Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Censorship]]>

Court Denies Motion to Dismiss Censorship Case Against Fauci and Other Biden Officials

by Leave a Comment

Big news today in Missouri v. Biden, the case filed by the states of Missouri and Louisiana against various Biden administration officials over their alleged coordinated efforts with Big Tech to censor discussion surrounding COVID and other failures of the administration on social media. Although the Defendants had moved to dismiss all of the claims, the Court denied that motion, in large part, and the case will proceed.

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, who assumed handling of the case after his predecessor, Eric Schmitt, was elected to the U.S. Senate, announced the victory on Twitter early Monday afternoon.

“The Court has DENIED Joe Biden’s motion to dismiss our case against the federal government for their vast censorship enterprise. Missouri will continue to lead the way in the fight to defend our most fundamental freedoms,” reads the tweet.

Discovery has been proceeding apace in the case, with depositions of Anthony Fauci and others being taken. As Teri Christoph noted once information regarding Fauci’s deposition began to emerge:

Another Fauci lie that came to light during the deposition was his role in downplaying the Great Barrington Declaration, in which a compendium of scientists argued against lockdowns in favor of common sense measures that would protect the most vulnerable. Per the New York Post:

After Fauci championed lockdowns to vanquish COVID, top scientists from Oxford, Stanford and Harvard in October 2020 issued the Great Barrington Declaration, which argued that “focused protection” for high-risk groups (such as the elderly) was vastly preferable to shutting down society.

When asked about his role in assailing that Declaration, Fauci declared, “I have a very busy day job running a $6 billion institute. I don’t have time to worry about things like the Great Barrington Declaration.” But less than two weeks after the Declaration’s release, Fauci emailed Deborah Birx, the White House COVID chief, “I have come out very strongly publicly against the Great Barrington Declaration.” Fauci did multiple media interviews castigating any suggestion that lockdowns were unnecessary to save America.

For most of us, that’s the crux of the matter. The dictatorial, one-size-fits-all approach championed by Anthony Fauci took away our right to deal with the pandemic in the way that best suited our situation and gave that right to the bumbling incompetents in government. That approach wears thin real quick — look no further than China to see how that goes.

A brief refresher about the significance of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (a Plaintiff in this lawsuit) and the suppression of the Great Barrington Declaration from Bob Hoge:

In his piece, titled “How Stanford Failed the Academic Freedom Test,” Bhattacharya reminds us of how far people in power were willing to go to hide information and discussion from the public in order to keep the money spigots flowing. With so many of the same people preaching now about how we should forget and move on, Bhattacharya shows us why we should never forget, and why those who were behind it should be held accountable.

COVID mania attained an almost religious fervor, he writes:

The COVID-19 pandemic has apparently brought us full circle, with a public health clerisy having replaced the religious one as the singular source of unassailable truth.

That would be the very same Stanford University at the heart of “The Virality Project,” detailed in the most recent Twitter Files releases:

Stanford University served essentially as the information hub, under the banner of “The Virality Project.” This enterprise was fed voluminous amounts of posts — numbering into the billions — that came from government agencies and social media platforms. They were flagging posts that dealt with questions about the vaccines, Senator Rand Paul’s comments on natural immunity, and even people telling or sharing what were labeled “worrisome jokes.” This shows how extensive their net was and how fine their information filter was set.

What we’re seeing unfold here is confirmation — from multiple sources — of that “vast censorship enterprise” that Missouri v. Biden seeks to reveal and put a halt to. As noted above, Monday’s Court Order denied the bulk of the government Defendants’ motion.

Order Re MTD – Mo v Biden by Susie Moore on Scribd

The Order grants the motion as to the Plaintiffs’ claims for injunctive relief against President Biden. The “injunctive relief” requested was twofold, asking the Court to:

  1. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants, their officers, officials, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them, from continuing to engage in unlawful conduct as alleged herein; and
  2. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants, their officers, officials, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them, from taking any steps to demand, urge, pressure, or otherwise induce any social-media platform to censor, suppress, de-platform, suspend, shadow-ban, de-boost, restrict access to content, or take any other adverse action against any speaker, content or viewpoint expressed on social media.

The crux of the requests is bolded. The Defendants’ argument as to why the requested relief could not be granted as to President Biden rests on the “separation of powers doctrine,” and Judge Terry Doughty, in his Memorandum accompanying the Order, acknowledged that “injunctions against the President have generally been disfavored (and may even be impossible).” Judge Doughty further explained:

[T]he Court agrees with Defendants that injunctive relief against President Biden is not proper here. Importantly, the Plaintiffs already seek relief against several subordinate federal officials, who are more properly subject to this Court’s jurisdiction. The case law suggests that where relief against other federal officials would redress the Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries, the claims against the President should not proceed and are not necessary. Further, there is no statute underlying President Biden’s actions that the Court could point to in forcing the President into some action. Most of the case law on this issue discusses a specific statute that a President failed to comply with, a fact that is clearly lacking here. Thus, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief against President Biden should be dismissed.

But that dismissal was as to President Biden only, and only as to the injunctive relief sought, not the declaratory relief, which includes:

  1. Declare that Defendants’ conduct violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and analogous provisions of Missouri’s, Louisiana’s, and other States’ Constitutions;
  2. Declare that Defendants’ conduct is ultra vires and exceeds their statutory authority;
  3. Declare that Defendants’ conduct violates the Administrative Procedure Act and is unlawful, and vacate and set aside such conduct

The Court denied that portion of the motion as to President Biden, noting that there is a lack of clear authority in the case law regarding declaratory relief sought against a sitting president. Most importantly, the Court denied the motion to dismiss outright as to all other Defendants.

What this means, as alluded above, is that discovery in the case will continue and, hopefully, the censorious overreach of administration officials like Anthony Fauci, Nina Jankowicz, Alejandro Mayorkas, and agencies like the CDC and FBI will be fully exposed and declared unconstitutional and improper under the law.

Trending on RedState Video

The Latest Twitter Files Release Reveals Efforts by the Government and Social Media Platforms to Block ‘True’ Information

by Leave a Comment

Matt Taibbi provides more disturbing evidence of how extensive the government’s desire and the outlets’ cooperation were to kill accurate information.

Matt Taibbi has just posted the latest batch of internal messages from the social media giant: The Twitter Files #19. This latest release comes just after he and Michael Shellenberger made an appearance before a House Committee regarding the activities at Twitter, and the contentious attitudes and belittling of these reporters by certain House members on March 9 are made even clearer as a result.

These latest revelations lay out cleanly the organized effort that took place to manage and control the pandemic-related messaging on social media, and the widespread agreement of those platforms. What is striking is just how extensive this plan was and the manner in which all of the various entities involved worked in concert to smother discourse that even those involved acknowledged was accurate.

Stanford University served essentially as the information hub, under the banner of “The Virality Project.” This enterprise was fed voluminous amounts of posts — numbering into the billions — that came from government agencies and social media platforms. They were flagging posts that dealt with questions about the vaccines, Senator Rand Paul’s comments on natural immunity, and even people telling or sharing what were labeled “worrisome jokes.” This shows how extensive their net was and how fine their information filter was set.

The Virality Project (VP) stated it was even flagging posts and content it admitted were accurate because the nature of these posts was deemed either dangerous or running counter to desired government efforts. These were flagged even as they were said to harbor “true content,” and as a result, they came up with a new designation: Instead of “disinformation,” these flagged posts were dubbed “malinformation” because the factual content could lead to vaccine hesitancy.

Another reason this type of action was so disturbing is that it involved so many entities which normally would not be so cooperative. As Taibbi points out, many of those participating in this project are normally working in their self-interest. But these were corporate rivals joining together. More than just Twitter, the Virality Project also involved Google/YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, TikTok, and Pinterest. These competitors were banding together under the guidance of the government and managed by Stanford to deliver an approved and homogenized narrative on their platforms.

The VP managed to both narrow its acceptable guidelines (from flagging opinions down to determining which facts were acceptable) and in turn broaden what would become flagged as misinformation. The entire goal was to preserve the governmental narrative. People expressing concerns over vaccine passports, for example, were cited because these concerns could then lead to vaccine hesitancy. 

Factual issues with one vaccine — from AstraZeneca — were squelched because it could lead to people casting doubts on other vaccines. This was the move to kill off possibly important health information, accurate information that could have impacted individuals. But because the broader narrative could have been threatened, this accurate information was targeted to be censored. This meant that even the New York Times came under the focus of the VP.

This policing of the language by the VP was so militant that factual news items would be flagged if the people who were mentioning those valid reports were doing so to promote the wrong narrative. Given as an example was the case of an elderly woman who became vaccinated and then soon after passed away. This was an entirely accurate and media-reported event, but because too many people sharing it or commenting on it were considered “anti-vax,” then the factual news story became labeled as misinformation.

The VP also began cataloging notable accounts that routinely put out information of which they disapproved, and thus rather than citing their specific posts which were problematic, the account itself would be declared a misinformation source. Senator Robert Kennedy was one such individual who fell into their category of “Known Repeat Offender.” So rather than flagging particular comments, Kennedy, and numerous others, were deemed to be wrong, just on the basis of who they are.

Stanford was growing in its confidence as the VP continued. Not only was it making more determinations and expanding its qualifications for “misinformation,” it soon became more proactive in this arrangement and began coaching the government. At one point the VP was advising the DHS to begin undertaking particular initiatives to combat rumors and disapproved narratives that were spreading nationwide. Immediately after was when Alejandro Mayorkas announced the formation of the ridiculed DIsinformation Governance Board.

Things took on a true Orwellian nature when we see one of the avenues of investigation. The VP began seeking out those who were commenting on the possibility of a “surveillance state.” This becomes the darkest of ironies; an established shadow project overseen by the government was trying to ferret out those suggesting there was a government-operated shadow project.

What becomes disturbingly clear is that this was an operation intent on enforcing true censorship, and it originated within our federal government. Throughout the examples Taibbi provides, you see it mentioned by those involved that information they were targeting was factual and true – and even as was seen, frequently the VP was itself factually inaccurate. 

It flagged as false the now-proven fact that those vaccinated can still contract COVID (our frequently-infected President Jose Biden is a testament.) The Wuhan lab leak story has now become certified. People punished for expressing concerns over governments issuing vaccine passports were proven to be accurate.

The most ominous aspect in all of this is the repeated assertion of facts which then must be stifled. Without any public knowledge, we had an extensive enterprise with numerous power centers working together to control the approved messaging. The underlying reality is that facts were frequently pushed aside because those were details interfering with the government messaging. The release of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s emails was cited by Graphika as an example of how this release of information undermined authorities.

All of this displays a disturbing level of thought control by government entities, and it explains so much about the hostility visited upon Taibbi and Shellenberger when they sat before the House committee. The Twitter Files continue to expose the level this federal government was willing to go to control what people were permitted to say on social media and the broader news outlets. The Democrats who lashed out at these reporters were angered that their control was being exposed in an Oz-like fashion, and their authoritarian desires are being threatened.

This is how you know they have been caught. The revelation of facts and the act of opening up information has the politicians, the social media platforms, and the compliant journalism outlets seething. The people who call for transparency and the news divisions that normally love whistleblowers are united in their disdain for these details going public. Like vampires in sunlight, they are recoiling at the facts shining down on them.

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

Fifteen Days to Slow Free Speech

by Leave a Comment

Fifteen days to slow the spread!

A phrase that shall live on in infamy. Three years ago this week the U.S. joined the entire planet in shutting down pretty much all of society as a virus spread from China across the globe. In those early days not much was known. We were already in the chaos of an election season and sadly we were in media chaos as well. The progressive media was already absorbed with giving Trump a hard time at every turn.

At a time when we needed clear and concise communication from our Commander-in-Chief, our corporate media was actively involved in obfuscating and censoring information coming directly from POTUS. Trump didn’t help matters with ill-advised recommendations to shelter in place and keeping in place a medical team that openly defied his instincts and direction.

Still, we went into what we now affectionately refer to as “lockdowns” with trepidation, fear, but also a hope that we could get back to regular life soon enough. We’d put in our time, do our part, slow that spread, and move on.

There is no need to rehash the past. We all know what happened next. Some of us knew it would happen all along. Some of us tried to warn the rest of America that if we cede this type of power to the government, our tyrannical woes would never end. Others of us thought we’d wait out our two weeks and then start screaming bloody murder if our governments didn’t end the lockdown as promised.

As it turns out, screaming bloody murder became damn near impossible…on purpose.

The naysayers and worrywarts were right. Once our local and federal governments got a taste of communistic-type powers, they could not release it. Like crack cocaine, that power began coursing through their veins and too many were helpless to resist. Suddenly they had the power to decide who gets to run a business, who gets to go to school, and who even gets to go to church. It became abundantly clear why the Founding Fathers went to such lengths to form a constitution that explicitly spelled out our human rights. They lived so close to tyranny, the taste was still in their mouths as they signed that great document.

It was worse than just shutting down small businesses and churches. The government shut down dissent. They shut down free speech, our most sacred right behind the right to life. They colluded with Big Tech to punish those who questioned the measures being taken, questioned the origin of the virus, and eventually questioned the efficacy of masks and an experimental vaccine that was suddenly mandated as a condition to participate in American life. We are only now seeing the extent to which that hellish partnership actually operated with the release of the Twitter Files.

It was a huge blessing, perhaps a gigantic turn in history, that Elon Musk purchased Twitter and released the Kraken on censorship, so to speak. While it doesn’t solve our larger problems in Big Tech, it was a gigantic step towards freedom and towards getting out truth that was being suppressed as “misinformation” by the left-wing tyrants of government and social media.

Our government found a way to nearly entirely squash any dissenting voices, and they almost got away with it.

In the opening days of the lockdowns and tense days following the J6 events, our publication had to do a lot of scrambling to stay visible. The crackdowns on conservative content were swift and punishing. There were moments when we and others wondered about our very future in the business. We had to pull back a bit and take a moment to reassess and figure out how to stay afloat in this new era of censorship. Our dissenting voices wouldn’t be much good if we allowed the left to make them disappear from public.

I’m proud to say, we weathered that storm and while it hasn’t been all sunshine and roses, it has been empowering. Conservative media is definitely stronger for having to push through the despotic instincts of the progressive political class. In fact, there is an argument to be made that the attempt to shut us up has only helped spread the conservative message.

Content creators began taking their messages directly to the customer through video and podcast platforms and paywalled content. Those paywalls aren’t always a fun adjustment, but they have allowed conservative media to free ourselves from the chains of Google and online ad revenue. Thankfully, our audiences have understood and we are now in the midst of a conservative media renaissance.

Here at RedState, and across the Townhall family of sites, we have created our VIP subscription program aimed at protecting our customers and our messages. It frees our pages and our writers from the grips of cancel culture, and gives our audiences more direct, in-depth content that doesn’t depend on getting through the fact-checker fascists first. It has been a huge success, thanks to the prescience and intelligence of our reader base. If you’re interested in joining us in the battle to free ourselves from left-wing censorship, details on how you can subscribe are below.

As for this morbid anniversary, let us use it to remind ourselves just how easy it was for the freest citizens on earth in the greatest nation on earth to become subjects again, 250 years after a group of farmers and businessmen changed the course of the western world. And let us pledge to never go quietly into that quiet night again, to continue being loud and truthful and demanding.

Fifteen days to slow the spread turned into three years to slow free speech. It feels like we are finally pulling out of that spiral, even if it’s a bit slower than we would have anticipated so many months ago.

It’s been a rough road, but we’re still Americans. That hasn’t changed.

To hell with censorship…all the way straight to the pit of hell with it.

Each RedState VIP and VIP Gold membership lessens our reliance on Big Tech and allows us to continue this critical work. We know that the Biden economy is affecting everyone’s bottom line, so with the promo code SAVEAMERICA you’ll get 40% off your VIP membership.

By becoming a RedState VIP member, you’ll not only directly support us in changing minds and winning those ideological battles, but you’ll also get exclusive columns and videos from some of our top writers, including me, and more.

P.S. – While VIP members have access to a wealth of exclusive content, VIP Gold subscribers get even more. With VIP Gold, not only is your direct support doubled, but VIP Gold members have Gold access across the entire Townhall Media family (Townhall, RedState, PJ Media, and more) – a nearly $300 value.

Twitter Is Censoring Republicans Again

by Leave a Comment

After Elon Musk took over Twitter, a renaissance of engagement with conservative thinkers began. Even someone as insignificant as myself compared to much larger accounts started gaining thousands of followers a month.

Recently, that growth has slowed to a trickle and impressions have fallen through the floor. Now, there’s even more direct evidence that the censorship is back with a vengeance.

Tucker Carlson recently shared statements from Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump in which both men broke from the preferred narrative on Ukraine. His account is now shadowbanned, and not showing up in searches.

Apparently, daring to suggest that there be any nuance in US policy toward Ukraine is off-limits for the Twitter hall monitors that remain at the company. Carlson is one of the biggest names in conservative thought (even if he strays from orthodox thinking at times). To have him search-banned is pretty nuts, and it smacks of the actions taken prior to Musk’s takeover.

That’s not the only example, though. Ron DeSantis is being personally censored for sharing a video in which a parent talks about protecting children from harmful transgender ideology. The tweet is currently throttled with a message that claims he may have violated Twitter’s “rules against hateful conduct.”

How is it hateful conduct for parents to not want children to mutilate and chemically castrated? Is that really where we are as a society? Somehow, I doubt that’s a popular position, but it seems to be the position of Twitter.

Musk promised a free expression of ideas when he bought Twitter. That is clearly a promise that is not being kept if this kind of censorship is happening again. I’ll be charitable and assume that these are actions being taken by rogue actors still embedded in the company. But it is up to Musk to lay down the law and stop this nonsense.

Lastly, if this is a result of some non-human-involved algorithm, then that algorithm needs to be changed immediately. It is not hateful to believe in biological reality and to want to protect children. That is a mainstream position among Americans and one that needs to be shared. Musk needs to fix this and fix it immediately.

Trending on RedState Video

Homeland Security Department Caught Hiding Evidence of ‘Domestic Censorship Activities’

by Leave a Comment

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of RedState.com.

By now, it should not surprise you to learn that a federal intelligence agency is trying to cover up evidence showing that they are working to censor free speech. The past decade has shown us that the federal government has no qualms with trying to use its power to shape public opinion – especially through censorship.

This time, it is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that was reportedly caught trying to conceal its role in squashing certain political views on Big Tech platforms. Fox News reported:

A federal agency in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that’s been scrutinized for what critics argue is suppression of dissenting political views under the guise of combating disinformation now appears to be “burying” evidence of its alleged censorship, experts and watchdog groups say.

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, has come under fire for working with Big Tech companies to flag and take down social media posts related to elections, COVID vaccines, and a range of other issues that were deemed mis-, dis-, and malinformation (MDM).

Mike Benz, executive director of the Foundation for Freedom Online, told Fox News his research found that CISA has attempted to hide its involvement in suppressing opinions posted on social media by Americans. The agency’s MDM webpage discusses “foreign influence operations and disinformation … targeting election infrastructure.” It says nothing of focusing on domestic activity.

But this particular page is new and “has a short web archive history” according to the Fox News report, which also noted that it only existed “since late last month.”

However, the old CISA page related to MDM addresses both “foreign and domestic threat actors [using] MDM campaigns to cause chaos, confusion, and division.” It also gives a much wider definition of CISA’s mission as working “in close coordination with interagency and private sector partners, social media companies, academia, and international partners on a variety of projects to build resilience against malicious information activities.”

The Homeland Security Department created CISA to bolster the nation’s cybersecurity and infrastructure security. It was established in November 2018 and is responsible for safeguarding America’s infrastructure from physical and cyber threats. This includes protecting the electrical grid, financial systems, transportation systems, communication networks, and others. It also takes the lead in the government’s mission to defend the nation against cyber threats and collaborates with public and private sector partners to this end.

But, the agency’s objective eventually morphed into addressing “disinformation campaigns and efforts that appear in social media,” according to a report from the Office of Inspector General.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency was set to go after “inaccurate information” related to vaccines and the origins of the coronavirus. It was also monitoring posts discussing racial justice, the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and the endless stream of support for Ukraine coming from the U.S.

“One could argue we’re in the business of critical infrastructure, and the most critical infrastructure is our cognitive infrastructure, so building that resilience to misinformation and disinformation, I think, is incredibly important,” said Jen Easterly, the agency’s director at a conference in November 2021.

Given the fact that CISA has been criticized for widening its focus beyond what it was originally intended to be, it makes sense that it would try to hide its true activities from the public.

“CISA pulled a fast one on the American public by setting up a social media censorship division in the name of fighting foreign influence, but then quickly seizing long-arm jurisdiction over domestic opinions online as well,” Benz said to Fox News. “CISA officials knew they lacked the legal authorization to do what they did. Now, CISA appears to be burying the evidence of its domestic censorship activities, right as oversight of potential malfeasance is heating up.”

Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) also slammed the agency for trying to conceal its activities, noting that it “raises more questions than answers about the focus and priorities of the agency.”

“CISA’s stealth course correction raises more questions than answers about the focus and priorities of the agency. CISA should be acutely focused on protecting critical infrastructure against foreign threats, not on domestic censorship of Americans,” he said. “It’s unacceptable, point blank. CISA can expect inquiries from the Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability Subcommittee to ensure that it does not deviate from its critical mission.”

Naturally, CISA denies having ever participated in censorship campaigns against Americans and claimed the changes to its website was part of a redesign.

“CISA does not and has never censored domestic political speech,” said a spokesperson, who also claimed that the agency’s focus is “building resilience to foreign influence operations and disinformation so the American people don’t face the brunt of these threats on their own.”

The spokesperson also mentioned that he has some prime oceanfront property in Wyoming to sell for cheap.

Alright, I might have made that last part up. But if you believe CISA’s denials, I might actually have that property for you.

Sometimes it seems that every week, more details emerge showing how extensively our government is involving itself with Big Tech specifically to suppress certain viewpoints on the internet. It may not be actively passing legislation to tamp down on these posts, but it is most definitely colluding with private entities that are more than happy to help Big Brother monitor and silence dissenting views on various issues. There will undoubtedly be more revelations in the future. The question is, what is going to be done to stop this new brand of tyranny?