If you Can't Beat 'Em, Censor 'Em: The Democratic Party Playbook
POSTED BY: 6IXSTRINGJACK
UPDATED: Thursday, March 6, 2025 15:10
VIEWED: 2083
PAGE 1 of 1
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/28/pritzker_suffoca
tes_free_speech_148252.html
How there is a Governor in the country that makes Eric Holcomb look competent I will never understand... But here we are.
Get fucked, Pritzker.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Who wrote the article? Steve Cortes, a former adviser to President Trump. The governor wrote a letter to the printer which asked, why are you printing wanted posters? Do you want those people on the wanted posters killed? The printer realized that maybe wanted posters was a bad idea. Good Trump idea but bad for the printing business.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/09/28/pritzker_suffoca
tes_free_speech_148252.html
How there is a Governor in the country that makes Eric Holcomb look competent I will never understand... But here we are.
Get fucked, Pritzker.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's not just the DNC SIX, it's the whole woke/green pro-globalists who are just looking for an excuse for MOAR AUTHORITARIANISM!
Quote:
New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern Demands Global Censorship System to Control Speech
New Zealand Prime Minister and Young Global Leader Jacinda Ardern is the latest WEF-aligned leader to call for an global system to censor free speech.
Unsatisfied with the corporate censorship of social media companies, leaders like Hillary Clinton have started promoting good old-fashioned state censorship. Speech regulation has become an article of faith on the left.
https://www.eutimes.net/2022/09/new-zealand-pm-jacinda-ardern-demands-
global-censorship-system-to-control-speech/
I just posted this particular link, but it's everywhere since she said this at the UN.
There was a book written many years ago called The Authoritarians
https://theauthoritarians.org/
that describes the drive towards authoritarianism and its manifestations, and while the author mostly describes rightwing authoritarianism he does make a point at the very beginning that left wing authoritarianism occurs.
It's a point that "left wingers" seem to forget. They think that as long as they espouse "virtuous" causes...R2P, "freedom", "antifa", "saving the world", or what have you .. it excuses any destructive or abusive behavior.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE someone poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It's not just the DNC SIX, it's the whole woke/green pro-globalists who are just looking for an excuse for MOAR AUTHORITARIANISM!Quote:
New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern Demands Global Censorship System to Control Speech
New Zealand Prime Minister and Young Global Leader Jacinda Ardern is the latest WEF-aligned leader to call for an global system to censor free speech.
Unsatisfied with the corporate censorship of social media companies, leaders like Hillary Clinton have started promoting good old-fashioned state censorship. Speech regulation has become an article of faith on the left.
https://www.eutimes.net/2022/09/new-zealand-pm-jacinda-ardern-demands-
global-censorship-system-to-control-speech/
I just posted this particular link, but it's everywhere since she said this at the UN.
There was a book written many years ago called The Authoritarians
https://theauthoritarians.org/
that describes the drive towards authoritarianism and its manifestations, and while the author mostly describes rightwing authoritarianism he does make a point at the very beginning that left wing authoritarianism occurs.
It's a point that "left wingers" seem to forget. They think that as long as they espouse "virtuous" causes...R2P, "freedom", "antifa", "saving the world", or what have you .. it excuses any destructive or abusive behavior.
It's fun to watch Ziggy run her recruitment pitch and try to rev Six up.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I see the two idiots have nothing to add, as per usual.
Where's Ted? We can make it a threefer.
--------------------------------------------------
Falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CA needed to stop Election Integrity Video for 2020 Election - must have been kiki running that show, she hated Election Integrity for 2020, kept explaining how only corrupt fraudulent criminals should run her Elections.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-sues-ca-secstate/?utm_cam
paign=tipsheet&utm_term=members
Quote:
Judicial Watch Sues California Sec of State for Causing YouTube to Censor Key Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election
YouTube pr
Watchdog Group Files Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit after Uncovered Gov Documents Show Censorship
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Shirley Weber, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of California (No. 2:22-cv-6894)).
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court Central District of California Western Division. It states that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity (OEC), which Secretary of State Shirley Weber oversees, caused YouTube to remove Judicial Watch’s election integrity video on September 25, 2020. The lawsuit alleges that the California official and her office violated Judicial Watch’s First Amendment and other civil rights.
On September 22, 2020, Judicial Watch posted on its YouTube channel a video titled “**ELECTION INTEGRITY CRISIS** Dirty Voter Rolls, Ballot Harvesting & Mail-in-Voting Risks!” The 26-minute video featured Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton discussing the vote-by-mail processes, changes to states’ election procedures, ballot collection (sometimes referred to as “ballot harvesting”), and states’ failures to clean up their voter rolls, among other topics.
The complaint states that Fitton’s comments were informed by successful lawsuits brought by Judicial Watch against Los Angeles County and Weber in 2017 to compel the county and State to comply with the National Voter Registration Act’s (NVRA) voter list maintenance requirements. For instance, in June 2019, Judicial Watch was informed that Los Angeles County had sent notices to 1.6 million inactive voters on its voter rolls after a settlement agreement had been reached. Prior to the California settlement agreement, Judicial Watch estimated that national census data and voter-roll information showed that there were 3.5 million more names on various county voter rolls nationwide than there were citizens of voting age.
Records show the Office of Elections Cybersecurity communicated with YouTube and/or Google to have Judicial Watch’s video taken down. On September 24, 2020, OEC Social Media Coordinator Akilah Jones emailed “civics-outreach@google.com” and copied four YouTube employees with the subject line, “REPORT VIDEO: **ELECTION INTEGRITY CRISIS** Dirty Voter Rolls, Ballot Harvesting & Mail-in-Voting Risks!” In the email, Jones wrote:
Hi YouTube Reporting Team,
I am reporting the following video because it misleads community members about elections or other civic processes and misrepresents the safety and security of mail-in ballots. Thank you for your time and attention on this matter.
All the best, Akilah.
At or about 11:16 a.m. (ET) on September 25, 2020, YouTube and/or Google representative Andrea Holtermann replied to Jones:
Hi Akilah,
Thanks for reaching out. We will look into this and get back to you as soon as we can.
Later that same day, Judicial Watch noticed that the video had been taken down.
On September 27, 2020, YouTube and/or Google’s Holtermann confirmed to Jones that Judicial Watch’s video had been removed:
Hi Akilah,
Circling back on this. Thank you for raising this content to our attention, this has been removed from the platform for violating our policies. Please do not hesitate to reach out if there are any other questions or concerns you may have.
Judicial Watch’s complaint establishes that the actions of Weber and OEC violated Judicial Watch’s First and Fourteen AmendmNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A Trumptard Judge in Texas Makes His Mark. Is This the Beginning of the End of the Internet? How a single Texas ruling could change the web forever
By Charlie Warzel
Occasionally, something happens that is so blatantly and obviously misguided that trying to explain it rationally makes you sound ridiculous. Such is the case with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’s recent ruling in NetChoice v. Paxton. Earlier this month, the court upheld a preposterous Texas law stating that online platforms with more than 50 million monthly active users in the United States no longer have First Amendment rights regarding their editorial decisions. Put another way, the law tells big social-media companies that they can’t moderate the content on their platforms. YouTube purging terrorist-recruitment videos? Illegal. Twitter removing a violent cell of neo-Nazis harassing people with death threats? Sorry, that’s censorship, according to Andy Oldham, a judge of the United States Court of Appeals and the former general counsel to Texas Governor Greg Abbott.
A state compelling social-media companies to host all user content without restrictions isn’t merely, as the First Amendment litigation lawyer Ken White put it on Twitter, “the most angrily incoherent First Amendment decision I think I’ve ever read.” It’s also the type of ruling that threatens to blow up the architecture of the internet. To understand why requires some expertise in First Amendment law and content-moderation policy, and a grounding in what makes the internet a truly transformational technology. So I called up some legal and tech-policy experts and asked them to explain the Fifth Circuit ruling—and its consequences—to me as if I were a precocious 5-year-old with a strange interest in jurisprudence.
Techdirt founder Mike Masnick, who has been writing for decades about the intersection of tech policy and civil liberties, told me that the ruling is “fractally wrong”—made up of so many layers of wrongness that, in order to fully comprehend its significance, “you must understand the historical wrongness before the legal wrongness, before you can get to the technical wrongness.” In theory, the ruling means that any state in the Fifth Circuit (such as Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi) could “mandate that news organizations must cover certain politicians or certain other content” and even implies that “the state can now compel any speech it wants on private property.” The law would allow both the Texas attorney general and private citizens who do business in Texas to bring suit against the platforms if they feel their content was removed because of a specific viewpoint. Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center, told me that such a law could amount to “a litigation DDoS [Denial of Service] attack, unleashing a wave of potentially frivolous and serious suits against the platforms.”
To give me a sense of just how sweeping and nonsensical the law could be in practice, Masnick suggested that, under the logic of the ruling, it very well could be illegal to update Wikipedia in Texas, because any user attempt to add to a page could be deemed an act of censorship based on the viewpoint of that user (which the law forbids). The same could be true of chat platforms, including iMessage and Reddit, and perhaps also Discord, which is built on tens of thousands of private chat rooms run by private moderators. Enforcement at that scale is nearly impossible. This week, to demonstrate the absurdity of the law and stress test possible Texas enforcement, the subreddit r/PoliticalHumor mandated that every comment in the forum include the phrase “Greg Abbott is a little piss baby” or be deleted. “We realized what a ripe situation this is, so we’re going to flagrantly break this law,” a moderator of the subreddit wrote. “Also, we like this Constitution thing. Seems like it has some good ideas.”
Everyone I spoke with believes that the very future of how the internet works is at stake. Accordingly, this case is likely to head to t
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Does anybody have a clue whether sloppysecondsbot posted anything on topic?
I conjure not.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Now CBS FINALLY wakes up and admits Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop IS REAL
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11453325/CBS-FINALLY-wakes-ad
mits-Hunter-Bidens-abandoned-laptop-REAL.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
US FTC is looking into ‘censorship’ by Big Tech
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/business/tech-censorship-us-ftc-user-b
ans-social-media-trump
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME