Conservatives Must Fight Big Tech or Lose~The problem isn’t simply radicalism. It’s power.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/conservatives-must-fight-big-tech-or-lose-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Long before, “In Soviet Russia, television watch you” became a staple of Cold War comedy routines, George Orwell’s 1984 novel had telescreens that broadcast propaganda and watched their citizens. Behind the satire is the core question of the struggle against Big Tech today.

Is technology going to be a tool of individual choice or social control?

Facebook and Twitter’s desperate attempts to block a damaging story about Joe and Hunter Biden is the culmination of four years of work to transform social media into the media. Under the guise of false claims about disinformation, foreign election interference, bots, networks, deepfakes, public health risks, and assorted tech paranoia, free speech died on the internet.

The moment when the White House Press Secretary had her account locked for tweeting a damaging news story about Joe Biden brought home the Big Tech reality to most Republicans.

Just like the media, Big Tech is the Democrat Party, and the Democrat Party is Big Tech. But, unlike the media, Big Tech controls the marketplace of ideas to an unprecedented degree.

Facebook controls 80% of social media and Google controls 80% of internet search traffic.

And that’s bad news because Democrats see the internet in the same terms as Xi, Putin, or your average dictator just about anywhere in the world, as a dangerous system spouting disinformation, damaging social ideas, and disruptive political rhetoric that must be controlled using a combination of economic and social pressures, along with government regulation.

Republicans and Democrats are both unhappy with the internet. Republicans are upset because there’s too much censorship and Democrats are upset because there isn’t enough censorship.

That Democrats, who once championed a free internet, now view it the same way all totalitarians do, speaks volumes not only about the death of liberalism but also about the transformation of the internet from a vox populi to a walled garden controlled by a handful of Big Tech monopolies whose cultural views and politics closely align with those of the Democrats.

‘Bigness’ has its own political and economic gravity. Big cities are more likely to have big governments and their inhabitants are more likely to vote for big government policies. They’re also more likely to use and generate the core companies and cultures that make up Big Tech.

The old political alignments based on questions of philosophy are being tossed aside and replaced with a new alignment based on the primevally simple questions of size and power.

The struggle is less defined by abstractions, than by the question of how much power you have.

In the Trump era, the more proximity to power you have, the more likely you are to be a Democrat, and the less proximity to power you have, the more likely you are to be a Republican.

The most striking thing about the Never Trumpers and the Rust Belt and Southern Democrats voting for Trump is how much power the former have and how little power the latter do.

Politics is being reduced to naked power.

Democrats shifted their stance on the internet because they gained control of core national institutions, in no small part through the growing fortunes pouring out of Silicon Valley which have tilted elections, financed political movements, and transformed public perspectives on social issues. And they are using their newfound power to do what the powerful always do, dismantle the safeguards of an open society so that there are no more threats to their power.

They’re doing this under the guise of fighting for equality and justice, and of waging a revolution for the oppressed, but so did most modern tyrants from Stalin to Hitler to Mao.

The Democrats are no longer interested in a free internet, for the same reason that they’ve tossed away free speech, the filibuster, or any institution or procedure that isn’t serving their interests this very minute. This isn’t due to a new progressive enlightenment, Republican obstinacy, grave new threats to democracy, or any of the other talking points they serve up.

The simple answer is that they won.

The Democrats of the 90s who welcomed an open internet were waging an uphill struggle against the open institutions of a generally conservative country. The country is now much less conservative, the institutions are much less open, and every major institutional force, from the biggest companies to the media, is unreservedly and uncritically backing them every step of the way, while suppressing any suggestion that they shouldn’t rule unopposed for all eternity.

All that’s left is collecting their winnings by shutting down the opposition.

Support for free speech is a matter of principle and practical politics. America was built on principle, but the Founding Fathers had a common-sense assessment of human nature. Free societies may be built on principles, but they survive through a balance of power. Every major faction must go on believing that it is in its interest to maintain free speech, checks and balances, and other protections against tyranny because it might end up needing them.

The Democrats have accumulated enough power that they no longer think that they need firewalls because if they play their cards right, the future, the right side of history, is their own.

That’s the fundamental development that explains the current crisis, not only of free speech, but of free elections, and a free country. The internet, like any society’s marketplace of ideas, is a symptom. Free countries have a robust marketplace of ideas. Unfree ones are obsessed with censoring speech and monitoring their citizens, all the while spinning paranoid fantasies about foreign interference, the threat of dangerous ideas, and the risk to political stability from speech.

Anyone who came out of a coma and spent an afternoon listening to CNN (owned by AT&T), reading the Washington Post (owned by the CEO of Amazon), and perusing the latest round of Democrat complaints about election interference and disinformation would know what we are.

The problem isn’t simply radicalism. It’s power.

Democrat radicalism isn’t being driven by the powerless, but by the powerful. That’s why Democrats with PhDs are more radical than those with a high school diploma. The problem of Big Tech can’t be separated from the problem of a political movement with too much power.

The culture of political censorship isn’t merely radical, it’s powerful. Cancel culture by college students or Big Tech censorship aren’t disparate phenomena, they’re the same phenomenon, often practiced on the same platforms by members of the same inbred ruling class.

America has been reconstructed to favor some classes at the expense of others. This new machine combining political institutions, activist groups, and corporations controls public life.

Conservatives can combat it or, like Soviet citizens, make jokes, and wait for it to collapse.

Big Tech is at the nexus of the political, economic, and cultural power of this new machine. That’s why breaking its power must be the objective of any winning conservative movement.

The massive monopolies control political discourse and as they tighten the noose around conservatives, political speech on the internet will consist of media narratives, a few tame conservatives, and little else. Imagine the high point of media dominance with no talk radio or cable conservative news. That’s the future. And it’s not going to arrive a year from now, it may already be here by Election Day. And if not, certainly when the next presidential election arrives.

But Big Tech also holds the key to the radical money machine. AOC and the Squad wouldn’t exist without a founding engineer from Stripe. The founder of eBay is responsible for everything from The Intercept to The Bulwark, the former is the media arm of the Sanders campaign and the latter of the Never Trumpers. The Washington Post was transformed from a fussy government paper into a den of furious radicals by the CEO of Amazon. Google money financed the Bernie Sanders campaign. Big Tech has poured a massive fortune into Black Lives Matter, from Steve Jobs’ widow, to Jeff Bezos’ ex-wife, to Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter.

And that’s the tip of the iceberg considering Facebook’s Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative.

The cultural power of Big Tech is even vaster. Google and Facebook determine what most people see on the internet. Amazon and Netflix are swallowing the entertainment industry. In a decade, a handful of vast, mostly, tech companies, Apple, Amazon, AT&T, Disney, Google, Netflix, and Verizon will control the culture far more than the old entertainment industry ever did.

By then it will be much too late to do anything except huddle in a few dark web outposts and mutter hate speech like the controversial words of the First Amendment.

If conservatives don’t fight Big Tech now, they will lose. And they will lose everything.

Big Tech’s power is growing exponentially, but it’s still vulnerable. The companies that will become immovable oligarchies in a decade can still be brought down and broken up. The internet and the marketplace of ideas can rise again from the ruins of those monopolies.

Now is the time. If we don’t fight Big Tech now, America has no future.

 

DAVID CLOUD’S “WAY OF LIFE” RECENT ARTICLES

SEE: https://www.wayoflife.org/friday_church_news/21-42.php
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

CAMPUS CRUSADE’S APOSTASY 

(Friday Church News Notes, October 16, 2020, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - Campus Crusade for Christ is an “evangelical” interdenominational ministry with 25,000 workers in nearly 200 countries. (The name was changed to “Cru” in 2011.) Never really sound theologically, the organization has moved ever farther from God’s Word. Founded by Bill Bright, Campus Crusade was radically ecumenical from its inception. In 1969, Bright said, “We do not attack the Roman Church. We believe God is doing a mighty work in it and will no doubt use millions of Roman Catholics to help evangelize the world” (The Post & Times Star, Cincinnati, Ohio, Aug. 30, 1969). By the 1970s Campus Crusade had several Catholics on staff (James Hefley, A Prejudiced Protestant Takes a New Look at the Catholic Church, 1971, p. 122). In an interview with Wittenburg Door, June-July 1978, Richard Quebedeaux said, “In Ireland, Campus Crusade is registered as a religious order. … And they work entirely within the Catholic church there with Catholics...” Now Campus Crusade is promoting the philosophy that Christians can be homosexual in dress and desire, as long as they don’t engage in homosexual activity. For example, in July 2019, Cru student leader Grant Hartley of California, who uses the hashtag #LGBTQinChrist, tweeted the following quote from Rachel Gilson, “There is no command in scripture to be straight; there is a command to be faithfully single or faithfully married, and you can do either of those without being straight.” Gilson is a Cru staff director in Boston (“Campus Crusade Teaching Kids That It’s Okay to be Gay,” Reformation Charlotte, July 30, 2019). God’s Word plainly condemns homosexuality in every aspect, including its “vile affections” and “burning lust” (Ro. 1:26-27).

MARXISM, THE NEW LEFTISM, CRITICAL THEORY, ETC., IS SIMPLY A WAR AGAINST GOD AND HIS HOLY LAWS 

(Friday Church News Notes, October 16, 2020, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - Karl Marx wrote, “Communism abolishes eternal truth, it abolishes all religion, and all morality” (The Communist Manifesto). Herbert Marcuse, father of the New Left, called for a “cultural revolution in the sense that the protest is directed toward the whole cultural establishment, including the morality of the existing society” (“Reflections on the French Revolution,” cited from Michael Walsh, The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West, 2015). Antonio Gramsci, founder of the Italian Communist Party and one of the founders of cultural Marxism, said, “One must speak for a struggle for a new culture, that is, for a new moral life that cannot but be intimately connected to a new intuition of life, until it becomes a new way of feeling and seeing reality,” and, “Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity” (Gramsci’s Political Thought: Hegemony, Consciousness, and the Revolutionary Process, 1981). Saul Alinsky, communist-leaning community organizer who influenced Barack Obama, honored Lucifer in Rules for Radicals. In the front of the book he said, “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical ... the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom.” Alinsky’s book has been called “the bible of the far left.” Kate Millett influential feminist, said, “A sexual revolution would require perhaps first of all an end of traditional sexual inhibitions and taboos, particularly those that most threaten patriarchal monogamous marriage: homosexuality, ‘illegitimacy,’ adolescent pre- and extra-marital sexuality” (Sexual Politics, 1979). Following is a chant led by Kate Millett in a consciousness-raising group in New York City in 1969: “And how do we make Cultural Revolution? By destroying the American family. How do we destroy the family? By destroying the American Patriarch. And how do we destroy the American Patriarch? By taking away his power. How do we do that? By destroying monogamy. How can we destroy monogamy? By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality” (cited by Kate Millett’s sister Mallory Millett who attended the meeting, “Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives,” Frontpage magazine, Sep. 1, 2014).

THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL, CULTURAL MARXISM, CRITICAL THEORY 

(Friday Church News Notes, October 16, 2020, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - The following is excerpted from Christopher Haun, The Eight Spectres of Karl Marx in the 21st Century: “In the 1930s, a group of professors at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Frankfurt in Germany (‘the Frankfurt School’ for short) developed their own unique strains of Western Marxism. While they preferred to call their theory ‘the critical theory of society’ their work has become more commonly known as ‘Cultural Marxism.’ They were keenly aware of the fact that the German workers did not revolt as Marx had predicted. But the fact that Marxism had failed its first and biggest test wasn’t enough to make them abandon Marx. They remained Marxist at the core and sought to salvage Marx’s vision for the dissolution of the evil ‘capitalist’ systems that dominated Europe and the United States and plagued the world. Max Horkheimer defined their critical theory of society as (1) ‘a theory dominated at every turn by a concern for reasonable conditions of life,’ (2) a theory which condemns existing social institutions and practices as ‘inhuman,’ and (3) a theory which contemplates the need for ‘alteration of society as a whole.’ In harmony with Marx, the Frankfurt School theorists taught that everything in Western society is so evil that every facet of it needs to be ruthlessly criticized, weakened, and destroyed. The rise of the Nazi movement in Germany forced these professors to flee their German homeland. The National Socialists were competing with Marxist Socialists and the Frankfurt theorists were definitely recognizable as Marxists. They were also all Jewish. So in 1935 they fled Germany and made Columbia University of New York their base of operations. ... Although sympathetic to Marx’s war on inequality among socio-economic classes, these ‘cultural Marxists’ instead focused on other cultural areas where people groups encounter inequality. They saw power inequalities in the clash of cultures ... races ... religions ... family ... gender ... and sexual orientation. ... The chief weapon in their ideological arsenal was criticism. The Frankfurt School made it academically fashionable to subject every old truth claim to ‘new criticism’ or ‘critical theory.’ Quite in harmony with Marx, every established authority and every established belief must be questioned, challenged, critiqued, doubted, ridiculed, marginalized, weakened, subverted, destroyed, and replaced. Beginning with criticism, Marx’s spectre can proceed to liberate all the peoples of the world from the oppression of Classical civilization and Judeo-Christian culture. Herbert Marcuse was one of the most influential and best known theorists of the Frankfurt School. He taught his brand of cultural Marxism into the 1970s at Columbia University, Harvard, Brandeis, and the University of California, San Diego. He is now widely regarded as the father of the New Left movement, the most influential ‘radical philosopher’ of the 1960s, and a major inspiration for the Hippie Movement, the student movement, and the civil rights movement.”

THE SPIRIT OF ADOPTION 

(Friday Church News Notes, October 16, 2020, www.wayoflife.org, fbns@wayoflife.org, 866-295-4143) - The following is excerpted from the Way of Life Commentary Series on Romans: “The sons of God have ‘the Spirit of adoption (Ro. 8:15). The “spirit of bondage again to fear” is the spirit of living under the law and being condemned by the law for every infraction in thought and deed. It is to live under the darkness and fire of Mt. Sinai, as described in Hebrews 12:18-21. It is to live under the curse of God, ‘for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them’ (Gal. 3:10). What a bondage! But the believer has ‘the spirit of adoption.’ Our curse fell upon Christ, and in Christ we are adopted children. We are sons in God’s family. We know God as ‘Abba,’ which is an intimate, tender term like ‘Papa.’ What an amazing and wonderful thing it is for a sinner to be able to call the thrice holy Creator God ‘Abba’! Jesus called the Father Abba (Mr. 14:36), and God’s redeemed children call Him Abba. This was God’s plan and purpose in redemption. His Father heart accomplished redemption for the purpose of enlarging His family. Note that it is by the Spirit “whereby we cry, Abba.” Compare Galatians 4:6, ‘And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.’ It is the Spirit of Jesus crying out to the Father through His redeemed people. Note that we ‘cry, Abba.’ This is the Greek krazo, which is a strong, passionate crying out. It is the blind men crying out to Jesus for healing (Mt. 9:27), the disciples crying out for fear when they saw Jesus walking on the water (Mt. 14:26), Peter crying out to Jesus to save him when he was sinking in the storm (Mt. 14:30), the Canaanite woman crying out for healing for her demon possessed daughter (Mt. 15:22-23), the people crying out to Pilate, ‘Let him be crucified’ (Mt. 27:23), the angels crying out with loud voices in the day of the Lord (Re. 7:210:314:1518:219:17). To cry ‘Abba, Father,’ by the Spirit is no half-hearted, lukewarm thing. Salvation is a very, very big thing, and those who are saved are dramatically changed and they have a new and passionate relationship with God. The world is passionate for the lusts of the flesh, and the lusts of the eyes, and the pride of life; it cries out for pleasure pastimes such as rock concerts, gambling, sports, and video games. But God’s people are passionate about God. Their chief enthusiasm is God, which is the purpose for which they were created. We observe, too, that ‘cry’ is present tense, which indicates that calling on God as Abba Father is their way of life, not something they do sometimes when they are in trouble.”

International Group of Medical Doctors Call COVID-19 A Hoax

'We see no evidence of a medical pandemic, so it looks like a plan-demic...'
BY ADAN SALAZAR

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/posts/watch-international-group-of-medical-doctors-call-covid-19-a-hoax/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Doctors from countries around the world banded together to issue a collective statement declaring the COVID-19 pandemic a sham.

In footage released by UK company Oracle Films, members of the World Doctors Alliance take turns explaining why the coronavirus has been overblown in their respective jurisdictions.

“I want to say that we do not have a medical pandemic or epidemic,” explains Netherlands general practitioner Dr. Elke De Klerk in a short excerpt from the meeting.

“We also state that COVID-19 should not be on list A for any longer, because we now know that it is a normal flu virus and the normal flu virus isn’t on list A.”

De Klerk goes on to say thousands of doctors and nurses are ready to join a class action lawsuit against the state, given that many nurses “do not want the vaccine that is being prepared for us.”

“I want to state, if there is no pandemic, I’m wondering why our kids are in schools with masks,” De Klerk ponders, going on to explain the PCR test currently used to test for the virus is faulty.

“There’s no reason for panic. Also in the medical practice, there’s no reason for panic,” assures De Klerk. “The panic is created by these false-positive PCR tests. 89 or 94 percent are false positive. They don’t test for COVID-19, and also the rest is false negatives, so we have to look at clinics. Medical doctors have to stop looking at those tests. That’s very important. Let’s go back to the claims and to the facts.”

In another video from the meeting on October 10, World Doctors Alliance host Dr. Heiko Schöning explains the group believes the coronavirus epidemic to be a “planned-demic.”

“Yes, so these are the statements of experts, doctors and our others scientists and activists all over the world,” Schöning says after hearing from over 14 doctors, adding, “and we have this good message to the people:

“We see no evidence of a medical pandemic, so it looks like a plan-demic, and we all together say we don’t want this new normal, and we don’t want to go back to the old normal because the old normal created this situation of new normal. We want a better normal!”

 

Did the FBI Sit on a Computer Containing Evidence of Hunter Sex Tape and Biden Burisma Corruption?

"Here we have Joe Biden’s son smoking crack on film with naked hookers and no one can be bothered to even mention it on the network news."

BY MEGAN FOX

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/election/megan-fox/2020/10/14/did-the-fbi-sit-on-a-computer-containing-evidence-of-hunter-sex-tape-and-biden-burisma-corruption-n1054706;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

One of the strangest details of the exclusive New York Post story involving the recovered data from a computer linked to Hunter Biden is the story of the laptop itself and what is alleged about it. You can read about the evidence alleging that Hunter Biden was trading influence with foreign actors in Matt Margolis’s piece here. But what also interested me was the part of the NYP investigation where they claim there’s a sex tape and pornographic photos starring Hunter on the laptop—and the FBI knew about it in December.

The computer was dropped off at a repair shop in Biden’s home state of Delaware in April 2019, according to the store’s owner.

Other material extracted from the computer includes a raunchy, 12-minute video that appears to show Hunter, who’s admitted struggling with addiction problems, smoking crack while engaged in a sex act with an unidentified woman, as well as numerous other sexually explicit images.

The customer who brought in the water-damaged MacBook Pro for repair never paid for the service or retrieved it or a hard drive on which its contents were stored, according to the shop owner, who said he tried repeatedly to contact the client.

The shop owner couldn’t positively identify the customer as Hunter Biden, but said the laptop bore a sticker from the Beau Biden Foundation, named after Hunter’s late brother and former Delaware attorney general.

Photos of a Delaware federal subpoena given to The Post show that both the computer and hard drive were seized by the FBI in December, after the shop’s owner says he alerted the feds to their existence.

Let’s forget for a moment that there’s reportedly a video of Hunter Biden smoking crack and romping with hookers on the laptop. That’s par for the course, isn’t it?

What about the part where the FBI had possession of this information back in December? Why didn’t the FBI come forward with this evidence about Hunter Biden’s emails, which appear to show collusion and influence-trading? Isn’t that something they should have told the president or members of Congress? Was the FBI deliberately covering it up? If the good citizen who came forward and alerted the FBI of the contents of the laptop had not made a copy of the information, it would still be under FBI lock and key. But the computer repairman did make a copy and sent it to Rudy Giuliani. If true, it’s a stunning indictment of the FBI that an American citizen—who alerted them to alleged multiple crimes involving a guy with the last name Biden—knew not to trust them and made other arrangements should they try to cover it up (which, apparently, they did).

Imagine for a moment that a laptop was recovered showing emails from Donald Trump Jr. to a Russian oligarch implicating him in influence-trading and, like a cherry on a sundae, there was also video of him snorting coke off the backsides of prostitutes. Do you think the story would lead every mainstream media news show? You’d better believe it would.

But instead of leading every news show, Twitter and Facebook are censoring the New York Post article and the mainstream press is pretending it doesn’t exist.

 

Facebook Exec ADMITS Throttling NYP Story About Biden Burisma Corruption, While Twitter Blocks Access

Our media and Big Tech companies are actively hiding things from us in an effort to help Joe Biden win the presidency. When will they have to report all these in-kind donations to a political campaign in the form of evidence suppression on behalf of the crooked Bidens? CNN is currently tweeting about the NFL. There is nothing on their timeline about a Hunter Biden sex tape. It’s hard to believe, but that’s the reality in which we live.

Donald Trump got hammered for saying he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose one supporter, and that was hypothetical! Here we have Joe Biden’s son smoking crack on film with naked hookers and no one can be bothered to even mention it on the network news. LOL.

I’m glad I still have my sense of humor. What else can be done short of an armed invasion and takeover of CNN headquarters? Will they never practice journalism? My God, it’s infuriating.

MSNBC is airing fantasies about Biden winning the election in a landslide. There’s no Hunter crack-pipe sex-tape story to be found anywhere on their Twitter either.

Thank God for MSNBC and their intrepid reporting skills. Whatever would we do without their daft speculation with no basis in reality? What a relief they’re not out there covering salacious sex tapes starring Joe Biden’s corrupt son or emails showing how our country’s vice presidential influence was up for sale. They’ll leave that to us and then claim it’s a “right-wing” conspiracy. Second verse, same as the first! At least they’re utterly predictable.

_______________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://www.infowars.com/posts/fbi-tried-to-cover-up-hunter-biden-emails-according-to-reports/

EXCERPTS:

The FBI tried to cover up the Hunter Biden emails last year by confiscating them from a computer repairman and stonewalling him afterwards, according to reports.

The emails only became public because the repairman made a copy of Biden’s hard drive that was ultimately delivered to Rudy Giuliani.

“According to [the repairman] Isaac, the FBI first made a forensic copy of the laptop, then returned a few weeks later with a subpoena and confiscated it,” reported Zero Hedge. “After he stopped hearing back from the FBI, Isaac said he contacted several members of Congress, who did not respond, at which point his intermediary reached out to Rudy Giuliani’s attorney, Robert Costello.”

All of this occurred under FBI Director Christopher Wray’s watch.

______________________________________________________________________________

Did Hunter Biden’s Laptop Contain Child Porn?

Reporter who allegedly saw contents of Hunter Biden laptop describes an "underage obsession."

SEE: https://www.infowars.com/posts/did-hunter-bidens-laptop-contain-pedophilic-content/

EXCERPTS:

A tweet published by One America News Network’s Chief White House Correspondent Chanel Rion claims the hard drive from Hunter Biden’s laptop contained “underage obsessions.”

“Just saw for myself a behind the scenes look at the Hunter Biden hard drive: Drugs, underage obsessions, power deals…” she wrote “Druggie Hunter makes Anthony Weiner’s down under selfie addiction look normal. Biden Crime Family has a lot of apologizing to do. So does Big Tech.”




Twitter Locks Trump Campaign Account 19 Days Before Election~SUPPRESSES NY POST STORY ALONG WITH FACEBOOK

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/10/15/election-interference-twitter-locked-trump-campaigns-account-19-days-from-election-day-n1058733;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

In a stunningly brazen move, Twitter has locked the Trump campaign out of its official Twitter account less than three weeks before Election Day on November 3. While Twitter unlocked the campaign after about two hours, the move is extremely noteworthy. Twitter locked the Trump campaign after moving against a New York Post article about Hunter Biden. Republican senators have announced they will subpoena Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey over similar moves.

“Twitter has suspended ⁦[The Trump campaign Twitter account]⁩ for posting a video calling Joe Biden a liar who has been ripping off our country for years, as it relates to the ⁦[New York Post]⁩ article. 19 days out from the election,” Mike Hahn, a social media staffer for the campaign, announced on Twitter.

Hahn included a screenshot of a Twitter notice telling the Trump campaign “your account has been locked” for “posting private information.”

Roughly 2.5 hours after Hahn announced the lockout, the Trump campaign announced it had been unlocked and tweeted the same video again.

“We are back and we are re-posting the video Twitter doesn’t want you to watch. JOE BIDEN IS A LIAR WHO HAS BEEN RIPPING OFF OUR COUNTRY FOR YEARS! PASS IT ON,” the campaign tweeted.

The video concerns a blockbuster story The New York Post published on Wednesday. The story involved a “smoking gun” email allegedly proving that then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter introduced the VP to an executive at the notoriously corrupt Ukrainian gas company Burisma — before Joe Biden pressured the Ukrainian president to fire a prosecutor looking into Burisma. This evidence appears to contradict Joe Biden’s repeated claims that he never discussed business deals with Hunter during his vice presidency.

Facebook announced that it was reducing the article’s distribution, even before any fact-check. Twitter also locked people out of their accounts when they tried to share the article, even cracking down on White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany.

On Wednesday evening, Dorsey admitted it was “unacceptable” for Twitter to block URL sharing via tweet or direct message “with zero context as to why we’re blocking.”

The company claimed that the two New York Post articles contained images that “include personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules.” Twitter argued that the materials violated its “Hacked Materials Policy.”

“Commentary on or discussion about hacked materials, such as articles that cover them but do not include or link to the materials themselves, aren’t a violation of this policy. Our policy only covers links to or images of hacked material themselves,” Twitter argued. “The policy, established in 2018, prohibits the use of our service to distribute content obtained without authorization. We don’t want to incentivize hacking by allowing Twitter to be used as distribution for possibly illegally obtained materials.”

“We know we have more work to do to provide clarity in our product when we enforce our rules in this manner. We should provide additional clarity and context when preventing the Tweeting or DMing of URLs that violate our policies,” the company concluded.

Many commentators countered this argument.

“You didn’t lock Rachel Maddow out of her account when she was posting about President Trumps alleged tax returns which were obtained illegally,” Mark Dice tweeted.

Will Chamberlain, editor-in-chief at Human Events, asked, “What is your evidence that the materials were ‘obtained through hacking?’”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) condemned Dorsey’s statement, saying it is “not nearly good enough. In fact, it’s a joke. It’s downright insulting. I will ask you – and [Facebook] – to give an explanation UNDER OATH to the Senate subcommittee I chair. These are potential violations of election law, and that’s a crime.”

Hawley formally requested that Dorsey and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg appear before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Terrorism in a hearing titled “Digital Platforms and Election Interference.”

While Twitter did unlock the Trump campaign account, it is extremely distressing that the Big Tech company would lock a presidential campaign’s account less than three weeks before Election Day.

:rotating_light::rotating_light: Editor’s Note: It’s time for conservatives to stand together and fight big-tech censorship. Join PJ Media VIP and use the promo code CENSORSHIP for 25% off your VIP membership. :rotating_light::rotating_light: 

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

Facebook Exec ADMITS Throttling NYP Story About Biden Burisma Corruption, While Twitter Blocks Access
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany Locked on Twitter
Trump Renews Push Against Section 230 After Facebook and Twitter Censor Hunter Biden Story
Twitter CEO Admits It Was ‘Unacceptable’ to Censor Hunter Biden Article ‘With Zero Context’

______________________________________________________________________

Facebook, Twitter, Illegally Donated to Biden Campaign By Suppressing NY Post Story 

BY R. CORT KIRKWOOD

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/hawley-facebook-twitter-illegally-donated-to-biden-campaign-by-suppressing-ny-post-story;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has accused Facebook and Twitter of illegal contributions to the Biden presidential campaign because the two social-media behemoths tried to suppress a story about Biden, his son Hunter, and their shady business dealings in Ukraine.

The story in the New York Post: Joe Biden lied when he said he never discussed with Hunter the latter’s inexplicably lucrative business activities in the country. 

Immediately, Facebook and Twitter whirred into damage-control mode for their candidate. Both suppressed the story, and even shut down the Twitter accounts of the Post and White House spokeswoman Kayleigh McEnany.

Hawley’s point: Blocking the story protects Joe Biden, and is, therefore, an off-the-books, in-kind campaign contribution. 

Hawley sent three letters yesterday: one to Facebook, one to Twitter, and one to the Federal Elections Commission.

Letter to Zuckerberg
Hawley wrote to Facebook chieftain Mark Zuckerberg to ask why the company blocked a story from a mainstream-media source while its social-justice warriors “fact-checked” it.

The Post reported that it secured e-mails from a MacBook Pro, presumably owned by Hunter Biden or a Biden operative, left at a repair shop. The owner of the shop turned a hard drive from the laptop over to the FBI and Rudy Giuliani, a top advisor to President Trump. The Post published e-mails from the hard drive that clearly show Joe Biden lied when he said he had “never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings” in Ukraine.

One e-mail, dated April 17, 2015, thanked Hunter Biden for arranging a meeting with his father, who was then vice president and President Obama’s top man on Ukraine policy.

Biden famously bragged that he forced Ukraine to fire the country’s top prosecutor, who was investigating Burisma, the company that employed Hunter, a notorious drug addict. Photos circulating online show Hunter Biden asleep with a crack pipe in his mouth.

“A representative from your company has publicly stated that Facebook will be ‘reducing [the story’s] distribution on our platform’ while a third-party fact-check takes place,” Hawley wrote to Zuckerberg:

The seemingly selective nature of this public intervention suggests partiality on the part of Facebook. And your efforts to suppress the distribution of content revealing potentially unethical activity by a candidate for president raises a number of additional questions, to which I expect responses immediately. 

Hawley asked whether Facebook’s “normal policy” is suppressing stories “before they have been fact-checked?” and if so, what is the policy and where has it stated?

As well:

If you have evidence that this news story contains “disinformation” or have otherwise determined that there are inaccuracies with the reporting, will you disclose them to the public so that they can assess your findings?

Why did you endeavor to publicly state that such a story was subject to a fact-check? Isn’t such a public intervention itself a reflection of Facebook’s assessment of a news report’s credibility?

Did any member of the Biden-Harris presidential campaign team or any person representing themselves as a representative of the campaign’s interests ask, encourage, or direct Facebook to suppress the New York Post story?

Hawley also explained the move, citing the Post: “Employees of the six largest Silicon Valley tech firms — including Facebook — have donated nearly $5 million to the Biden-Harris campaign.”

Letter to Dorsey
In his letter to Twitter CEO Dorsey, Hawley targeted the social-media site’s false claim that the story contained “hacked materials,” and thus violated the so-called Twitter Rules.

“In line with our Hacked Materials Policy, as well as our approach to blocking URLs, we are taking action to block any links to or images of the material in question on Twitter,” Twitter told the Post.

Wrote Hawley:

A Twitter representative has since stated that “in line with our Hacked Materials Policy, as well as our approach to blocking URLs, we are taking action to block any links to or images of the material in question on Twitter.” This statement raises questions about the applicability of your policy, especially because such a pre-emptive removal of a news story on such grounds — and the additional scrutiny you have applied — appears to be an unusual intervention that is not universally applied to all content.

Hawley demanded that Dorsey explain how Twitter determined the materials were “hacked,” and why it shut down the Twitter account of a paper as large as the Post

“If you have evidence that this news story contains ‘disinformation’ or have otherwise determined that there are inaccuracies with the reporting, will you disclose them to the public so that they can assess your findings?” Hawley asked.

And, he asked, did the Biden campaign contact Twitter to demand it block the story?

Illegal Contribution
Thus did Hawley accuse the two social-media sites of illegal campaign contributions.

“This conduct does not merely censor the core political speech of ordinary Americans, though it certainly does that,” the senator wrote to FEC General Counsel Lisa Stevenson. “Twitter’s and Facebook’s conduct also appears to constitute a clear violation of federal campaign-finance law. Federal law prohibits any corporation from making a contribution to a federal candidate for office.”

Facebook quickly attempted to suppress discussion of the exposé.

Because a contribution is “anything of value … for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office,” the “active suppression of public speech about the New York Post article appears to constitute contributions under federal law.”

The social media sites are providing “extraordinary value” to the campaign because suppressing the story is “depriving voters access to information that, if true, would link the former Vice President to corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs. And this censorship manifestly will influence the presidential election.”

_________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/twitter-operates-bidens-censorship-arm-joseph-klein/

What the Media Hides About the 2020 Election

Despite being in the midst of a presidential election, very little attention has been given to what Joe Biden's policies actually are. The media and even Biden's campaign have been rather quiet about his stances, and there are good reasons for the silence. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/