TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Censorship by the government in collaboration with big tech is described as one of the worst civil liberties violations. The Biden administration, he says, manipulated social media, driving impressions below followings and treating censorship as action of the administrative state rather than private platforms. He cites five suspensions on Twitter as evidence that government direction silences dissent. Under First Amendment, he argues neither Congress, the president, nor agencies can compel such actions, and he hopes his voice pierces suppression.

Mark Changizi discusses a First Amendment lawsuit against the federal government for censoring opposing viewpoints.

Government involvement in big tech censorship violates civil liberties, undermines free speech, and distorts public discourse.

On November 8, 2023, Dave Rubin discussed the censure of Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, whom he labels a Hamas supporter and anti-American. He likens Tlaib to a terrorist sympathizer and criticizes her statements following the October 7 attacks in Israel, particularly her use of the term "resistance" and the slogan "From the River to the Sea," which he interprets as a call for the destruction of Israel. Rubin also highlights the emotional reactions from Tlaib's colleagues during the censure vote, particularly Ilhan Omar and Cori Bush, whom he describes as members of the "Hamas caucus." Rubin shifts focus to a bombshell report by Jim Jordan revealing government collusion with Big Tech to censor speech, particularly targeting conservatives. He emphasizes the need for legal recourse for citizens whose First Amendment rights have been infringed upon, discussing potential lawsuits against government officials involved in censorship. Harmeet Dhillon, a First Amendment lawyer, joins to elaborate on the implications of Jordan's findings and the necessity for a Bill of Rights for social media users. The conversation touches on the broader implications for free speech and the challenges facing the Republican Party, especially in light of recent electoral defeats.

Eric Schmitt traces his trajectory from Missouri attorney general to the U.S. Senate, arguing the Senate is powerful but often 'kabuki theater' and that the real battlefield has shifted to the courts. He says when a Democrat president was in office, you could challenge the Biden administration in court and win without 50 votes, because the courts could serve as the 'last line of defense' while reinforcements could arrive with President Trump. He frames his time as attorney general as using litigation to resist left-wing policy and protect the country until those reinforcements came. Schmitt catalogs major courtroom victories: blocking OSHA's vaccine mandate, winning at the Supreme Court on student loan debt forgiveness, and staving off a Biden border plan. He emphasizes Missouri v. Biden as a turning point, arguing they uncovered a 'censorship enterprise' that spanned Biden administration emails, text messages, and big tech collaboration. The suit exposed censorship before Elon Musk bought Twitter and before congressional hearings, showing how speech suppression was coordinated across agencies and platforms; he highlights the stakes for ordinary people hurt by school policies and masks. On the governance problem, Schmitt says Congress has abdicated authority to administrative agencies, and Chevron deference has enabled it. He argues for prescriptive laws and judges who interpret statutes 'as written' rather than as they wish, describing a return to originalism as essential. He credits Trump-era judges with taking a tougher view of law as it is, warns against treating the judiciary as a super legislator, and says courage on the bench will determine whether constitutional rights survive leftward pressure. The civilizational aim, he suggests, is credible, accountable governance rooted in the Constitution. Turning to COVID and its politics, Schmitt recounts Fauci deposition moments, the prebunking of the Hunter Biden laptop, and the role of the EcoHealth Alliance in gain-of-function research. He argues U.S. funding helped origin this virus and calls for accountability; he also notes a direct White House channel to social media and CDC lines pressed to censor. He argues for greater transparency and critiques heavy secrecy around classified material, while linking supply chains and manufacturing resilience to national security, including the push to bring critical drugs and minerals onshore. Personally, Schmitt explains how his son Steven, who has tuberous sclerosis with daily seizures, shaped his faith and political purpose. The experience reinforced working-class empathy, a focus on opportunity back home, and the belief that leadership should be authentic rather than performative. He describes a generational shift in the GOP, the rise of Trumpism, and the need to confront a large administrative state. He ends with cautious optimism about a coalition that values real leadership, economic renewal, and a recommitment to constitutional restraint and accountability.

Mark Changizi discusses a lawsuit filed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance against the Department of Health and Human Services, claiming First Amendment violations due to government pressure on social media to censor COVID-19 misinformation. The case highlights the importance of free expression and the dangers of silencing dissenting voices.

Mark Changizi discusses a lawsuit against the federal government for coercing social media to censor anti-narrative positions, violating the First Amendment.

Doctor Mark Changizi's lawsuit claims the government coerced Twitter into censoring dissenting views on COVID policies.

Andrew Bailey, the 44th Attorney General of Missouri, shares his journey from a decorated combat veteran to a public servant. He attended the University of Missouri on an Army scholarship and served in Iraq as an armored Cavalry officer. After law school, he became a prosecutor dedicated to fighting violent crime and protecting constitutional rights. Bailey emphasizes his commitment to enforcing laws, training new attorneys, and maintaining a high conviction rate. Bailey discusses his groundbreaking First Amendment lawsuit, Missouri v. Biden, aimed at combating government censorship on social media platforms. He reveals evidence of the Biden administration pressuring Meta to remove content during the COVID pandemic, which he argues violates free speech rights. The case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which acknowledged censorship occurred but required further discovery. He highlights the dangers of corporate censorship and the need for algorithmic choice in social media to enhance free speech and consumer rights. He addresses the challenges of censorship faced by content creators, advocating for breaking up algorithmic monopolies and allowing users to select their own algorithms. Bailey believes that consumer protection laws can be leveraged to combat corporate censorship without amending Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Bailey also discusses his lawsuit against the Chinese government for its role in the COVID-19 pandemic, seeking a $25 billion judgment. He explains the process of executing such a judgment and the importance of holding foreign entities accountable. He emphasizes the need for transparency and accountability in government actions, particularly regarding the pandemic. On the topic of gun rights, Bailey outlines Missouri's strong Second Amendment protections and the state's efforts to combat federal overreach. He highlights the importance of self-defense laws and the right to protect oneself and others. He expresses concern over the politicization of policing in St. Louis and the impact of Soros-backed prosecutors on crime rates. Bailey shares his experience in removing a Soros-backed prosecutor in St. Louis through a writ of quo warranto, arguing that failure to perform duties constitutes unlawful office holding. He emphasizes the need for accountability in prosecutorial discretion and the negative effects of non-prosecution policies on communities. He reflects on his role as Attorney General, noting significant increases in criminal prosecutions and consumer protection settlements. Bailey discusses recruitment challenges within his office and initiatives to improve retention and training for attorneys. Looking ahead, Bailey expresses gratitude for his current position and openness to future opportunities in federal service. He remains optimistic about the direction of the country under President Trump and the importance of restoring constitutional order and individual liberties.

Censorship during COVID violated First Amendment rights, with plaintiffs suing the government for pressuring social media to suppress conflicting viewpoints, impacting free expression and scientific credibility.