps threatening the freedom of speech.” The Atlantic wrote of “Trump’s warped definition of free speech,” and USA Today opined: “Trump 2020 plan: New threats to press freedom and trust in media pillars of our democracy.”

Now, after winning full control of the legislative branch and the White House, Democrats are wielding their newfound power to limit free speech in ways the former president never dreamed.

Two Democratic members of Congress wrote a letter Monday to the chief executive officers of the country’s largest television providers, bullying them into purging Fox News, Newsmax and One America News Network from their cable lineups on the basis of them promoting “misinformation and conspiracy theories.”

EshooMcNernyDemocratic Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney want these cable providers to apply some newfound “moral or ethical principles … related to journalistic integrity,” in determining what content they should allow to be disseminated on their platforms.

They’re demanding these providers explain the steps they took following the Nov. 3 election and up to the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riot “to monitor, respond to, and reduce the spread of disinformation, including the encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your company disseminates to millions of Americans.”

They want detail on each step and when it was taken, including any adverse actions against the channels Fox, Newsmax and OANN.

The same people who spent four years claiming to be worried about authoritarian rule are absolutely committed to using their newfound power to silence dissenting voices. I dare you: Name something — anything — former President Trump did that more seriously endangers freedom of press than this.

Yet, the mainstream media and Silicon Valley are in agreement — cheering on this authoritarian rule.

Alex Stamos, the former chief security officer for Facebook, suggested on CNN that AT&T, Comcast and other cable providers should rethink their carriage of right-wing outlets like Fox News and Newsmax because of the “disinformation” being spewed by them. The Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan echoed similar thoughts.

The Post’s Eugene Robinson and journalist Katie Couric have both openly questioned how one can “deprogram” Trump supporters.

On Wednesday, The House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing titled “Fanning the Flames: Disinformation and Extremism in the Media.”

Their claim is “the spread of disinformation and extremism by traditional news media presents a tangible and destabilizing threat” and that “some broadcasters’ and cable networks’ increasing reliance on conspiracy theories and misleading or patently false information raises questions about their devotion to journalistic integrity.”

Journalist Glenn Greenwald warned: “Democrats’ justification for silencing their adversaries online and in media — ‘they are spreading fake news and inciting extremism’ — is what despots everywhere say.”

He continued: “Since when is it the role of the U.S. government to arbitrate and enforce precepts of ‘journalistic integrity’? Unless you believe in the right of the government to regulate and control what the press says — a power which the First Amendment explicitly prohibits — how can anyone be comfortable with members of Congress arrogating unto themselves the power to dictate what media outlets are permitted to report and control how they discuss and analyze the news of the day?”

(Read more at the Washington Times)

Since Democrats are chomping at the bit to implement socialism, who would think they would act like socialist dictators?

Who would think there would be no difference between Maduro, Pol Pot, and Pelosi? Since they all come from the same mold, this is not unimaginable.

…

In response to YouTube feed pulls, conservatives go to Rumble and Vimeo


Lifesite feed pulled on YouTube. In response, they go to Rumble.

Lifesite News reports that the dictators at Google have pulled the plug on the Lifesite feed. In response, Lifesite News pulled up stakes and moved to Rumble.

LifeSiteNewsAs YouTube has suspended LifeSite’s channel for a week, based on accusations of “medical misinformation” within a video featuring comments by a medical doctor, LifeSite’s new videos will be available via Rumble or on The John-Henry Westen Show YouTube channel.

Rumble is popular as an alternative to YouTube for many conservatives, including Dinesh D’Souza, Dan Bongino, Devin Nunes, and others, as it is free from Big Tech influence and is outside Google’s de facto monopoly (YouTube is part of Google).

All of LifeSite’s videos and shows, including The Mother Miriam Show, The Bishop Strickland Show, and many more, will available for viewing this week on LifeSite’s Rumble channel by clicking here.

They will also be available on YouTube on The John-Henry Westen Show channel, which was not suspended. To find our videos on YouTube this week, like and click the notification bell on The John-Henry Westen Show channel by clicking here.

The video that led to censorship from YouTube can also be found there.

On November 18, YouTube had flagged another of LifeSite’s videos, The Mother Miriam Show. Despite being titled, “Catholic Christmas traditions to instill faith in your kids,” that video also received a warning of “medical misinformation.” YouTube then removed the video.

With the warning on November 18, and yesterday’s strike, LifeSite has now been banned from uploading any videos by YouTube for a week.

(Read more at Lifesite News)

Although I don’t know the inner workings, my church steered from YouTube to Vimeo

My church, Crossroads Baptist Church, steered away from using YouTube to using Vimeo for its online sermons and other streaming services. Because I am not in leadership, I cannot tell you why this decision was made; however, by reviewing the things done by YouTube to people of faith and conservatives, I can certify that their decision was a reasoned and sound one.

…

Sean Parnell, an American hero and candidate for Representative in Pennsylvania, speaks at the RNC (full text)


Sean Parnell recounts a uniquely American experience

On the first day of the Republican National Convention, Sean Parnell shared part of what he learned in combat and from his grandfather:

I’m Sean Parnell and it is an honor to be here.

In 2006, the Army sent me to Afghanistan as a young platoon leader placed in command of Americans from every corner of our planet. Our platoon reflected the diversity of our nation: every race, creed, and religion. Despite those differences, we were bound together as brothers from the same American family. On June 10, 2006 our platoon was attacked just after dawn. Outnumbered 10 to 1, we endured mortar and machine gun fire as hundreds of Taliban charged us from three sides.

We had 24 men that day.

Wave after wave of Taliban advanced up the hill. I was wounded three times in the fighting. Nearly all of my platoon was wounded within the first minute, but the enemy kept coming. We fought to our last rounds of ammunition and when it was over, we held the hill.

In the face of death, I saw ordinary Americans become heroes. In our darkest hour, when our survival depended on each other, my men and I learned an important lesson: we all bleed red.

Our differences did not define us. United, we were unbeatable. After 485 days of combat, I came home eager to enjoy the freedoms I risked my life to defend, but I watched with alarm as the party of my grandfather (a life-long, union Democrat) turned against the very people it professed to represent.

I watched as Joe Biden spit venom at an auto worker who dared to question Joe’s intent to dismantle the Second Amendment and take your guns. Where Democrats once stood for hard-working, law-abiding Americans who displayed our flag with pride, this new Democrat party considers these people uneducated racists “clinging to guns and Bibles.”

The party of Harry Truman became the party of hedge fund managers, Hollywood celebrities, tech moguls, and university professors — all bloated with contempt for middle America. I look across the aisle and I do not see a party that wants you to pursue your dreams. I see a Democrat party that wants to dictate what those dreams are. I don’t see a party that wants you to be free. I see a party that wants to chain you into conformity and will destroy anyone they deem heretic.

I swore an oath to defend my country and its Constitution. President Trump has sworn to do the same. That’s why he’s advanced freedom despite savage political attacks to overcome the agenda of the radical Left.

President Trump has unleashed the economic might of this nation like no other president in our history. He triggered the rising tide of working families, brought us energy independence, reclaimed jobs from overseas (that, you know, Democrats said would never return).

He has fiercely defended the besieged First and Second Amendments. That is just a start.

With four more years, imagine what we can achieve by simply working with our President. I believe in our President’s vision for the future. I stand here tonight calling on all Americans to join us. It doesn’t matter what you look like, who you love, how you worship, your gender, or your job. If you’re a traditional Democrat who’s become disillusioned with how radical your party has become, then stand with us. You are most welcome.

America needs all her patriots to rush to her defense.

My fellow Americans, I promise you this: in our tent, you are free. Free to speak the truth, choose your journey, define your life. You have the power to go as far as you aim. Then aim higher and and keep going, because that is what Americans do. We are idealists and dreamers, lovers of adventure. We’re rugged and independent. We don’t make excuses, we make the impossible a reality.

Think about it. In a century, we went from ground-bound dreamers gazing to the stars to doers who created the means to reach them.

This is not the time to stand on the sidelines. If you love our country (as we do)(as our President does) join the chorus of patriot voices that will preserve this exceptional union.

Mister President lead the way. Millions in our American family believe in this path to destiny. Guide us to that horizon. Thank you and may God bless the United States of America.

By the way, if you like this message from Sean Parnell and would like to see more like him in Congress, you might want to visit his campaign web site at SeanForCongress.co. Any gift would probably help immensely.

Four more times the Democrat message turned into Anti-Americanism


Snuffing out the freedom of religion, step by step

  1. California’s Governor forbids Christians from singing in church houses

Christian Broadcasting Network shows us how churches now have to decide whether to obey God or Governor Newsom of California.

GavinNewsomGolden State Christians have been ordered by California’s governor to stop singing in church. This is a direct assault on the First Amendment, as I warned folks about in my new book, “Culture Jihad: How to Stop the Left From Killing a Nation.” Click here to read.

“Californians are still free to attend their house of worship. But they’re forbidden from singing or chanting,” read the lead paragraph in a story published by the Sacramento Bee. 

The new guidance for places of worship was issued on July 1.

“Discontinue singing (in rehearsals, services, etc.), chanting, and other practices and performances where there is increased likelihood for transmission from contaminated exhaled droplets. Consider practicing these activities through alternative methods (such as internet streaming) that ensure individual congregation members perform these activities separately in their own homes,” the 14-page order reads.

The previous guidelines only encouraged churches to “strongly consider” ending corporate worship, the Sacramento Bee reported.

(Read more at the Christian Broadcasting Network)

In the early history of the church (Acts of the Apostles, chapter 5), a similar event happened.

Peter and the apostles were confronted with a similar command by a similar governmental leader. In Acts 5:29, Peter and the apostles responded:
Sing to God, O kingdoms of the earth, Sing praises to the Lord, Selah. (Psalms 68:32 NASB)

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

We have the same choice. We can let the government mandate that we abandon our Biblical acts and beliefs or we can follow the Word of God. We can we can kowtow to a more politically-correct message or choose to share the good news of the gospel. We can hold our praise and singing or we can obey the mandates in the Psalms. We can ignore the Bible and go the World’s way or we can follow what we read in the Bible.

By the way, since this article centers on singing, here are some of the Psalm verses commanding Christians to sing praises to God:

  • Sing praises to God, sing praises; Sing praises to our King, sing praises. For God is the King of all the earth; Sing praises with a skillful psalm. (Psalms 47:6‭-‬7 NASB)
  • My heart is steadfast, O God, my heart is steadfast; I will sing, yes, I will sing praises! (Psalms 57:7 NASB)
  • All the earth will worship You, And will sing praises to You; They will sing praises to Your name.” Selah. (Psalms 66:4 NASB)
  • Sing to God, O kingdoms of the earth, Sing praises to the Lord, Selah. (Psalms 68:32 NASB)
  • Sing to the Lord a new song; Sing to the Lord , all the earth. (Psalms 96:1 NASB)
  • I will sing of lovingkindness and justice, To You, O Lord , I will sing praises. (Psalms 101:1 NASB)
  • Sing to Him, sing praises to Him; Speak of all His wonders. (Psalms 105:2 NASB)
  • Sing to the Lord with thanksgiving; Sing praises to our God on the lyre, (Psalms 147:7 NASB)

Believe me, there are multiple other verses.

…

Nike hopes that the silent majority will visit their stores when based on Nike’s silence

  1. Nike remains quiet after Kaepernick calls Independence Day a ‘Celebration of White Supremacy’

Breitbart points out the silence of Nike as they ignore their spokesperson’s words on Independence Day.

NikeKaepernickNike has not responded to a request for comment after Colin Kaepernick, one of their leading pitchmen, called Independence Day a “celebration of white supremacy.”

On Saturday afternoon, as 4th of July festivities were getting underway across the country. Kaepernick took to Twitter and accused America of having “dehumanized, brutalized, criminalized + terrorized” black people for centuries.

(Read more at Breitbart)

This ignores stories like that of Richard Allen: From slave to pastor to founder of AME church to Founding Father and many other firsts

Kaepernick’s narrative ignores the true potential of America. Kaepernick’s narrative says: “Look over here at these cases of injustive.” Never mind that America elected a Black President for two terms. Never mind that people like Oprah Winfry, General Colin Powell, HUD Secretary Ben Carson, and many others enjoy success in America. However, even from the beginning, some have been able to apply the teachings of the Bible and the principles of the Declaration of Independence to the betterment of all. For example, the Christian Broadcasting Network recounts the accomplishments of Richard Allen, a Black founding father.

From his young years, Richard Allen knew the humiliating and dehumanizing pain of being a slave. Born in 1760, his entire family was sold from his first master to another. And when that second master fell on financial hard-times, he divided the family by selling Richard’s mother and three of his siblings to another plantation.

Then the teenager known as “Negro Richard” went on in toil and drudgery with just one of his brothers and sisters still with him. That’s when he met the Lord Jesus Christ when listening to the preaching of an abolitionist pastor. He and his brother decided their best Christian witness would be to serve their master all the more and with excellence.

Richard then got his slave master to listen to that preacher too, and his master also came to know the Lord. One of his Christian deeds was to offer Richard his freedom within five years if Richard could pay for that freedom. Throwing himself into odd jobs for cash, Richard managed to buy his way out of slavery in just one and a half years.

He educated himself and became an itinerant preacher in the mid-Atlantic states, changing his name from Negro Richard to Richard Allen. He thought soul-saving would now be the major mission of his life. But he also frequently advocated for an end to the enslavement of the colonies’ 700,000 black people, even as America was fighting for its liberty from Britain.

A Methodist Episcopal church in Philadelphia asked Allen to preach on a more regular basis. His sermons became so popular that black people began to flood the church to overflowing. The church built a new balcony area and then tried to force the African Americans to worship there, separated from their white Christian brothers and sisters. It literally picked some blacks up off their knees and dragged them away from praying with those whites.

Allen and many of his fellow congregants decided to walk out of that church. He decided they needed their own house of worship.

Dr. Peter Lillback founded and heads up the Providence Forum, a group that wants to keep in Americans’ hearts how much God and faith figured into the founding of their nation and the forming of its values.

Lillback said of Allen, “This now former slave who’s been educated is going to establish a church that reaches out to the African Americans.”

The popular pastor had earlier purchased land in 1787 with the help of George Washington and Declaration of Independence signer Dr. Benjamin Rush.

Allen eventually bought a blacksmith’s shop, and in 1794 had it dragged by horses to this property, which has become the piece of land continually in the possession of African Americans longer than any other real estate in the US. He turned that blacksmith shop into a church, meant to be for blacks only so they wouldn’t have to deal with the degrading prejudice of whites and being pushed around by them in the holy space of a church.

But white Methodist leadership in Philadelphia fought back and demanded control over aspects of Allen’s church. He finally took them to court and what’s come to be known as Old Mother Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church won its independence.

This became the nation’s first major African-American church. Then Allen convinced several other black congregations in the region – who also wanted to be free of racist overseers – to join with his church. In 1816, they became the African Methodist Episcopal Church, America’s first independent black denomination and oldest formal institution in the US for African-Americans.

Allen was named its first bishop. The AME now has 2,500,000 members in more than 7,000 congregations in 39 countries spread across five continents. And Allen’s Old Mother Bethel is still a lively church within that denomination.

Those weren’t Allen’s only firsts. He was the first black activist invited into a US president’s home. He was the first African American to write a copyrighted pamphlet; the first black to write a eulogy for George Washington (and the only person at that time to write of Washington emancipating slaves).

“If you love the God of love,” he wrote in 1794, “clear your hands from slaves, burden not your children or country with them.”

Allen also helped put together the first convention of African American activists. Conventions became a major place for blacks to push for reforms, abolition and civil rights.

He and fellow reformer Absalom Jones formed the Free African Society to benefit blacks. And he made his own church a major place to educate African Americans and help them improve their place in the young nation. That church harbored more than 30 Jamaicans who’d escaped their slave masters. It became an early stop on the Underground Railroad and helped finance it.

He went on to influence major black reformers in the 1800s like Frederick Douglass and such civil rights activists in the 1900s as Martin Luther King Jr.

While slave owners were using the Bible to justify slavery, Allen was using that same Bible and the Declaration of Independence to battle against racism and men owning their fellow men.

Frederick Douglass went so far as to say that what Allen preached about freedom and equality for his fellow African Americans formed “a new Declaration of Independence.”

(Read more at the Christian Broadcasting Network)

…

Corporate Cancel Culture forces a communications exec to resign for stating the military’s official position when he was a Navy pilot

  1. Boeing forces Golightly to resign for an op-ed in a Navy internal publication 35 years ago

The New York Post reports on the forced resignation of Neil Golightly.

BoeingBoeing communications boss Niel Golightly has resigned over a sexist article he wrote three decades ago opposing women’s service in the military.

His exit leaves the embattled planemaker searching for a new top spokesman as it works to get its troubled 737 MAX jet flying again.

Golightly stepped down Thursday as Boeing’s senior vice president of communications following an employee complaint about the 1987 article, which he called “embarrassingly wrong and offensive.”

“At issue is not whether women can fire M-60s, dogfight MiGs, or drive tanks,” Golightly, then a US Navy lieutenant, wrote in a US Naval Institute magazine. “Introducing women into combat would destroy the exclusively male intangibles of war fighting and the feminine images of what men fight for — peace, home, family.”

Golightly, who had only been with Boeing about six months, said he decided to resign for the company’s sake even though the article does not reflect his current views.

“My article was a 29-year-old Cold War navy pilot’s misguided contribution to a debate that was live at the time,” Golightly said in a statement. “The dialogue that followed its publication 33 years ago quickly opened my eyes, indelibly changed my mind, and shaped the principles of fairness, inclusion, respect and diversity that have guided my professional life since.”

Boeing said it disagreed with the content of Golightly’s article and that it has started a search for his successor. Greg Smith, Boeing’s chief financial officer and executive vice president of enterprise operations, will oversee communications in the meantime, the company said.

Boeing President and CEO David Calhoun talked with Golightly about the article and its implications for his role as the company’s top spokesman, Calhoun said. He added that Boeing has an “unrelenting commitment to diversity and inclusion in all its dimensions.”

“I greatly respect Niel for stepping down in the interest of the company,” Calhoun said in a statement.

(Read more at the New York Post)

Everybody thinks their sins are too small to be noticed and their accomplishments are too big to ignore

We are all self-centered. We all think too highly of ourselves (and we know it, unless we have become self-deluded and have begun to drink our own Kool Aid).

However, from God’s perspective, our best deeds are like a dirty diaper or used bandage.

For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. (Isaiah 64:6 NASB)

Therefore, maybe these punks are letting us know something that any Bible-reading Christian knows: we have feet of clay (we sin, we are fallible).

However, this makes me wonder what these self-righteous Marxists will think in 10 or 20 years when people change values and destroy their icons. Hey, maybe it won’t even be that long. Maybe the next generation will value babies and wonder how America could sacrifice over 60 million to Molech.

Maybe the next generation will find itself knee deep in debt and will wonder why we squandered our economy for a cold.

…

Cancel Culture creeps into the Church

  1. Indiana Priest Suspended for Condemning BLM’s Violence, Marxism and Destruction — BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

As I first found at BUNKERVILLE, an Indiana priest has been reported to have suspended for condemning BLM‘s violent Marxism. Here is part of Bunkerville’s assessment:

We are witnessing the wholesale capitulation of the bishops before the Marxist mob.

Father Theodore Rothrock from St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church in Carmel, Indiana was suspended this week after his condemnation of the radical Black Lives Matter protest movement published in the parish’s Sunday bulletin on June 28, 2020.  Liberal media outlets almost immediately published excerpts from the bulletin article and called for Rothrock’s removal.

Here is the Father Rothrock’s column in its entirety:

The lady (doth) protest too much, methinks

Today in Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton
Thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time
28 June 2020

This dialogue from Hamlet is taken from Act 3, scene 2 and is a response to Hamlet’s query: “how like you this play?” The line suggests a hidden agenda that is revealed in the objections, where the accuser is actually the perpetrator. History is replete with examples of misdirection. In 2001 the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamyan, the 6th century monumental statues of Gautama Buddha in central Afghanistan, claiming them to be pagan idols. The world was horrified, but did nothing about it.

Despots and tyrants have always employed accusation and distortion to achieve all manner of mischief in an effort to shape and mold public opinion. Anyone currently doing business with Amazon could not help but notice the prominent banner headline from the internet giant touting their proud support for “Black Lives Matter.” But do those black lives really matter to the community organizers promoting their agenda? Is “Antifa” concerned with the defeat of fascist right-wing nationalism or more interested in the establishment of left-wing global socialism?

The brutal murder of a black man in police custody has sparked a landslide of reaction to the alleged systemic racism in America. We are being told that the scars of race relations in this country are really unhealed wounds that continue to fester and putrefy; amputation is required! Reforms must be sweeping and immediate to crush the rising wave of racism that pervades the nation and perverts the body politic.

On the heels of the Covid sequestration, the bottled-up tension of an isolated population has exploded into riots and demonstrations that we have not seen the like in fifty years. What would the great visionary leaders of the past be contributing to the discussion at this point in time? Would men like Fredrick Douglas and the Reverend King, both men of deep faith, be throwing bombs or even marching in the streets? Would they be pleased with the murder rates in our cities or the destruction of our families by the welfare system? Would they see a value in the obliteration of our history to re-write a future without the experience and struggles of the past? Would we tear down their monuments?

Who are the real racists and the purveyors of hate? You shall know them by their works. The only lives that matter are their own and the only power they seek is their own. They are wolves in wolves clothing, masked thieves and bandits, seeking only to devour the life of the poor and profit from the fear of others. They are maggots and parasites at best, feeding off the isolation of addiction and broken families, and offering to replace any current frustration and anxiety with more misery and greater resentment.

The message of peace that comes to us in Christ is the gospel we carry in common with the Orthodox Churches and other Christians. We must stand in solidarity with our brethren across the world to oppose this malevolent force. Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and the other nefarious acolytes of their persuasion are not the friends or allies we have been led to believe. They are serpents in the garden, seeking only to uproot and replant a new species of human made in the likeness of men and not in the image of God.  Their poison is more toxic than any pandemic we have endured. The father of lies has not just been seen in our streets, we have invited him into our home. Now he is prowling like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, strong in your faith.

On Tuesday, Fr. Rothrock was forced to issue an apology, stating “It was not my intention to offend anyone and I am sorry that my words have caused any hurt to anyone.”Apparently this was not enough for the “frothing at the mouth” Marxists calling for his removal.  On Wednesday, Bishop Timothy Doherty removed Fr. Rothrock from public ministry.

(Read the statement from the church on Fr. Rothrock’s removal at BUNKERVILLE)

Since I come from a denomination that has leading factions that have promoted “gospel diversity” and other idiocy, I don’t point to a perfect church

Since my church includes the likes of Russell Moore, JD Greear, and other inventors of attempts to pull the world’s philosophies into the church, I cannot claim to have a perfect church.

With that said, this act against Fr. Rothrock seems to be like a huge step back toward liberation theology.

May Jesus come soon.

…

Five times America received and reacted to electronic discrimination from the Cyber-Left


In an effort to further snuff out the conservative message on online, Facebook takes action

  1. Facebook announces hate speech advertisement ban

One America News Network reports that Facebook has decided to ban advertisements it deems as hate speech.

Mark_ZuckerbergMark Zuckerberg recently announced Facebook will prohibit hate speech from now on. On Friday, the CEO announced the platform will prohibit any advertisements that claim society is threatened by members of a particular race, ethnicity, gender or other protected category.

This came after several major companies threatened to pull Facebook advertisements for the month of July. Zuckerberg specifically noted posts from politicians will be removed if they “incite violence or suppress voting.”

According to the CEO, other posts may be flagged if they do not adhere to the company’s rules.

“We’re going to start labeling content that we find newsworthy that might otherwise violate our policies,” he said. “…If we determine the content may lead to violence or deprive people of their right to vote, we’re going to take that content down, no matter who says it.”

Facebook will also notify users if they try to share a post that has been flagged.

This comes as many social media users on both sides of the aisle have pointed out censorship abuses by big tech.

Attorney General William Barr has addressed how the Department of Justice might handle big tech censorship. In an interview with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Barr claimed the department is investigating several tech companies on the grounds of antitrust laws.

According to reports, he will be announcing specific measures in the next few weeks.

The attorney general is reportedly considering revisions to Section 230, which protects companies from content on their sites and ensures equal speech representation.

“They built up this powerful network, very strong market power, based on the representation that they were sort of open to all as sort of a bulletin board,” explained Barr. “When they got that market power, now they’re censoring views.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

Considering the American government developed the resource they now use to deliver their product, these Internet companies might deliver a balanced product

Considering that the Internet came from ARPANET (a network between universities and the military) and that the overall network within the borders of the U.S. cannot be disputed to as a U.S. asset, the American government might exercise the same rights as it does over the airwaves. That is, just as it requires television stations and radio stations to prove that they are broadcasting in the public interest.

Moreover, considering that all of these social networking companies say that they are platform where ideas are shared freely; however, in practice, they act as publishers (by editing the messages that are allowed out and choosing winners and losers among the field of message bearers). Therefore, if they are going to act like publishers, they should be open to lawsuits like publishers.

…

Another instance that reminds us that the speech everybody likes does not need protecting

  1. Reddit bans r/The_Donald and r/ChapoTrapHouse as part of a major expansion of its rules

As seen on The Verge, Reddit has banned subreddits “The_Donald” and “ChapoTrapHouse” as part of an expansion of its rules.

redditReddit will ban r/The_Donald, r/ChapoTrapHouse, and about 2,000 other communities today after updating its content policy to more explicitly ban hate speech. The policy update comes three weeks after Black Lives Matter protests led several popular Reddit forums to go dark temporarily in protest of what they called the company’s lax policies around hosting and promoting racist content. It marks a major reversal for a company whose commitment to free expression has historically been so strong that it once allowed users to distribute stolen nude photos freely on the site.

“I have to admit that I’ve struggled with balancing my values as an American, and around free speech and free expression, with my values and the company’s values around common human decency,” Reddit CEO Steve Huffman said in a call with reporters.

In a blog post that cites the company’s new rules, Huffman said users of the r/The_Donald subreddit had violated the site’s policies for years. (The site has no official connection to President Donald Trump, although he did do an Ask Me Anything there as a candidate in 2016.) “The community has consistently hosted and upvoted more rule-breaking content than average (Rule 1), antagonized us and other communities (Rules 2 and 8), and its mods have refused to meet our most basic expectations,” Huffman said.

Similarly, r/ChapoTrapHouse had also hosted content that violates the site’s rules, Huffman said. The subreddit is a spinoff of the popular left-wing podcast.

Reddit’s new policy begins with a first rule that requires users to “consider the human.” It reads:

Remember the human. Reddit is a place for creating community and belonging, not for attacking marginalized or vulnerable groups of people. Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence. Communities and people that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.

That formed the basis of a policy framework that bans hate speech.

“Reddit’s mission is to bring community and belonging to everybody in the world, and there is speech in the world and on Reddit that prevents other people from doing so,” Huffman told reporters. “Harassing speech or hateful speech prevents people from coming to Reddit and feeling safe and sharing their vulnerabilities … So if we have speech on Reddit that’s preventing people from using Reddit the way that we intend it to be used, or that prevents us from achieving our mission, then it’s actually a very easy decision.”

The introduction of the new policies has resulted in the removal of about 2,000 subreddits so far, and the company says “the vast majority” were inactive. Only about 200 of them had more than 10 daily users, the company said. They include:

  • r/DarkHumorAndMemes
  • r/ConsumeProduct
  • r/DarkJokeCentral
  • r/GenderCritical
  • r/Cumtown
  • r/imgoingtohellforthis2
  • r/Wojak
  • r/soyboys

Last year, Reddit “quarantined” r/The_Donald, placing it behind a warning screen after it was found to host content that incited violence. The company had previously prevented posts on the forum from reaching Reddit’s front page. Former users of the forum began moving to a new site off Reddit last year.

While Monday’s removals hit some high-profile political communities, Huffman said the company would continue to support a broad range of political speech.

(Read more at The Verge)

It sounds like these restrictions would have stopped A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift

Although I do not support the transfer of nude pictures, this clampdown on the conservative segment of the Reddit audience does not match up to the standards that they claim to hold. As with the previous article, this seems like a case of a company that claims to be an online billboard acting more like an online publisher that edits the works on it.

…

Censorship of Conservatives by Liberal Twitter creates a response

  1. Parler hits 500K as an alternative to liberal Twitter

One America News Network reported in a 27 June 2020 article that Parler has gained 500K users due (in most part) to the censorship from liberals at Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

ParlerAmid rising censorship of conservative voices on Twitter and other social media platforms, the new app Parler has seen a large influx of users. According to reports, more than 500,000 new people created accounts on the site after Twitter recently banned two conservative accounts.

Parler’s user base skyrocketed by 50% this week alone, bringing the total number of users to 1.5 million.

Conservatives like Rep. Matt Gaetz and Sen. Ted Cruz announced they joined site after experiencing what they called “unfair banning of right-wing accounts.”

“They use that power to silence conservatives and to promote their radical left-wing agenda,” stated Cruz. “Big tech has shown the ability to shadow ban what you say or post without anyone ever knowing about it.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

I have been on Parler as @Mark1one since 4 June 2019

Feel free to follow me at @Mark1one, since I have been there for some time.

Of course, since I am not a heavy hitter (and even if I were), all I can say is: the more the merrier.

…

Potential Democrat leaders encourage discrimination by the Left on social media

  1. Democrat Congressional candidate urges Twitter followers to ‘report’ Trump supporters

Breitbart shares the rantings of McMurray, the ]Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District.

Nate McMurrayNate McMurray, the Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District, urged Twitter followers Wednesday to “report” Trump supporters.

“When you see fake videos, when you see racism, when you hear support for Trump, do not roll your eyes, do not play nice, do not worry about hurting someone’s feelings, CALL IT OUT — REPORT IT — FIGHT IT,” he wrote:

Thursday, immigration lawyer Matthew Kolken shared a screenshot of McMurray’s tweet and said, “This is a dangerous chill of 1st Amendment freedoms”:

However, McMurray appeared to have amended the “REPORT IT – FIGHT IT” command with “TALK TO THEM – DO NOT GO WITH THE FLOW” in another tweet on Friday:

(Read more at Breitbart)

This “Fight it” stance seems to go with someone who thinks their supporters have made their mind(s) up and cannot be confused with the facts

Much like the times I have noted the Cancel culture, this “Cancel campaigning” seems to ignore the opposition and encourages the followers of the campaign to do the same. It looks like this guy has thoroughly gotten lost in his own confirmation bias.

…

Facebook doubles down on eliminating the First Amendment

  1. Facebook blacklists Laura Loomer’s campaign ads

Breitbart reports on what might seem to be violation of Laura Loomer’s First Amendment rights.

Laura LoomerFacebook has reportedly banned all ads on behalf of Laura Loomer, the frontrunner in the GOP primary race for House candidate in Florida’s 21st district.

Loomer’s personal account is banned on Facebook, as well as on Facebook-owned Instagram, and her campaign was prevented from creating a page to reach voters on Facebook last November. Now the campaign is being banned from running ads on the platform as well.

Loomer’s most recent ad can be viewed on YouTube:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has previously said it’s not right for “private companies to censor politicians.”

“The Laura Loomer for Congress Inc. Campaign represents more than just Laura Loomer, the candidate,” said Karen Giorno, chief strategist for the Loomer campaign and formerly the campaign manager for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign in Florida.

The Loomer campaign, said Giorno,  “embodies a national movement, that radiates from within President Donald J. Trump’s home district, FL-21 and is made up of millions of voices from across the country. Many have become volunteers, donors and have pledged to vote for Laura Loomer in the August 18th primary and again in November to retire the radical, elitist, entrenched Democrat incumbent, Lois Frankel. ”

“This community of citizens that are Republican, Democrat and Independent are choosing to support Laura Loomer for Congress to represent them in Washington, because she embodies their values, their mores, their beliefs and their norms.  By Facebook banning Laura Loomer for Congress Campaign ads from running, they are essentially going against their own policy, and canceling millions of voices as well.”

“This is a perfect example of how Big Tech is committing blatant election interference in the form of illegal in-kind contributions to the Democrat party and their candidates in a race that is taking place in the President’s backyard.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

The Left is out to destroy America. Sadly, Loomer is getting in the way of that.

While Zuckerberg claims he wants free speech, his actions show that he only wants free liberal speech or free Marxist speech. If you step over the boundaries and start to become in the least conservative (as with the first article in this post), he will shut you down.

…

It seems that Starbucks has seen the light


Antifa carries AK-47’s and takes over 6 square blocks of Seattle (Starbuck’s home)

Starbucks bans employees from wearing anything in support of Black Lives Matter

The Hill reports that Starbucks now has decided to pull back from supporting Black Lives Matter.

SeattleAR-15
Antifa member carrying an AR-15

An internal memo sent to Starbucks employees last week specifically warned staffers against wearing accessories or clothes bearing messages in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The memo, obtained by BuzzFeed News, reminds staffers that such messages are prohibited under the company’s policy against accessories that “advocated a political, religious or personal issue.”

Numerous employees told the news outlet, however, that the company regularly allows or even encourages employees to wear pins in support of LGBTQ equality, especially during Pride Month every June.

“Starbucks LGBTQ+ partners wear LGBTQ+ pins and shirts, that also could incite and create violent experiences amongst partners and customers,” one black transgender employee of the coffee chain told BuzzFeed. “We have partners who experienced harassment and transphobia/homophobia for wearing their pins and shirts, and Starbucks still stands behind them.”

A video from a top company executive reportedly sent with the memo warned employees that “agitators who misconstrue the fundamental principles” of the movement could seek to “amplify divisiveness” if the messages are displayed in stores.

“We know your intent is genuine and understand how personal this is for so many of us. This is important and we hear you,” the memo read.

(Read more at The Hill)

Do you think that the light-handed reports from main stream media influenced Starbucks?

Since CNN took the word of Mayor Jenny Durkan at face value (as evidenced by the tweet below) and did not investigate the violence within the barricades, maybe they (and the other Democrat-supporting press) has made themselves a non-factor as far as Starbucks is concerned.

You see, Starbucks would know that the tripe that this Democrat mayor spews (refer below) does not match with reality. With people in Seattle, they would know that backing the Antifa side and the Black Lives Matter side would mean the economic death of a company that asked for more than a pittance for their services. So they produced this memo from reality.

Reality like that experienced by freelance reporters and the Seattle Police Chief.


Reality like that experienced by those accused of crime or those who have an unpopular opinion.


A reality that we all will contend with should another Democrat administration come to power along with a Democrat House and Senate.

A hat tip to The Last Refuge.

…

Seven stories on the foolishness of “the Squad”


Problems with Rashida Tlaib

  1. Rashida Tlaib Boos Hillary Clinton at Bernie Sanders Rally: ‘No, No, I’ll Boo’

Breitbart reports in a 1 February 2020 article that Rashida Tlaib bucked the lead of the moderator and led the crowd in booing Hillary Clinton.

rashida-iowa-boo-hillaryRep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) booed Hillary Clinton at an Iowa event for her candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Friday evening, drawing laughter from the audience.

Tlaib made an appearance at Sanders’ “Caucus Concert” in Clive, Iowa, on Friday, which also featured a performance by the indie folk band Bon Iver, and took an opportunity on stage to boo Sanders’ former challenger.

During the panel discussion, the moderator, Dionna Langford, made a reference to Clinton’s recent remarks that “nobody likes him [Sanders].”

“We’re not going to boo. We’re not going to boo. We’re classy here,” Langford told the audience.

Tlaib interjected.

“No, no, I’ll boo,” she said, shouting “boo” loudly into the microphone:

(Read more at Breitbart)

Had this been a Republican, this would be on the front page of the New York Times

As we all know, had a conservative or other out-of-favor group booed Hillary Clinton, they would have been pilloried by most media outlets, both left and right. However, because this politician has a Democrat and a Muslim label, the main stream media has decided to ignore this event. The only way we find out about it is that a few right-wing media do the job that the main stream media as abandoned.

…

  1. Rashida Tlaib Releases Apologetic Statement After Booing Hillary Clinton

Breitbart also reports in a 1 February 2020 article that Rashida Tlaib has flip-flopped on her opposition to Hillary.

rashida-tlaib-apologizes-after-clip-booing-hillary-clinton-goes-viralRep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) on Saturday released an apologetic statement after going viral for booing Hillary Clinton at a campaign event for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Friday evening, explaining that she allowed her “disappointment with Secretary Clinton’s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me.”

Tlaib released the statement after booing at the mention of Clinton at Sanders’ “Caucus Concert” in Clive, Iowa, explaining her frustration with attempts to “dismiss the strength and diversity” of Sanders’ movement.

“I am so incredibly in love with the movement that our campaign of #NotMeUs has created. This makes me protective over it and frustrated by attempts to dismiss the strength and diversity of our movement,” she wrote.

“However, I know what is at stake if we don’t unify over one candidate to beat Trump and I intend to do everything possible to ensure that Trump does not win in 2020,” she continued, explaining that she “allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton’s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me”:


(Read more at Breitbart)

Although the main stream press will not let us know, there is a war going on in the Democrat party

Between the Clinton moderates and the Warren/Sanders/Buttigieg socialists, people have come to a war of words (refer to the post Kyle Jurek to see how a Bernie supporter says cities will burn if Bernie doesn’t get the nomination).

…

Problems with AOC

  1. Ocasio-Cortez Tells Billionaires: The People Don’t Want Your Money; They Want Your Power

In a 21 January 2020 article, Breitbart repeats the claims by AOC that socialists don’t want billionaires’ money — they want the billionaires’ power.

AOC_isAnIdiotRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) on Monday delivered a message to billionaires, stating that the people want their “power” — not their money.

The New York lawmaker spoke at the Blackout for Human Rights: MLK Now 2020 in Harlem’s Riverside Church on Monday, stating that if billionaires want to be ethical, they should relinquish their power.

“If Jeff Bezos wants to be a good person, you turn Amazon into a worker cooperative,” she said to cheers. “You know, like what do I do with all this money that I have created with this unjust system?”

“And if — usually if you’re a billionaire, that means that you control a massive system. It means that you own oil supplies. It means that you control textiles. It means that you have a massive labor force under your control,” she continued.

“And to be ethical, if you’re a billionaire today, the thing that you need to do is give up control and power. So I don’t want your money as much as we want your power. The people. Not me,” she clarified:

(Read more at Breitbart)

What power (other than money) do all billionaires have?

According to the decision of the Supreme Court in Buckley versus Valeo, the ability to direct money to support a cause or a candidate constitutes free speech. Therefore, other than the billionaire’s ability to support a candidate with money or resources (food, transportation, goods, services, …) — what power does the billionaire have that AOC supposedly wants over the money?

This woman is a bloviating moron.

…

  1. AOC claims Democrats are center or center-conservative

The Washington Times provides the words of Representative Ocasio-Cortez — who said Democrats are the “center or center-conservative.”

If one is a socialist, the Democratic Party probably does look conservative.

At a Martin Luther King Day event Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Democrat, derided her party as insufficiently left-wing and too beholden to capitalism.

AOC_isAnIdiotTwo“We don’t have a left party in the United States. The Democratic Party is not a left party,” the freshman congresswoman said to audience applause. “The Democratic Party is a center or a center-conservative party.”

(Read more at the Washington Times)

How has “socialist” become “center or center-conservative?”

How has the party who staged cry-ins outside of a inner-city school in South Texas now transformed into a conservative party? How has the party who denies due process to a
sitting President become a conservative party? When has the party who cannot handle a caucus of the Democrat part of a small state (but still wants to nationalize our health care) somehow transformed into a conservative group?

More centrally, when has the controlling socialist (as exposed through the Green New Deal) become the freedom-loving, job-creating conservative?

…

  1. A-Owe-C riles Dems by refusing to pay party dues, bankrolling colleagues’ opponents

Fox News points out how AOC has been marginalizing herself by both refusing to pay her Democrat party dues and then bankrolling opponents in the Democrat party who are not liberal enough for her tastes.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has already topped the fundraising charts in her short time in Congress, but the liberal darling won’t donate a cent of her millions to Democrats’ House campaign organization — a position that has rankled some of her colleagues, Fox News has learned.

Instead, Ocasio-Cortez is building her own fundraising operation for fellow progressive candidates to bypass the official Democratic Party infrastructure. Already, she’s actively funding primary challengers to oust certain Democratic colleagues.

“Sometimes the question comes: ‘Do you want to be in a majority or do you want to be in the minority?’” Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., told Fox News, when asked about AOC’s stance. “And do you want to be part of a team?”

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chairwoman Cheri Bustos downplayed Ocasio-Cortez’s decision to shun dues and pointed to the record-breaking fundraising numbers the committee has notched without her.

“That’s always up to individual members so I guess I don’t think about it one way or another,” Bustos said when asked about Ocasio-Cortez’s stance. “We’re raising record amounts of money from our members.”

(Read more at Fox News)

Democrats deserve this. This is socialism in action.

Democrats birthed the baby of class warfare and then got rich off of the taxpayers. Therefore, it follows that one of their own kind would start to step in their path. Ocasio-Cortez has only begun to take from the rich Democrat party and give to her poor socialist comrades.

…

Problems with Ilhan Omar

  1. Iranian Journalist Says Ilhan Omar Helped Smear Her After She Criticized Soleimani

The Daily Caller reported in a 10 January 2020 article that Masih Alinejad became the victim of a smear campaign after that Iranian journalist criticized General Soleimani.

Masih Alinejad
Masih Alinejad

Iranian journalist and author Masih Alinejad says Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar has been a part of a smear campaign against her.

Alinejad wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post criticizing the late Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and claiming that many Iranians viewed him as a warmonger and even a war criminal rather than a celebrated leader — and Friday evening, she told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that Omar had joined those attacking her.

Alinejad said that she believed the attacks were a response to her recent article, saying, “I criticized Soleimani and I’ve said that many Iranians do not see him as a hero. They see him as a warmonger, as a war criminal. And that is why I got a lot of attacks by these Islamist lobbyists and she actually shared one of these defamatory articles against me.”

Alinejad said that what really bothered her was the fact that she had reached out to the freshman congresswoman on a number of occasions, asking her repeatedly to lend her voice to different situations.

“One time, six women got arrested just because of protesting compulsory hijab. Another time, 29 women in Iran got arrested in one day because of protesting compulsory hijab, and I asked Omar to join us and show solidarity. She was silent,” Alinejad began. “And another time when my brother was taken hostage by the Revolutionary Guard, I reach out to her. Silence again. My mother was interrogated for three hours just because of my activities. Again, she was silent. 1500 people got killed, she was silent. Right now, 176 people got killed in a suspicious situation in Iran, Ukrainian airplane — she’s silent!”

“Are you suggesting that she doesn’t care about the freedom that you are fighting for?” MacCallum pressed, asking whether Alinejad believed Omar was actually siding with the regime and against the people.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Why should we expect a leftist Representative who seems to have cheated the system to gain entry to the USA to act differently?

Why would we expect a Democrat (who comes from a pool of identity politics and bases her election on her religion and race) to treat this journalist fairly when that journalist bucks the Democrat norm and took stances the elected Democrat did not like?

…

  1. Ilhan Omar Continues To Dump Big Bucks Into Alleged Boyfriend’s Firm

The Daily Caller reports how Ilhan Omar continues in 2020 to dump money into her boyfriend’s firm.

Over half of Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s campaign expenditures in the last quarter of 2019 went to her alleged boyfriend’s consulting firm, according to Federal Election Commission filings released Friday.

Omar’s campaign paid $217,000 to E Street Group LLC between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31 for research services, digital advertising, fundraising consulting, travel and more, filings show. The firm is run by Democratic consultant Tim Mynett, who was accused by his ex-wife in August of having an affair with Omar.

The fourth-quarter spending figures represent yet another significant uptick in the level of campaign funds Omar has dedicated to Mynett’s firm.

In the third quarter of 2019, Omar disbursed about $146,713 to E Street Group, and in the 10-month period prior, from August 2018 to June 2019, her total spending with the firm was $223,000.

In total, Mynett’s firm has received $587,000 from Omar’s campaign, the bulk of which was received after he was alleged to be dating the congresswoman.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

So, Ilhan Omar may have married her brother, may have lied to gain entrance to the USA, and seems to have broken up a marriage while married

While Ilhan Omar may have married her brother, lied to gain entrance to the USA, seems to have committed campaign finance violations, seems to have broken up a marriage while she was also married — she does not seem to be slowing down with her illegal and immoral acts.

All the time, she wears a hijab — a symbol of her Islamic chastity and morality.

This woman wearing a hijab for chastity makes about as much sense as Americans handing over their health care to Democrats (who got hacked in 2016 and could not run a 200K member caucus in 2020).

…

If the Presidential election were today, who has earned your vote