The White House is caught red-handed in a scandal about its influence on, and collusion with, some of the biggest social media platforms. They have worked together with Twitter and others to shape public opinion, and what we think is influencing the outcome of the election. White House Press Secretary Karine Pierre responds to a question about being forced to hand over Big Tech collusion communications. They are so busted.
(more…)
TheHill.com – BY JONATHAN TURLEY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 03/05/22 10:00 AM EST
Beware of politicians bearing reforms. Since the Trojans first wheeled a wooden horse into their fortified city, many are leery about “gifts” that may be heavily laden with dangers. That is true with the Trojan horse legislation just offered by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.). In the name of “reforming” the internet and bringing tech monopolies to heel, Klobuchar has penned a “Nudge Act” that would expand corporate censorship and speech controls.
(more…)
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a “Notice of Intervention” in the Trump v. Twitter lawsuit. Trump filed a lawsuit against the social media platform for permanently banning him following the January 6 riot at the US Capitol.
The DOJ’s intervention is in the defense of Section 230, a piece of legislation that protects online platforms from liability from content posted by users. The DOJ wants to point out the constitutionality of the legislation.
In this case, the DOJ is getting involved because the case questions the protection afforded to social media companies under Section 230.
“Under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5.1(c) and 24(a)(1), and in accordance with the authorization of the Acting Solicitor General of the United States, the United States hereby intervenes in this action for the limited purpose of defending the constitutionality of Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (“CDA”) (Pub. L. No. 104-104, § 509, codified at 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)),” the notice states.
Although the DOJ insists it is only getting involved for “the limited purpose of defending the constitutionality of Section 230,” by doing so, it is indirectly defending Twitter.
The notice adds: “The United States is entitled to intervene in this action under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and by statute. Rule 5.1(c) permits the Attorney General to intervene in an action where, as here, the constitutionality of a federal statute is challenged. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1(c). Rule 24 further permits a non-party to intervene when the non-party ‘is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statute.’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(1).
“The United States has an unconditional statutory right to intervene ‘[i]n any action…wherein the constitutionality of any Act of Congress affecting the public interest is drawn in question[.]’ 28 U.S.C. § 2403(a). In such an action, ‘the court…shall permit the United States to intervene…for argument on the question of constitutionality.’ Id. Here, Plaintiffs have ‘drawn in question’ the constitutionality of 47 U.S.C. § 230(c), and the United States has an unconditional right to intervene to defend the statute.”
The DOJ requested the court to “set the deadline for the United States to submit its memorandum in defense of 47 U.S.C. § 230(c) as December 9, 2021.”
Taken from Reclaimthenet.org 11/22/2021
If you’re tired of censorship, cancel culture, and the erosion of civil liberties subscribe to Reclaim The Net.
By Tom Parker – Reclaimthenet.org – Dec 10, 2020
This time the censorship is so obvious and unabashed censorship we had to share.
In one of its most flagrant election-related censorship moves to date, YouTube has announced that from today, it will start removing any videos alleging that “widespread fraud, errors, or glitches changed the outcome of any past US presidential election.”
(more…)
