reSee.it - Related Post Feed

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

THREAD: Missouri v. Biden To get back up to speed on the case as we have covered it at @UncoverDC, I will provide 3 links for you. I will begin this thread with the latest in the case and if you want more details you can read: 1. https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/10/23/bombshell-court-order-outlines-proven-government-big-tech-censorship/

Bombshell Court Order Outlines Proven Government/Big Tech Censorship - UncoverDC Americans worried about the government conspiring with social media companies to censor their speech aren’t conspiracy theorists. It’s been proven. Just this past Friday, what appears to be one of the only honest judges left in America ordered several key figures to sit for depositions in a court case brought against the Federal Government by […] uncoverdc.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

2. https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/11/03/missouri-v-biden-judge-smacks-down-government-attempt-to-avoid-deposition/

Missouri v. Biden: Judge Smacks Down Government Attempt to Avoid Deposition - UncoverDC The Missouri v. Biden case will go down in history as one of the most important civil liberties cases ever tried in a United States court. uncoverdc.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

3. https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/12/05/the-twitter-files-are-peanuts-new-filing-in-missouri-v-biden/

The “Twitter Files” Are Peanuts: New Filing in Missouri v. Biden - UncoverDC With the release of the "Twitter Files" on Friday evening, our ongoing coverage of the Missouri v. Biden case is all the more prescient.... uncoverdc.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The Missouri v. Biden case is the most important civil liberties case we have seen in years, and may be the most important ever. The case is brought by Missouri and Louisiana, along with other individual plaintiffs. It asks the court to bar the government from colluding…

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

..with social media companies to limit free speech. Recently, the judge entered a ruling on motions before him. The Biden Administration had appealed to a 3 judge panel at the 5th circuit to either bar the lower court from forcing the depositions of high level officials he had..

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

..granted, or make them depose less senior officials. The 5th circuit declined to bar the judge from doing anything, instead asking him to revisit the potential of less obstructive means of obtaining the information needed.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The transcripts of Elvis Chan (FBI Agent who visited Meta about the laptop) and Anthony Fauci were produced from depositions in this case. You can read those here in case you haven’t. Chan: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23379650/elvis-chan-deposition.pdf Fauci: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/61910a2d98732d54b73ef8fc/t/638e558a9eeae74b040688c6/1670272399105/135885afauci112322_full_redacted.pdf

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The judge in LA asked the Plaintiffs to brief him again on whether there were other people who could answer the Plaintiffs questions to prove their case for a temporary injunction, and asked the Defendants to respond. The Plaintiff response is what I was threading last night.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

It is linked above. The defendants told the judge that he should pause all of this while their motion to dismiss the case was on the table. The defendants want all of this discovery and deposition to stop and don’t want to have to answer to anyone. The judge isn’t having it.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

What follows now is a breakdown of his order, filed recently. As an aside, I broke out the Jen Psaki piece of this, even going so far as to read the transcript from HER judge shopping expedition in Virginia court. They really don’t want her deposed.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

As usual, in any filing or order, you get a brief summary of “what is this about and why are we here?” It makes it easy to understand what the parties are arguing at that particular time, and why.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The judge discusses the criteria he is using to make his decision. The higher court has asked for the lower court to analyze whether the Plaintiffs can get the information from “less intrusive, alternative means” and evaluate again whether all should be paused as they wait..

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

..for a ruling on the motion to dismiss in the case. The last brief by the Plaintiffs offered up some alternatives for the people they initially sought. Keep in mind, Psaki is no longer the head of anything.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

This is the judge saying: “I already ruled on this, but we have to do this again because the higher court said so”

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Rob Flaherty: One of the criteria you need to meet to be able to depose high-level government officials is “exceptional circumstances.” Flaherty was recently added to the case after expedited discovery revealed his involvement.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

In their brief, the Plaintiffs argued that the replacement being offered up instead of Flaherty (Slavitt) wouldn’t be sufficient because he didn’t attend all of the meetings Flaherty did. In their brief, the defendants argued “exceptional circumstances” didn’t exist. Bad move.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The judge orders that no suitable replacement is available for Flaherty, but that they will start with written interrogatory and discovery in the form of document requests. The judge lays out a timeline for this. Understand, this is a very big deal.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The judge also addresses what will happen if the defendants pull some nonsense in written response, something the Plaintiffs also addressed. This judge ain’t having it.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

This is the warning. “If you don’t respond correctly, Flaherty will be sitting down for a verbal deposition, under oath”

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Jen Easterly: The judge asserts there is no reason to depose Easterly ,and he has gone through why, but also decides that Scully is a suitable replacement. I actually agree, FWIW. They will go to Easterly for anything they can’t get from him, and he was involved EVERYWHERE.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Also, please note that the judge reaffirms “Cognitive Infrastructure.” We learned earlier in the suit that CISA has designated YOUR THOUGHTS as part of it’s critical infrastructure, and therefore they can regulate that the same way they would regulate other things.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Vivek Murthy: Murthy was one the Plaintiffs really harped on, but the judge went with his underling. Again, if they don’t get anything from the underling, Waldo, they will go back for Murthy. Waldo is the biggest fish in his office with involvement here.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Murthy had responded in written form, and defendants argue no deposition is needed from anyone there because his responses were good enough. The judge doesn’t agree with that either, but I am considering this one a loss for now. They really needed Murthy.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

I also need to add here, this judge is basically under the watchful eye of the 5th circuit right now- a higher court. It would’ve been easy for him to just side with the Defendant arguments, not granting any further discovery because of the alleged “harm” it caused the government

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Even with a gazillion other courts breathing down his back, he is doing the right thing. In analyzing the judges decision, I suppose he is thinking that by allowing the depo of a lower official, with options for more later, he is circumventing the 5th circuit stepping in (cont)

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

And ruling over him on the pending mandamus (it originates on these deposition appeals.) He is throwing the higher court a bone while also allowing the Plaintiffs all the leverage and leeway they need to make the depositions they want.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Jen Psaki: This is something. Psaki was originally a dependent, but left the government. Then, the WH said they knew nothing about anything Psaki said and couldn’t return any responsive documents during expedited discovery. The judge ordered her deposed.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Psaki didn’t like that, so she started fighting it, with the government helping her. However, the government maintained that there is no replacement for Psaki. They are saying no one knows what she was saying and why. That’s their argument.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Jen Psaki will be deposed. And it is the Biden Administrations fault. READ: https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/11/28/judge-in-va-takes-rhee-to-task-on-psaki-deposition-in-censorship-case/

Judge in VA Takes Rhee to Task on Psaki Deposition in Censorship Case - UncoverDC Tracy provides commentary and an overview of the State of Missouri vs. Biden Case.  This is a brief update and reading of the deposition. uncoverdc.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

One of the biggest worries for people on the side of actual justice, is that the courts seem to grant motions to dismiss on cases that really need to be adjudicated, especially when it comes to big-tech and censorship. I think this judge is going to see this case through.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

He basically tells the defendants here that their motion to dismiss is bunk, while scolding them about the time they took to file it and the fact that they asked a higher court to force him to halt discover for a motion to dismiss that HADN’T EVEN BEEN FILED YET:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

He also reminds everyone that this discovery is ONLY so he can rile on the temporary injunction and that since the plaintiffs do have standing, (a central argument of the motion to dismiss,) they may move to trial where MORE deposition and discovery will be necessary.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

I have followed this case since it has filed. It has been unprecedented in what it has uncovered. The @elonmusk Twitter Files, covered by @mtaibbi @bariweiss and @ShellenbergerMD have been icing on a cake for it; most of this will also probably come out in discovery.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The argument folks always put forth (and the government does as well) is, “Well sure, as the government we were making SUGGESTIONS about censorship, but we weren’t FORCING them to do it” Hogwash. Psaki made statements from the podium threatening anti-trust and also 230 (cont)

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

..penalty should social media companies not ban who the government identified. More, in released discovery we learned the “Disinformation Governance Board” was a way for CISA to organize their ALREADY IN MOTION censorship “help desk” <more>

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The highlighting of the Hobbs email was part of this, and came from discovery here. People would send in “tickets” and CISA, in partnership with NGO’s and other Non Profits, used YOUR TAX dollars to run a censorship “help desk.” However, they needed more organization and funding

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The disinformation governance board was a way for them to centralize what they were already doing, and continue to do.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

I have really missed being able to bring this information to you. Please bookmark our website, and if you are on alternative platforms you can find us there as well. I hope my account stays active and I can continue to bring you ACTUAL journalism. Http://UncoverDC.com

UncoverDC uncoverdc.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

One more - I neglected the link to the docket. Thank you @bocamarla for reminding me: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63290154/missouri-v-biden/

Missouri v. Biden, 3:22-cv-01213 - CourtListener.com Docket for Missouri v. Biden, 3:22-cv-01213 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. courtlistener.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

I’ll add to this whenever I do some new work.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Thread on released discovery of Rob Flaherty, with a cameo by the office of Jill Biden. Yes, you read that right.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

A thread on filings by the government and the Plaintiffs regarding Flaherty discovery and Psaki depositions:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Order entered on Psaki- briefing schedule set.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

New- motion to compel discovery from CISA. More employees identified in having participated in censorship.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Plaintiffs file to amend complaint to be class action:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Government files notice of terminations and replacements - why is it important? Read:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Judge GRANTS motion to amend complaint to class action:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Mega thread before the Missouri v. Biden hearing- still in progress as of 5/23/23:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Rob Flaherty is no longer working in the Biden admin.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

The government filed another motion to dismiss based on two SCOTUS rulings. The judge issued a minute entry setting rapid deadlines for reply given the impending decision on the temporary injunction to stop government from colluding with social media companies to censor (including with NGO’s.) In their reply, Plaintiffs were able to enter into the record the weaponization committee report on the weaponization of CISA (read it - link below) Response to motion: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.291.0.pdf Weaponization: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520/gov.uscourts.lawd.189520.291.2.pdf

Response (NOT Motions) – #291 in Missouri v. Biden (W.D. La., 3:22-cv-01213) – CourtListener.com RESPONSE to Defendants' Notice of Supplemental Authority Regarding Recent Supreme Court Decisions by Jayanta Bhattacharya, Jill Hines, Jim Hoft, Aaron Kheriaty, Martin Kulldorff, State of Louisiana, State of Missouri re 289 Notice (Other),,,,,, . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Slip Opinion, # 2 Exhibit B - Subcommittee Report)(aty,Sauer, Dean) (Entered: 06/28/2023) courtlistener.com

Exhibit B - Subcommittee Report – #291, Att. #2 in Missouri v. Biden (W.D. La., 3:22-cv-01213) – CourtListener.com RESPONSE to Defendants' Notice of Supplemental Authority Regarding Recent Supreme Court Decisions by Jayanta Bhattacharya, Jill Hines, Jim Hoft, Aaron Kheriaty, Martin Kulldorff, State of Louisiana, State of Missouri re 289 Notice (Other),,,,,, . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Slip Opinion, # 2 Exhibit B - Subcommittee Report)(aty,Sauer, Dean) (Entered: 06/28/2023) courtlistener.com

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

🚨🚨🚨🚨

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

New: Government appeals temporary injunction-

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Thread on ruling for temporary injunction:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Thread on Motion to Stay injunction:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Plaintiffs file memorandum in opposition to stay on injunction

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

MOTION TO STAY DENIED.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Memorandum Ruling Denying the motion to stay the temporary injunction

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Appeal of Injunction filed at 5th circuit.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Appellate court places a stay on the temporary injunction until oral arguments can be heard in an expedited fashion.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

There’s dispute on briefing and discovery schedule between parties:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Democrat states file amicus brief in favor of censorship:

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

7 republican states file briefs in support of temporary injunction.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Renee DiResta and Alex Stamos file amicus in favor of the government censorship

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

Analysis on 5th circuit decision on the Temporary Injunction…

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

🧵 1/ Rulers of Public Discourse: On February 8, former Twitter excts were called to testify before members of the Congress’s Oversight Committee regarding the #TwitterFiles. A review of the hearing and the dramatic recent legal developments of internet governance >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

2/ Before I get to Congress - let's set a frame for this discussion: ‘The Control of Content’- who and how should control the content of the public discourse, should there be such control at all? - this question has been sharpened during the unprecedented Covid censorship >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

3/ In these years, the social networks went through an accelerated process from careful and very reserved control of how positions and opinions are expressed (censorship of incitement and calls for violence) to aggressive and shameless control of the positions themselves >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

4/ eventually creating a centrally coerced truth and false that allowed those in control of the content to determine WHAT is allowed to be said or expressed - leading the public discourse into a fake “consensus”. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

5/ I have been following this process very closely, first on Facebook - where the censorship rules changed blatantly and quickly, then on Twitter after the unprecedented and unreasonable action of suspending the account of a sitting president - Trump >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

6/ I’ve been researching Internet law in recent years and I followed closely and with great concern the rapid and dramatic changes in the private governance policy of social networks. During the Covid years I noticed a very clear change in their governance policy >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

7/ It became clearer and clearer that the social networks are no longer managed in a way that preserves and protects the liberties of their users from governments and other seekers of this content control - but - >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

8/ Never have I imagined how close and routine their relationship with the government administration was, all for the purpose of monitoring the individual, censoring the discourse into a uniform narrative and using the networks as a GLOBAL and "private" platform - >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

9/ to create a covert global content control that governments were NOT (then) allowed to carry out within the framework of the constitutions and the brakes applied to them to protect basic rights and important democratic principles. So this was a constitutional bypass. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

10/Simply put: the public sector has let the private corporations be the free "liberator" of democracy- so that we all depend on it for the maintenance of discourse- and thus the liberator can become an effective prison, to be then used- by those government agencies. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

11/ The complexity of the issue of monitoring/regulating/controlling the discourse has always been around the dilemma - how do we do no harm? How do you do it solely to keep this space as authentic and safe and not to select and filter preferred opinions and silence others, >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

12/ and also - who can actually be the person that will have this enormous power and not abuse it? who will monitor this person against misuse of power? - Do we prefer private governance or public governance? Or maybe non at all? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

13/ This increased censorship policy on social networks and the absolute abuse of power came into light with the reveal of #TwitterFiles and the public debate that followed (following this also- the recent events that happened in the @Project_Veritas - see attached tweet) >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

14/ Back to the US Congress’s Oversight Committee’s hearing regarding the #TwitterFiles 4 ex Twitter employees, invited to testify: Jim Baker, Vijaya Gadde, Yoel Roth, Anika Collier Navaroli Who are they? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

15/ Jim Baker- fmr FBI lawyer,served as Twitter Deputy General Counsel Vijaya Gadde- an attorney, former general counsel & Head of legal, policy, and trust at Twitter. Yoel Roth- former Global Head of Trust & Safety at Twitter. Anika Collier Navaroli- Twitter Whistleblower >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

16/ The hearing was titled ”Protecting Speech from Government Interference and Social Media Bias, Part 1: Twitter’s Role in Suppressing the Biden Laptop Story.” It was set up for a discussion on the censorship case of Biden Jr.’s computer, but - >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

17/ Inevitably it dealt with the censorship on Twitter in general, including the censorship of scientists, doctors, politicians - and thus a broader picture of control of content and public discourse was revealed. Let’s review the hearing first >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

18/ Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY) argued that the entire discussion is a misuse of public resources, But imagine she was censored for that argument- across all social platforms, is it still a waste of time do discuss the abuse of censorship powers? The hearing begins >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

19/ Here are the claims against former these ex Twitter employees - @RepClayHiggins: Claim #1 Content governance interfered with the 2020 US presidential elections, knowingly and willingly. Higgins announces his intention to collect evidence from them leading to arrests >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

20/ @laurenboebert: Claim #2 - Twitter governance silenced Members of Congress from communicating with their constituents, in this case with “an aggressive visibility filter” (shadow ban) because of one tweet on Hilarity Clinton “Who the hell do you think that you are?” >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

21/ To complete the picture, this is the tweet that got @laurenboebert shadow banned: >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

22/ @RepMTG : Claim #3 - Twitter Content governance censored congress members’s tweets - with critical views on vaccines, masks, etc.- but pedophile accounts were not taken down or censored: >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

23/ @RepJamesComer - Claim #4: Twitter previously lied to Congress. And - “Twitter under the leadership of our witnesses today was a private company the federal government used to accomplish what it constitutionally cannot — limit the free exercise of speech”

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

24/ @RepNancyMace : Claim #5 - Twitter Content governance also censored and silenced an important, substantive and professional criticism of government Covid policy - and cost lives: >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

25/ Here @DrJBhattacharya explains how he found out he was "blacklisted" on Twitter from the first day he entered the platform: >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

26/ Freedom of speech is protected under the 1st amendment of the US constitution, so, How could Twitter (and other platforms) do all that and get away with it? Are they really more powerful than everyone else? Who in Twitter has that power? Well, >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

27/ Let’s go back to Jim Baker for a second. Baker claimed in the hearing that he ‘did not act unlawfully or otherwise inappropriately with respect to the Biden laptop’ affair (an affair which the members refer to as criminal interference in the US elections) >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

28/ “I’ve acted in a way consistent with the First Amendment. As a private entity, The First Amendment protects Twitter and its content moderation decision.” Says Baker, a former FBI lawyer, that served as Twitter Deputy General Counsel >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

29/⚖️ This absurd argument of using the freedom of speech amendment to allow private corporations to censor speech- is argued now by NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (which both represent Facebook, Google, Twitter) in recent legal developments. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

30/ The representative groups say the First Amendment prohibits viewpoint-based laws that restrict websites’ editorial choices. 👉🏻 The federal court wasn’t convinced when ruling in the case of the anti-censorship new Lee in Texas: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-51178-CV1.pdf >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

31/ This interesting legal issue arose when two states (Texas, Florida) enacted anti-censorship laws that prevent platforms from filtering content - following the suspension of Trump's Twitter account and other censorship events. This issue was brought to the Supreme Court. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

32/ Two other cases were recently brought to the Supreme Court the question whether platforms should have a complete immunity from publishers responsibility to published content and/or to censorship of content, as a non-publisher under section 230 to the DCA

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

33/ So, on one hand the platform seek constitutional protection as a private editor of speech, and on the other hand - they seek ‘complete immunity from liability’ under Section 230 to the DCA (1996) - as a “non publisher” >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

34/ But it gets worse. The private censor did not act with independent judgment but in coordination and conspiring with government agencies - against citizens. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

35/ On February 1 - @RepDanBishop explained how government agencies have used Twitter to spy on US citizens. ‘Bad enough if it was just the FBI but it was also intelligence agencies that should be directing their attention abroad’ based on the #TwitterFiles >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

36/ On the February 8 hearing- 🚨 @RepLuna exposes 👉🏻 Jira a private cloud server that used Twitter to secretly communicate with the government >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

37/ “The law allows governments to have complex, multi-faceted relationships with the private sector. When done properly, these interactions can be of interest to the company and the general interest of the public.” Says Baker on the February 8th hearing: >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

38/ Was Twitter really a private company (Dr facto)? It is a vital and complicated question- whether a private company can censor the public discourse in such manner (I’ll get back to that) but can Twitter still argue the private company protection? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

39/ Let’s go back to Jim Baker - FBI lawyer that served as Twitter Deputy General Counsel - who is he? And is this just anecdotal? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

40/ Was Baker the only Twitter employee who previously worked for the FBI? - Apparently there were many. Here’s a review: What can we conclude from that? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

41/ Can there really be a private censor with such power? Can it stay independent as a private entity, free from governments? We saw on the #TwitterFiles that the government agencies used the private sector as a shield from the constitution. Can we stop this from happening? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

42/ Maybe the problem is the excessive power that those entities (private and public) have when they conspire TOGETHER? Listen to this clip from a follow up discussion on the #TwitterFiles and the dangerous relationship between the private platforms and the administration >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

43/ Can there really be a “Safe & Effective” separation between the private sector power and the public sector power? Listen👇🏻 >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

44/ The SECRET relationship between Twitter executives and the government administration and agencies led to them being high on power >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

45/ “colluded to shape and mold the narrative” @Jim_Jordan >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

46/ #TwitterFiles uncovered that Biden Admin officials colluded with Big Tech companies to silence differing opinions during the pandemic. But also - the dangerous potential in such power and in internet content moderation in general >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

47/ Did those particular people fail or did the whole mechanism fail? Is it possible for the public to find out and judge the content completely on its own? And if not, is there a mechanism less at risk of abuse of power? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

48/ ⚖️ The U.S. Supreme Court will have to decide soon on the boundaries of this complicated issue that affects our lives to the core. The court recently delayed its decision and asked the Biden administration for its views on the controversial laws in the meantime. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

49/ If the court takes the cases up, it likely won’t be until the next term, and a decision wouldn’t come until 2024, which coincides with the next presidential election. https://spectrumlocalnews.com/tx/south-texas-el-paso/news/2023/01/24/supreme-court-delays-decision-on-hearing-texas--florida-social-media-moderation-cases >

Supreme Court delays decision on hearing Texas, Florida social media cases High court requested the Biden administration's views. spectrumlocalnews.com

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

50/ 👉🏻 The Supreme Court’s move came as new Twitter owner Elon Musk has granted “amnesty” to many suspended accounts, including Trump’s. Could this be the reason for restoring those accounts? Prevention of a problematic ruling? Or is it simply to make us depend on it again? >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

51/ ⚖️ On February 21, 2023 there will be a hearing at the US Supreme Court in the case of the lawsuit filed by the Gonzalez family against Google, which will examine the protections granted to networks under Article 230. https://www.reuters.com/legal/supreme-court-scrutinize-us-protections-social-media-2022-10-03/ >

Supreme Court to scrutinize U.S. protections for social media The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to federal protections for internet and social media companies freeing them of responsibility for content posted by users in a case involving an American student fatally shot in a 2015 rampage by Islamist militants in Paris. reuters.com

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

52/ 🇩🇪 Meanwhile, in December 2022 - a German court ruled that Twitter should remove offensive tweets •BEFORE• they are reported - That means they have an even greater responsibility, for active censorship > https://t.co/dxQCjjERDB

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

53/ Another thing is happening at the same time - Google's search engine is exercising ׳preventive control׳ over the contents in advance )like a vaccine 😂) This is how it looks like to cultivate habits of chilling discourse and self-censorship. > https://t.co/Gx9DFwVMBP

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

54/ 🇮🇱 Last but not least- Israel’s internet governance The Ministry of Communications recently adopts the recommendations of the committee for regulating the social networks operating in Israel. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

55/ The main recommendations of the committee: applying regulation to platforms with over 500,000 active users in Israel (5% of the country's population), determining legal responsibility of the platform operators in relation to clearly offensive illegal content >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

56/ requiring the platforms to operate an online HOTLINE for reporting illegal and offensive content and handling In these reports, the duty of transparency and more. >

@GalG____ - Gal.G, Adv 🇮🇱

57/ It would’ve sounded wonderful if it hadn’t come at the end of a tsunami of legislation that seriously harms individual freedoms and especially their privacy, in the post-Covid era, And if we weren't painfully aware now of the dangers of having “discourse rulers”

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

1/ 🧵 Democrats need to understand the 26 words that created the internet as we know it - Section 230 before the Supreme Court next week. There’s a reason GQP Sen. Josh Hawley wants it gutted. There’s a reason (D) Sen. @RonWyden wrote it. Let’s break it down. It protects YOU.

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

2/ “We're talking about rewriting the legal rules that govern the fundamental architecture of the internet," - @EFF — Conservatives are using the case as a vehicle to rail against "Big Tech" firms & amplify claims ..platforms censor content based on political ideology.” - CBS

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

3/ It fact, it does just the opposite of what Hawley claims, who has taken several shots at the First Amendment and free speech, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-section-230-social-media-google-v-gonzalez/

Supreme Court to hear case that could reshape the "fundamental architecture" of the internet The Supreme Court will for the first time consider the scope of Section 230, which provides legal immunity to online companies for content posted by third parties. cbsnews.com

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

4/ This is not Elon’s version of free speech. Algorithms are necessary, and so is Section 230. https://reason.com/2023/01/13/googles-brief-to-the-supreme-court-explains-why-we-need-section-230/ via @reason

Google's brief to the Supreme Court explains why we need Section 230 'Gonzalez v. Google' seeks to strip Google of protections from civil liability for third-party content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. reason.com

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

5/ A thread here. 1/3 It does nothing to reign in Big Tech. It leads to censorship of YOU.

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

6/ @ACLU “ … it will drive platforms both to censor lawful content & also to feature speech of little interest or value to users, including voter suppression material, disinformation and hate speech, contrary to the goals …”https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-warns-harm-free-speech-online-if-supreme-court-dismantles-section-230

ACLU Warns of Harm to Free Speech Online if Supreme Court Dismantles Section 230 | American Civil Liberties Union aclu.org

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

7/ Sen. Ron Wyden’s filed an amicus brief also https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/sen-wyden-and-former-rep-cox-urge-supreme-court-to-uphold-precedent-on-section-230

Sen. Wyden and former Rep. Cox Urge Supreme Court To Uphold Precedent on Section 230 | U.S. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon The Official U.S. Senate website of Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon wyden.senate.gov

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

8/ I wrote this law to protect free speech. Now Trump wants to revoke it. By Ron Wyden for CNN Business Perspectives https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/09/perspectives/ron-wyden-section-230

I wrote this law to protect free speech. Now Trump wants to revoke it | CNN Business Protecting Section 230 is crucial to defending free speech online, especially by those without power and influence, such as the protesters against police violence, writes Ron Wyden, a senator from Oregon. cnn.com

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

9/ The impact on online communities could be especially profound for marginalized groups.” - ACLU Like blogging or writing on Patreon, Reddit, substacks, YouTube? Like blogging on LGBTQ, abortion rights, even political speech? Gone if 230 is changed. https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/01/30/the-supreme-court-could-change-free-speech-on-the-internet.html

How the Supreme Court could soon change free speech on the internet In 2023, the U.S. justice system, including the Supreme Court, will take on cases that will help determine the bounds of free expression on the internet. cnbc.com

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

10/ @EFF Warns Supreme Court That Users’ Speech is at Stake When Increasing Platforms’ Liability https://www.eff.org/press/releases/ff-warns-supreme-court-users-speech-stake-when-increasing-platforms-liability via @eff

EFF Warns Supreme Court That Users’ Speech is at Stake When Increasing Platforms’ Liability SAN FRANCISCO – Increasing online platforms’ liability for hosting their users’ speech would lead to severe censorship that could undermine the very architecture of the free and open internet, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argued to the U.S. Supreme Court in a brief filed Thursday. EFF... eff.org

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

11/ The 26 words. See where it says “and user?” https://t.co/csrfDU6SzR

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

12/ “Section 230 effects social media, blogs, image sharing, forums and comment sections — any service that enables users to submit content. Literally every online platform that allows users to post information, share content, and comment relies on Section 230. - @EFF

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

13/ Another thread 🧵 https://t.co/pCscT1nZgz

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

14/ Tim Pool supports is repeal, too. 🧵⬇️ (thread) https://t.co/oAjgjFGw4I

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

15/ This conservative won’t be able to talk about God. Platforms are then liable for his speech. He doesn’t understand. https://t.co/vxGZix04bz 1/2 https://t.co/jMvVMBTlyk

@VegasVisions - News Views - Retired Hack Reporter ™

16/ There’s a lot more to add, but that a lot to consume for today. I really want Team Blue to understand this and read it. It will effect everyone if overturned. The 9th Circuit upheld it. Judge Clarence Thomas called it up for review. (End)

@TruthUnitesUs - TruthUnitesUs

RFK Jr finally has his say after House Democrats fail to completely shut him up Heroic opening statements 1st hr vid Historic Missouri v Biden 155 pg injunction ruling pdf evidence: Seismic proof - free speech suppression by govt⚖️ http://ag.state.la.us/Article/13151 https://americanthinker.com/blog/2023/07/rfk_jr_finally_has_his_say_after_house_democrats_fail_to_completely_shut_him_up.html

RFK Jr finally has his say after House Democrats fail to completely shut him up Prior to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s testimony yesterday before the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government of the House Judiciary Committee, I thought President Trump had gotten the worst treatment of anyone in public life by th... americanthinker.com

@TruthUnitesUs - TruthUnitesUs

The US Government Is Building A Vast Surveillance & Speech Suppression Web Around Every American Govt is preparing to monitor every word Americans say on the internet & censor citizens who don’t toe party line [funding AI-driven 1st Amendmt violations⚖️ https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/21/grants-reveal-federal-governments-horrific-plans-to-censor-all-americans-speech/

Grants Reveal Feds' Horrific Plans To Censor Americans’ Speech Our government is preparing to monitor every word Americans say on the internet and censor citizens who don’t toe the party line. thefederalist.com

@TruthUnitesUs - TruthUnitesUs

Trade Commission’s Retaliation Against Twitter Is More Proof The Biden Admin Is Violating The First Amendment Court: Govt “blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech” to lead “the most massive attack against free speech in U.S. history” https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/18/trade-commissions-retaliation-against-twitter-is-more-proof-the-biden-admin-is-violating-the-first-amendment/

FTC Targeting Of Twitter Proves Biden Is Violating 1st Amendment Biden punishing a censor-gone-rogue like Twitter removes all remaining doubt that the First Amendment is under attack by the government. thefederalist.com

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

The media say Biden didn't violate the First Amendment by demanding social media censorship. But the evidence presented in yesterday's federal circuit hearing plainly shows that he did. If the Supreme Court decides to hear the case, we may soon win a massive free speech victory. https://t.co/oUKDb8nYm6

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

Historic Missouri v. Biden Censorship Lawsuit Likely Headed To Supreme Court by @galexybrane Yesterday the Fifth Circuit court heard oral arguments in the Missouri v. Biden case, and the judges did not hold back. One judge suggested the government “strongarms” social media companies and that their meetings had included “veiled and not-so-veiled threats.” Another judge described the exchange between the Biden administration and tech companies as the government saying, “Jump!” and the companies responding, “How high?” “That’s a really nice social media company you got there. It’d be a shame if something happened to it,” the judge said, describing the government’s coercive tactics. Attorney John Sauer, representing Louisiana, masterfully argued that the government had repeatedly violated the First Amendment. He pointed to specific evidence of coercion in the Facebook Files. “You have a really interesting snapshot into what Facebook C-suite is saying,” Sauer explained. “They're emailing Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg and saying things like… ‘Why were we taking out speech about the origins of covid and the lab leak theory?’” The response, Sauer said, was, “Well, we shouldn’t have done it, but we're under pressure from the administration.” He also cited an email from Nick Clegg, Facebook President of Global Affairs, that pointed to “bigger fish to fry with the Administration - data flows, etc.” On Monday, Public reported that these “data flows” referred to leverage the Biden administration had over the company; Facebook needed the White House to negotiate a deal with the European Union. Only through this deal could Facebook maintain access to user data that is crucial for its $1.2 billion annual European business. But Sauer also made it clear that coercion was not the only basis on which the court could rule against the Biden administration. Joint activity between the White House and social media platforms would also be unconstitutional. Sauer compared what the government had done to book burning. “Imagine a scenario where senior White House staffers contact book publishers… and tell them, ‘We want to have a book burning program, and we want to help you implement this program… We want to identify for you the books that we want burned, and by the way, the books that we want burned are the books that criticize the administration and its policies.” Daniel Tenny, the attorney for the Department of Justice, was left nitpicking and misrepresenting the record. In one instance, he denied that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins had hatched a plan to orchestrate a “takedown” of the Great Barrington Declaration. Why? Because, Tenny said, according to their emails, they actually planned a takedown of “the premises of the Great Barrington Declaration.” Tenny also stated that social media companies had not removed any true content. From the case’s discovery as well as the Facebook Files we know that is far from true. Facebook, against internal research and advice, did remove “often-true content” that might discourage people from getting vaccinated. Facebook’s own emails clearly suggest that the company only did this due to pressure from figures within the Biden Administration. Tenny also claimed that when Rob Flaherty, the White House director of Digital Strategy, dropped the F-bomb in an exchange with Facebook it was not about content moderation. In fact, it was precisely about content moderation and occurred during a conversation about how Instagram was throttling Biden’s account. Ironically, the account couldn’t gain followers because Meta’s algorithm had determined that it was spreading vaccine misinformation. Later, Sauer demolished an earthquake hypothetical that Tenny had introduced to justify state-sponsored censorship. “You can say this earthquake-related speech that's disinformation is false, it's wrong,” Sauer said. “The government can say it's bad, but the government can't say, ‘Social media platforms, you need to take it down.’ Just like a government can't stand at the podium and say, ‘Barnes and Noble, you need to burn the bad books, burn the Communist books, whatever it is.’ They can't say take down speech on the basis of content.” Based on this hearing, the plaintiffs in Missouri v. Biden may have a strong chance of winning. Biden’s DOJ simply had no valid arguments to present. The evidence is clear: the administration brazenly engaged in an unlawful censorship campaign and instrumentalized private companies to do its bidding. This total disregard for fundamental civil liberties will be a stain on the Democratic Party for years to come. The Supreme Court will be the supreme victory in the US, but our free speech work won’t be done after we win there. No nation enjoys free speech protections like ours. And so, after we win in the US, you can expect to see us helping our allies abroad achieve similar protections from government strongarming, aka censorship, in their own nations.

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

Free Press Hosts Sex Revolution Debate: September 13 Did the sexual revolution liberate women to have it all — work, love, and a family? Or did it overpromise and underdeliver, leaving more and more women childless and unhappy? Friend of Public, Bari Weiss, the founder of The Free Press, is hosting a debate between four of the biggest feminist and post-feminist thinkers in the world: Grimes and Sarah Haider for the revolution side vs. Anna Khachiyan and Louise Perry for the counter-revolution. At the Ace Hotel Theater in Los Angeles at 7pm on September 13. Buy your ticket now! — @shellenberger Dems Turn On Drug Sites The OnPoint supervised drug consumption site in East Harlem, New York, operates as openly and unabashedly as the bodega next door. Addicts file through its front door, bringing their drugs of choice with them. Inside, OnPoint provides them with the private spaces, sterilized equipment, and human oversight they need to get high comfortably and — at least in the view of the site’s supporters — safely. On any given day, you can find NYPD officers standing around on the sidewalk in front of the building, taking no interest in what’s happening inside. But contrary to appearances, OnPoint, which operates two drug use sites in New York, operates in brazen violation of the law. Supervised consumption sites plainly fall under the definition of “drug-involved premises” under a 1986 federal law informally known as the “Crack House Statute,” which then-Senator Joe Biden co-sponsored. OnPoint has been insulated from enforcement only by the support it has succeeded in currying from progressive politicians. Even Mayor Eric Adams, a moderate Democrat, and a former cop, openly supports the service and has called for more. But now, US Attorney Damian Williams has announced a crackdown on the two sites. “My office is prepared to exercise all options — including enforcement — if this situation does not change in short order,” he told the New York Times. Harlem residents have complained about the site for years, largely to no avail. Even though drug addiction plagues neighborhoods throughout New York City, the Greater Harlem Coalition has pointed out that treatment services are concentrated in this single, low-income, majority-non-white neighborhood, turning it into a magnet for drug addicts. For example, the Times article on the US Attorney’s announcement profiles a user “who travels almost every day to East Harlem from Brooklyn so he can inject his drugs under supervision.” The influx of drug users has exacerbated the blight that already plagued the area: dirty needles littering the sidewalks, human feces in playgrounds, open drug use in plain view of school children. Government policies, the Coalition says, have turned Harlem into a sacrifice zone. On the other side of the country in San Francisco, residents have seen the same thing in that city’s sacrifice zone, the Tenderloin. Last year, the city’s public health department quietly opened up its own illegal supervised consumption site, though, unlike OnPoint with its sterile equipment and private cubicles, this one consisted of nothing more than a fenced-off courtyard and some staff members with Narcan and the city tried to prevent the public from finding out about it. Sites like OnPoint and the Tenderloin Center are the cutting edge of the “harm reduction” movement in the United States, which seeks to combat the addiction crisis on American streets not by restricting the supply of dangerous drugs and pushing addicts into recovery but by managing the risks of drug abuse by providing users with sterile narcotics paraphernalia, opioid overdose reversal medication, and controlled environments in which to use. The movement claims to save lives, but the evidence, which I’ve reported on in-depth, is questionable at best. The approach largely amounts to lowering our standards for people in the throes of addiction: instead of insisting on rescuing addicts from their disease, we’re asked to make them comfortable and manage their decline. It’s palliative care for a non-terminal condition. We should expect more. We should expect of drug users the basic personal responsibility that is an inextricable part of human dignity, even if we must compel them to accept it. We should expect our political leaders to ensure minimal public safety, hygiene, and moral decency in our cities and not shame us for wanting it. We should expect the government to treat our poorest neighborhoods with the same respect as our wealthiest and not to turn them into containment zones for the kind of activity the affluent would never tolerate anywhere near their families. Michael and I and two other journalists were the first to expose the San Francisco site and draw attention to the wider issue. Following that political embarrassment, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill to build more such sites throughout California. We co-founded in January of this year North America Recovers, a coalition of mothers seeking to save their homeless children from imminent drug deaths, neighbor activists from Harlem to Seattle angry at the chaos brought by the drug sites, and recovering addicts who understand that intervention, including by the police if need be, is necessary to save lives. As our first campaign, North America Recovers committed to halting the legalization and spread of state-sanctioned drug dens and, in particular, pledged to shut down OnPoint in Harlem. It appears our warnings of the dangers of such sites, outside of a recovery-based addiction care system like they have in the Netherlands, has been heard by the Department of Justice, the Biden White House, or any high-ranking Democratic Party strategist capable of imaging a political attack ad on the issue. Indeed, some of the mothers in the NAR coalition put up just such an ad in San Francisco last year and in Washington DC last spring. Maybe someone in the White House was paying attention. The US Attorney for Manhattan called the situation in Harlem “unacceptable.” He’s absolutely right. We should not accept it, and we shouldn’t let any politician, activist, or media pundit gaslight us into thinking we should. — @lwoodhouse

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

Shellenberger To Dublin For Free Speech: September 16 Ireland’s proposed hate censorship bill is shaping up to be the most controversial legislative proposal in recent Irish memory. Nearly three-quarters of the Irish public are against it, yet the Irish Senate may pass it into law as early as September. They won’t pass it without a fight. I’m happy to announce that I’ll join Ireland’s leading free speech advocates on stage in Dublin on Saturday, September 16. The event is co-sponsored by two friends of Public: Free Speech Ireland and Gript, a scrappy news media start-up. Buy your ticket now! — @shellenberger Deep Fake of the Week

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

Why We Trust Vets Who Recover From PTSD Journalist Ken Klippenstein on Wednesday reported in the Intercept that UAP whistleblower David Grusch, who told Congress under oath two weeks ago that the US military had recovered nonhuman spacecraft, had suffered PTSD and was suicidal 10 years ago. Supporters of Grusch were outraged that someone within the US government had leaked Grusch’s confidential medical information. During a Twitter Spaces interview, Klippenstein acknowledged that the information came to him from someone in the U.S. intelligence community. But, he added, they just gave him a tip; they didn’t give him Grusch’s files. “You know how people — the intel people — they’re vague,” said Klippenstein. “They’ll be like, ‘Look into his background’ and kind of hinting.” I called Klippenstein to ask about how he got the information. “This person knew this stuff socially,” he said of his source. Please subscribe now to support Public's groundbreaking reporting, our free speech campaign, and to read the rest of the article! https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1690004319498649602?s=20

@stclairashley - Ashley St. Clair

Anybody who cherishes free speech, especially in the digital age, should be cheering on this move by X. California’s “Content Moderation Legislation” as Forbes calls it, is actually a draconian censorship bill— AB 587. It requires social media companies to give the California Attorney General’s Office regular reports regarding disinformation, misinformation, extremism, radicalization, and “hate speech.” The bill also allows the state to impose fines if companies do not comply with these reporting regulations. The Babylon Bee and Minds led the charge suing the CA AG over this bill earlier this year.

@Forbes - Forbes

Elon Musk’s X Sues California Over Content Moderation Legislation https://go.forbes.com/c/TYEZ

Elon Musk’s X Sues California Over Content Moderation Legislation X argues that a new law requiring it to make its privacy policy public violates the company’s constitutional rights. forbes.com

@GlobalAffairs - Global Government Affairs

Today, @X filed a First Amendment lawsuit against California AB 587. As made clear by both the legislative history and public court submissions from the Attorney General in defending the law, the true intent of AB 587 is to pressure social media platforms to “eliminate” certain constitutionally-protected content viewed by the State as problematic. You can read our filing here: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.caed.433955/gov.uscourts.caed.433955.1.0.pdf

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

A huge win for free speech in America today.

@tracybeanz - Tracy Beanz

🚨🚨BREAKING: MISSOURI V. BIDEN: The 5th circuit court of appeals has ADDED CISA to the preliminary injunction!

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

🚨 BREAKING: The United States Supreme Court has granted cert in Missouri v. Biden -- the nation's highest court will hear the most important free speech case in American history. I'm proud to have filed this case when I was AG, and will always defend free speech. https://t.co/2MOfLXH8u0

@shellenberger - Michael Shellenberger

The media say the Censorship Industrial Complex is a conspiracy theory, but it's not. It's very real. And now, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the landmark Missouri v. Biden case, which may very well put an end to it. https://t.co/dowSlND9lZ

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

It’s been one week since the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear our free speech case, Missouri v. Biden. Here’s an update. https://t.co/0q9qIxtCoj

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

We will do whatever it takes to support your right to free speech!

@xDaily - X News Daily

NEWS: 𝕏's lawyers have come to the defense of an Illinois student being threatened with disciplinary action by his university over posts he made on the platform. This is the first known example so far of X paying legal fees to support users' free speech, as promised in August. https://t.co/yFyK9dOwxS

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

🚨BREAKING: We have filed a brief to reverse the unconstitutional gag order against President Trump.   The gag order stifles his ability to speak freely ahead of the 2024 presidential election and denies Americans the right to hear free debate from all presidential candidates.

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

President Trump, like so many Americans, has been silenced on social media platforms for daring to be a political opponent of Joe Biden, and now they’re attempting to silence his right to speak at all.

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

This blatant weaponization of the criminal justice system is inherently un-American and goes against the very soul of our great nation. I’m proud to stand with President Trump in this new front in the war for free speech.

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri will continue to be a champion for free speech for ALL.

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Read more about our brief here: https://ago.mo.gov/attorney-general-bailey-files-brief-opposing-unconstitutional-gag-order-on-president-donald-trump/

Attorney General Bailey Files Brief Opposing Unconstitutional Gag Order on President Donald Trump | Attorney General Office of Missouri ago.mo.gov

@TheReal40_Head - 40_Head

MASSIVE NEWS from Texas that seems to have become the victim of the very Biden administration program that Texas is battling against. There is very little mainstream media coverage talking about this! The story appears to have basically been blacklisted. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and co-counsel The New Civil Liberties Alliances, along with two media groups, The Federalist and The Daily Wire, are seeking to halt the censorship-industrial complex; a taxpayer-funded program created to censor the media. Paxton filed an injunction against the U.S. government on February 7th. But nobody seems to know about it! Paxton and his allies are targeting Biden's program that is directed to silence any media reports (or social media posts) that attempt to expose the government's corruption and communist style attacks on Constitutionally protected free speech. “Every last person involved in the illegal conspiracy to use the power of government to trample our First Amendment rights better buckle up, because we are not going to stop until the entire censorship-industrial complex is on the ash heap of history.” And what do you know? It just so happens to parallel a major 4 year delta from February 7th, 2020. "3838 Feb 07, 2020 12:04:23 AM EST Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 Control over the media has kept people in the dark. Control over the media has kept people at heel (behind). Control over the media has kept people focused on falsehoods. Control over the media has kept people in a constant state of fear. Control over the media has divided our Republic into segments: >Race >Religion >Class >Political Affiliation >Gender [weaponized] When a citizenry is divided they have no 'collective' power. When a citizenry has no 'collective' power they can no longer control the levers that govern them [levers of control]. [illusion of democracy] Q" https://dallasexpress.com/national/paxton-files-injunction-to-stop-biden-news-censorship/?fbclid=IwAR1YkWrdSF8M_pbxkPvfL4GFesV5ujQ-TJ3Zgfly0RtLn_ZSle3vNweYtjc_aem_Ae-Pmlg6l7QcX9CBYOQOvIrXRQq1exQTPUxLHin26QBhI5TenGbPGoH116g7RAzkKGw

Paxton seeks order against Biden administration to halt government-funded media censorship Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with two media groups, is seeking to halt a taxpayer-funded program allegedly created to censor the media.  dallasexpress.com

@TheBabylonBee - The Babylon Bee

Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon says a lot of things. This time, it's an important message about the battle against censorship.

@TheBabylonBee - The Babylon Bee

Join the fight for free speech 👇https://buff.ly/49puORl

Bitly | Page Not Found | 404 buff.ly

@annmforti - Ann Forti

And this is why the upcoming Supreme Court ruling for Murthy v. Missouri (formally Missouri v. Biden) is so critical: “The worst free speech violation in United States history.“ The ruling will affect every single one of us. @NCLAlegal @MarkChangizi @DrJBhattacharya @AaronKheriatyMD @newlouisiana

@DrJBhattacharya - Jay Bhattacharya

The Supreme Court just ruled in the Murthy v. Missouri case that the Biden Administration can coerce social media companies to censor and shadowban people and posts it doesn't like. Congress will now need to act to enforce the Constitution since the Sup. Ct. won't.

@DrJBhattacharya - Jay Bhattacharya

This now also becomes a key issue in the upcoming election. Where do the presidential candidates stand on social media censorship? We know where Biden stands since his lawyers argue that he has near monarchical power over social media speech.

@DrJBhattacharya - Jay Bhattacharya

The court ruled that the plaintiffs (Missouri and Louisiana, as well as me and other blacklisted individuals) lacked standing to sue. This means that the Administration can censor ideas & no person will have standing to enforce the 1st Amendment. Free speech in America, for the moment, is dead.

@TulsiGabbard - Tulsi Gabbard 🌺

It’s a sad day for America, as the Supreme Court has just ruled that the government can collude with Big Tech companies to censor free speech. The First Amendment is now dead in the United States. https://t.co/bvLWjfGwcw

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Congrats to the 𝕏 legal team for defending freedom of speech, the bedrock of democracy!

@xDaily - X Daily News

NEWS: In lawsuit brought by X Corp, the Ninth Circuit rules that California's law requiring large social media companies to submit reports to the AG about their content-moderation policies and practices likely violates the First Amendment https://t.co/jolvhtJLE7

@AGAndrewBailey - Attorney General Andrew Bailey

🚨BREAKING: We are moving to obtain merits discovery in Missouri v. Biden to DISMANTLE the Biden-Harris censorship regime once and for all. This lawsuit is for every American who has been censored by our own government. The fight for free speech is just beginning. https://t.co/IuUSvizxZl

@RCPolitics - RealClearPolitics

The Bird and the Bee: Satire, Social Media, and Censorship How does a satire comedy website find itself on the front lines of the debate over free speech online? Seth Dillon and his team at the Babylon Bee tell the story of how they unwittingly found themselves at war with Twitter over a joke, eventually garnering the attention of Elon Musk and ushering in a new era for the social media company—in a new documentary from the Palladium Pictures Film Incubator. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/11/21/the_bird_and_the_bee_satire_social_media_and_censorship.html

@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal

🚨🇺🇸X WINS FIRST AMENDMENT FIGHT AGAINST CALIFORNIA—PERMANENT INJUNCTION BLOCKS CENSORSHIP LAW X just secured a major victory in its First Amendment lawsuit against California AG Rob Bonta, blocking the enforcement of AB 587, a law aimed at regulating speech on social media. The Ninth Circuit ruled in X’s favor, issuing a permanent injunction against the law—marking a landmark win for free speech. No other platform challenged the law, but X stood alone and won. Elon’s platform remains the only major social media company actively fighting censorship—and winning. Source: @GlobalAffairs

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

It's hard to overstate how big this is. For years, the State Department ran a global censorship operation—not just in America, but across the West. Now, it's pushing free speech instead. Here's why this matters. 🧵

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

The "disinformation" and "hate speech" industry is one of the top threats to Western freedom today. "From its very beginnings," @SecRubio writes, this industry "has existed to protect the American establishment from the voices of forgotten Americans."

@SecRubio - Secretary Marco Rubio

Over the past half decade, our own governing ruling class nearly destroyed America's long free speech history. Today, we are putting that to an end. https://thefederalist.com/2025/04/16/rubio-to-protect-free-speech-the-censorship-industrial-complex-must-be-dismantled/

Rubio: To Protect Free Speech, The Censorship Complex Must Die No matter what name it goes by, the Global Engagement Center is dead. It will not return. thefederalist.com

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

As Attorney General of Missouri, I sued the Biden admin for working with Big Tech to censor conservatives. We took them all the way to the Supreme Court. That case—Missouri v. Biden—led to the release of thousands of pages of documents detailing a vast censorship enterprise. https://t.co/YffN43srog

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

Piece by piece, we uncovered exactly how this system worked. Under Biden, government agencies funded an army of third-party censors and "disinformation" groups to do what they couldn't legally do themselves—censor American speech. More details here: https://t.co/vNDBYyAo8r

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

The Left spent the past decade building a vast censorship enterprise. A shadowy network of NGOs, tech groups and governments working to censor the Left's enemies—not just in America, but across the West. Over the next four years, the GOP must expose + dismantle this system. 🧵 https://t.co/XH2EkdGaoM

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

One of the nerve centers of this censorship machine was the State Department's Global Engagement Center (GEC). Founded under Obama, the GEC was originally billed as a way to combat FOREIGN propaganda. But it began to target Americans—under the guise of fighting "disinformation." https://t.co/i8LTeUKzcB

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

And it wasn't just Americans. The GEC funded and worked with powerful NGOs pushing speech restrictions and creating advertiser blacklists—designed to crush conservative media—across the West. Your tax dollars were funding a global war against conservatives. As Rubio writes: https://t.co/1I03Q8VCks

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

These people were very good at burying their radicalism in neutral, harmless euphemisms—"disinformation," "information integrity," etc. But in practice, they were almost exclusively going after right-wing speech. This was an international effort to silence criticism of the Left.

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

For example: One GEC-funded group, the London-based Global Disinformation Index, compiled blacklists of media outlets to feed to advertisers—essentially a form of financial warfare against disfavored outlets. The top 10 outlets on its "disinformation" list were all on the right. https://t.co/sdjGwfu3dF

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

Last year, I led a fight in Congress to shutter the GEC for good. The agency was supposed to sunset at the end of 2024. But the Biden State Department simply renamed it, kept all the same employees, and tried to smuggle it into the next administration. https://t.co/Zfmi7fDTys

@SenEricSchmitt - Senator Eric Schmitt

The Global Engagement Center must be excluded from any subsequent piece of legislation for the remainder of the 118th Congress. The American people deserve to know their First Amendment rights are being protected. https://t.co/dxU8V5clAz

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

That's how the administrative state works. It morphs and adapts to protect itself. But now, those of us in Congress who pushed for these reforms have an administration that shares our goals. As Rubio writes today: "Whatever name it goes by, GEC is dead. It will not return." https://t.co/M0VsQrrfAN

@Eric_Schmitt - Eric Schmitt

This is a huge step in dismantling the Left's censorship enterprise. Free speech—and in particular, free speech online—is one of the major battlefields of our time. It's one of the fights that will define whether we win or lose on everything else. It's a big, big win.

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

🚨BREAKING: Due to our oversight efforts, GOOGLE commits to offer ALL creators previously kicked off YouTube due to political speech violations to return to the platform. BUT THAT’S NOT ALL. Thread: https://t.co/60SsoCK2Yk

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

YouTube also: -Admits the Biden Admin censorship pressure was “unacceptable and wrong” -Confirms that the Biden Admin wanted Americans censored for speech that did not violate YouTube’s policies -Details when YouTube began rolling back its censorship policies on political speech after @JudiciaryGOP began its investigation -States that public debate should NEVER come at the expense of relying on “authorities” -Promises to NEVER use third-party “fact-checkers” -Warns that Europe’s censorship laws target AMERICAN companies and threaten AMERICAN speech

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

Over the past few years, we have uncovered massive scandals relating to Big Tech censorship. https://t.co/aUgWllkPUv

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

During the Biden-Harris years, under White House pressure, YouTube changed its policies to censor political debate on COVID and elections. TODAY, YouTube admits that the censorship pressure from Biden Admin was “unacceptable and wrong.” https://t.co/dGfJK0T0oD

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

Now, to make amends to the American people, and because of our work, YouTube is rolling back its censorship policies on political speech, including topics such as COVID and elections. https://t.co/ni42Ze9dR4

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

What does that mean? Whether you were an established YouTube presence with a massive following like @dbongino or just were starting out to express political views there, YOU will have an opportunity to come back onto the platform if you were censored for engaging in political speech.

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

This is another victory in the fight against censorship. In Aug 2024, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote the Committee a letter admitting: 1. Biden Admin “pressured” Facebook to censor Americans. 2. Facebook censored Americans. 3. Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story. https://t.co/m2KqiWbY1A

@JudiciaryGOP - House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Mark Zuckerberg just admitted three things: 1. Biden-Harris Admin "pressured" Facebook to censor Americans. 2. Facebook censored Americans. 3. Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story. Big win for free speech.

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

Even as Meta admitted the Biden-Harris censorship was wrong, others in Big Tech were reluctant to go on the record. Now Google is acknowledging, for the first time, that it too faced censorship pressure from the Biden White House and that pressure was “unacceptable and wrong.”

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

But that’s not all. YouTube is making changes to its platform to prevent future censorship. YouTube is committing to the American people that it will NEVER use outside so-called “fact-checkers” to censor speech. No more telling Americans what to believe and not believe. https://t.co/MFIk0NIAiV

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

YouTube also is trying out Community Notes. @elonmusk was ahead of the curve. Meta followed suit. And now YouTube. https://t.co/1IHDqOKREY

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

And YouTube confirms that Europe is targeting American speech and innovation. Here it admits that European social-media laws place a “disproportionate regulatory burden on American companies.” https://t.co/bbuVnVseqJ

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

YouTube warns that Europe could force companies to remove LAWFUL social-media content and could risk freedom of expression “within and OUTSIDE of the EU.” That’s right. Europe wants to censor your online speech even if you aren’t in Europe! https://t.co/aRBvErnQ61

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

Google and YouTube credit @JudiciaryGOP for bringing transparency of and accountability for Big Tech’s censorship. We will continue to hold Big Tech accountable. https://t.co/lJiEalQZeE

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

Read GOOGLE’s whole letter to the Committee here: https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2025-09-23-letter-to-hjc.pdf

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

All the above are MASSIVE wins for the American people, the First Amendment, and freedom. We won’t stop fighting to protect free speech.

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

🚨 1/MUST-WATCH: Former YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki admits they removed over 1 million COVID videos — while coordinating directly with Biden & Fauci. Even more disturbing: she doesn’t just defend the censorship, she pathologizes dissent — musing about whether “anti-vaxxers” should be psychoanalyzed for their behavior. This wasn’t “content moderation.” It was government-directed censorship at mass scale — erasing science, silencing citizens, and rewriting reality.🧵

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

2/ On Sept 23, 2025, Alphabet (Google/YouTube’s parent) finally CONFESSED in writing to @Jim_Jordan: ➡️ The Biden administration pressured them to censor lawful speech. ➡️ They called this pressure “unacceptable and wrong.” 🔥This is the smoking gun.

@Jim_Jordan - Rep. Jim Jordan

🚨BREAKING: Due to our oversight efforts, GOOGLE commits to offer ALL creators previously kicked off YouTube due to political speech violations to return to the platform. BUT THAT’S NOT ALL. Thread:

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

3/ For years, the so-called “Disinformation Dozen” were vilified, deplatformed, and erased . We said this wasn’t about health or misinformation. It was about CONTROL. Alphabet’s admission proves we were right all along.

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

🚨Intentionally spreading MISSING information has become a digital crime punishable by defamation and de-platforming, demonetization, law fare, 'black operations,' and threats of criminal prosecution. 🇺🇸The following US citizens courageously spoke up to share the truth about the Covid jabs, lockdown mandates, and advocated for bodily sovereignty, parental rights and informed medical choice. ☠️They were labeled "killers" by their own government, corporations, the global media, and foreign, dark money groups like the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which deleted their accounts only days ago to remove evidence that would implicate their alleged illegal activities against US citizens, and their election interference. 🙌All of the citizens on this list have now been completely vindicated. Their bravery, dedication and commitment to sharing the truth saved many thousands of lives. ⁉️But why are they still deplatformed and defamed? Give this a share, and support those who were treated this way. 🎉Here are the 'trusted twelve' you should know about and follow: ✅Dr. Joseph Mercola @mercola ✅Sayer Ji @sayerjigmi ✅Robert F. Kennedy Jr. @RobertKennedyJr ✅Ty Bollinger @TyCharleneB ✅Charlene Bollinger @TyCharleneB ✅Dr. Sherri Tenpenny @BusyDrT ✅Rizza Islam @RizzaIslam ✅Dr. Rashid Buttar @DrButtar ✅Erin Elizabeth @unhealthytruth ✅Dr. Kelly Brogan @kellybroganmd ✅Dr. Christiane Northrup @DrChrisNorthrup ✅Dr. Ben Tapper @DrBenTapper1 ✅Kevin Jenkins @Kevdjenkins1963 🚨Also, when will X reinstate @greenmedinfo (http://www.Greenmedinfo.com's account)? - our handle of 13 years was deleted after CCDH directed Twitter 1.0 to remove it. @Safety @elonmusk #CCDH #informationdozen #trustedtwelve #disinfodozen #disinformationdozen #FARA #sovereignty

GreenMedInfo | Alternative Medicine | Vitamin Research | Natural The world's most widely referenced, evidence-based, natural health resource with over 10,000 health topics and 95,000 peer reviewed abstracts. greenmedinfo.com

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

4/ My deep-dive article breaks it all down: 🔎 Alphabet’s confession 🔎 Susan Wojcicki’s chilling brag 🔎 The global censorship-industrial complex 🔎 Why our federal civil rights lawsuit is the road to justice 📖 Read here ➡️ https://sayerji.substack.com/p/breaking-big-tech-admits-censorship

BREAKING: Big Tech Admits Censorship Was ‘Unacceptable and Wrong’ — Our Lawsuit Fights for Justice In a historic plot twist, Alphabet (who owns Google and Youtube) admits to grave wrong-doing against the countless Americans it deplatformed on behalf of the government sayerji.substack.com

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

5/ This fight is bigger than me. It’s about restoring the First Amendment for EVERY American. No citizen should ever be erased because their views are politically inconvenient. ⚖️ Join us. Share this. Support the lawsuit. The road to accountability starts NOW. Let's do this! Learn more: https://sayerji.substack.com/p/on-trial-for-truth-replay-of-live @DrChrisNorthrup @unhealthytruth @RizzaIslam @DrBenTapper1 @DrChrisNorthrup @mercola @RobertKennedyJr @TTAVOfficial @greenmedinfo @standforhealth1 @G_W_Forum

🔥 🔥 On Trial for TRUTH: Replay of Live Conversation with the Trusted Twelve They called them the “Disinformation Dozen” and tried to erase them from the internet. They failed, and they are coming back stronger than ever now on behalf of FREE SPEECH and SOVEREIGNTY. sayerji.substack.com

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

This was the May 2021 meeting where YouTube staged a so-called “Town Hall” with President Biden, Dr. Fauci, and hand-picked influencers. Marketed as “conversation,” it was in truth a state-sanctioned propaganda event: the White House partnered with a private platform that was simultaneously banning dissenting voices, narrowing what Americans could see and hear to only government-approved talking points. This is not free speech — it is viewpoint discrimination directed by the state and enforced by Big Tech. Events like this expose the architecture of a censorship regime where government power merges with corporate control to erase debate under the guise of “public health.” The Constitution forbids the government from outsourcing its censorship to private actors, yet this is exactly what happened. What was presented as outreach was, in fact, an egregious violation of civil liberties — a calculated move in a global campaign to weaponize “disinformation” as a pretext for silencing dissent and manufacturing consent. https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/white-house-youtube-town-hall/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

President Biden and Dr. Fauci join YouTube creators Jackie Aina, MannyMUA and Brave Wilderness to discuss COVID-19 vaccines and debunk myths Inside President Biden's YouTube Town Hall on COVID-19 vaccination and more on our efforts to reach younger Americans. blog.youtube

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

🚨FLASHBACK🚨 In 2021, the White House + YouTube used beauty influencers to push COVID shots: 💄 Manny MUA (with ~5m followers): “I have dose one and two. I am fully vaccinated.” 👨‍⚕️ Fauci: kids “are not exempt” & must get vaccinated. 🇺🇸 Biden: young people have an “obligation” to get the shot ❌This was propaganda disguised as lifestyle content. Now Alphabet admits Biden’s censorship pressure was “unacceptable and wrong.” The influencer campaign wasn’t about health. It was about control. Our lawsuit fights back — for us, and for every American silenced. 👉Learn and support this historic federal civil rights case here: https://sayerji.substack.com/p/breaking-big-tech-admits-censorship #FreeSpeech #Censorship #DisinformationDozen

Video Transcript AI Summary

There's a lot of rumors that are going around that young and healthy people don't need to get the vaccine. You should save it for people who are a little bit older. "There’s a syndrome that we refer to as long COVID, which means you get a syndrome following the clearing of the virus where it could be for months and months that you have symptoms that are profound fatigue, muscle aches, temperature dysregulation, and even an inability to focus or concentrate." "So for the person themselves to protect themselves. But then there's also the responsibility that you have of not being part of spreading the infection throughout the community. So you almost wanna take what I call a societal responsibility. Protecting children also protects society." "And, by the way, we have enough supply of vaccine. We don't have to worry about it. Everybody can get vaccinated."

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: There's a lot of rumors that are going around that young and healthy people don't need to get the vaccine. You should save it for people who are a little bit older. What do you guys think about that? Both of your guys' thoughts. Speaker 1: Well, certainly, young children, even though, statistically, when they get infected, it's unlikely that they would have a serious disease compared to an elderly person or a person who has an underlying condition. But they are not exempt from getting serious illness. So you want to protect the youngsters, be they adolescents, be they young children. You want to protect them. There's no doubt about it. The other thing that I think people don't appreciate is that even with people who get mild disease or very few symptoms, there's a syndrome that we refer to as long COVID, which means you get a syndrome following the clearing of the virus where it could be for months and months that you have symptoms that are profound fatigue, muscle aches, temperature dysregulation, and even an inability to focus or concentrate. So for the person themselves to protect themselves. But then there's also the responsibility that you have of not being part of spreading the infection throughout the community. So you almost wanna take what I call a societal responsibility. Protecting children also protects society. Speaker 2: And, Manny, I think that young people, at least, I think every generation, that's where most of the idealism comes from. And I think it's an obligation, an obligation to help your fellow man, an obligation to make sure that even if it's only a small percentage possibility that you could be a carrier of and spread the disease, that you have an obligation. That's what I you know, one of the reasons I'm so incredibly optimistic about the future, and I'm not being solicitous when I say this, is that we have the most generous, the most informed, the most caring generation coming up. And it's not just people who are, you know, 14, 15, 16, but people in their twenties and early thirties. So I I think it's, you know, it's and by the way, we have enough supply of vaccine. We don't have to worry about it. Everybody can get vaccinated. And I'm not gonna ask you, but you should too. Speaker 0: I'm fully vaccinated, just so you're aware. Speaker 2: Alright. Well, good. We're Speaker 0: in. I have dose one and two. Speaker 2: Alright. Great. Speaker 0: So I am good.

BREAKING: Big Tech Admits Censorship Was ‘Unacceptable and Wrong’ — Our Lawsuit Fights for Justice In a historic plot twist, Alphabet (who owns Google and Youtube) admits to grave wrong-doing against the countless Americans it deplatformed on behalf of the government sayerji.substack.com

@sayerjigmi - Sayer Ji

Indeed, these 'researchers' amplified a fake report by CCDH (a UK-US intelligence cutout who laundered civil rights violations on behalf of governments and corporations) which had a 1300 FOLD error, yet it was used by the research community in a dozen or more peer-reviewed and published studies to further crystallize the lies against us: https://greenmedinfo.com/content/disinformation-publication-case-study-academic-failure1

From Disinformation to Publication: A Case Study in Academic Failure From Disinformation to Publication: A Case Study in Academic Failure In the realm of academic publishing, a 1460-fold error should raise more than eyebrows--it should sound alarms. Yet, at the 14th ACM Web Science Conference 2022, sponsored by SIGWEB, such a colossal miscalculation found its way into the proceedings, calling into question the very foundations of academic integrity in the digital age. greenmedinfo.com