Censorship Czar Anthony Fauci Bans Discussion of the Lab Leak Hypothesis

Glenn Greenwald connects all the dots regarding the lab leak hypothesis.

Fauci knew lab leak was possible, but he and his $-conflicted pals denied this and summoned the power of the federal government to bar others from discussing lab leak in the "news" media and social media for many months. In addition to this being public health corruption, this is a free-speech disaster. This is your country's leadership keeping you safe by protecting you from ideas they consider harmful, even from true ideas they consider harmful.

You can watch Glenn's show every week-night on Rumble, the free-speech alternative to YouTube.

Continue ReadingCensorship Czar Anthony Fauci Bans Discussion of the Lab Leak Hypothesis

Measuring First Amendment Ignorance

New report by FIRE indicates that many Americans who are celebrating the Fourth of July with BBQ and fireworks don't appreciate the meaning of the holiday.

In a recent AmeriSpeak panel conducted by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, FIRE asked 1,140 Americans if they could name any of the specific rights protected by the First Amendment. The results were dismal.

Almost a third of Americans could not name a single enumerated right protected by the First Amendment and another 40% could name only one — usually freedom of speech. Among Americans who named one or more enumerated rights, roughly two-thirds (65%) named freedom of speech, about a quarter (26%) named freedom of religion, 20% named the right to assemble, 15% named freedom of the press, and 8% named the right to petition. Only 3% of Americans could name all five and, on average, could name 1.33 First Amendment rights. In other words, Americans’ knowledge of the First Amendment remains poor.

he AmeriSpeak panel is funded and operated by NORC, and is a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. household population. Although knowledge of the First Amendment was low across the board, some notable differences did emerge. Generally, males were able to name significantly more rights than females, although they still averaged less than two (1.47 and 1.23, respectively). Males were also significantly more likely to name four-of-five First Amendment rights than females were:

69% of males named freedom of speech compared to 61% of females. 24% of males named the right to assemble compared to 16% of females. 18% of males named freedom of the press compared to 12% of females. 11% of males named a right to petition compared to 5% of females.

These findings may reflect greater interest in the First Amendment among males. Other surveys have found that, compared to females, males are more likely to adopt an absolutist stance on the First Amendment and are more willing to allow the expression of statements that are offensive or hateful. Scholarship has long documented that males are also more opposed to censorship in a number of different content domains.

Liberals were significantly more likely to name at least one right and significantly more likely to name at least two rights compared to moderates and conservatives. One-third of conservatives and 27% of moderates could not name a single right, compared to 15% of liberals. Liberals also named significantly more rights on average than moderates did, although, as with males above, liberals still named less than two rights on average (1.56 and 1.28, respectively).

Generational differences are also evident. Americans aged 18-29 were significantly less likely to name free speech (55%) than other Americans, particularly those aged 45-59 (67%) and those aged 60 and older (70%). Those aged 18-29 (19%) and those aged 45-59 (21%) were also significantly less likely to name freedom of religion as a right guaranteed by the First Amendment, compared to Americans aged 30-44 (30%) and those aged 60 and older (29%). Thus, older Americans appear to be the most knowledgeable about the First Amendment, suggesting that knowledge may decline further as they age and represent a smaller overall portion of the American population.

Continue ReadingMeasuring First Amendment Ignorance

Who is the Authoritarian?

because I follow these trends closely, but . . . For the past month Matt Taibbi has been reporting in detail that the FBI, DHS, DOD, CIA and other agencies have built a system for mass delivery of censorship requests to firms like Twitter and Facebook. MSNBC has now accused Taibbi of fueling authoritarianism with his reporting. Taibbi responded by listing some of the many pro-censorship advocates currently lurking around at MSNBC, people who call themselves journalists:

John Brennan, former Director of the CIA, now senior intelligence analyst at MSNBC

Frank Figliuzzi, formeer Assistant Director of Counterintelligence at the FBI

Asha Rangappa, former Special Agent for the FBI, specializing in counterintelligence

Nicolle Wallace, former Communications Director for George W. Bush

Jeremy Bash, former Chief of Staff of the CIA

Clint Watts, former FBI counterintelligence agent and MSNBC national security analyst

Chuck Rosenberg, former Acting DEA administrator and senior FBI official

Nayyera Haq, former Senior Director of the White House

Richard Painter, former Chief Ethics lawyer in the George W. Bush White House

Neal Kaytal, former Acting Solicitor General of the United States

Ben Rhodes, former National Security Advisor to Barack Obama

Barry McCaffrey, former U.S. Army General and Drug Czar, security analyst for NBC and MSNBC

Stephen Twitty, former Lieutenant General of the U.S. Army

Joyce Vance, former U.S. Attorney

Barbara McQuade, former U.S. Attorney

Glenn Kirschner, former Assistant U.S. Attorney

For more on the abject silence of the left-leaning legacy media, its refusal to acknowledge the obviously disturbing importance of Taibbi's recent reporting on the Twitter Files, consider this episode of Glenn Greenwald's System Update on Rumble. The title: "Media Silent as Twitter Files Expose Flagrant Misconduct in Govt. & Journalism."

Continue ReadingWho is the Authoritarian?

The Twitter File Disclosures, So Far . . .

Matt Taibbi recently published a summary of the Twitter File disclosures so far.

One of the big take-aways with the Twitter Files so far: There has been substantial ongoing Deep State (FBI, CIA, DHS, CENTCOM) interference with how citizen attempts to discuss important important issues on Twitter. Our own government encouraged the shadow-banning and cancellation of thousands the authors of true or controversial postings. The net result was to secretly muzzle many people (including highly-credentialed medical doctors and researchers on COVID issues) in order to make it look like there was a false consensus on many highly disputed issues. The independent journalists further uncovered evidence that the FBI was paying Twitter multi-millions of $ so that Twitter would do the FBI's dirty-work for it. In sum, we appear to have actionable cases of a private third-party acting under color of state law (Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan (1963)).

This is chilling stuff right out of Orwell's 1984. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution suggesting that this government censorship is authorized and, in fact, this government action appears to clash head-on with the First Amendment. According to Matt Taibbi, there are a lot more disclosures yet to come.

The official reaction of the legacy media so far (NYT, MSNBC, NPR, WaPo and MSNBC: almost total silence. No better evidence that they think of their readers as infantile.

I have been following the Twitter Files closely. To express my outrage about what has been going on I redesigned the FBI Official Seal, which I hereby offer to the FBI free of charge.

Continue ReadingThe Twitter File Disclosures, So Far . . .

Twitter Files Result in Conspiracy of Silence by Legacy Media Outlets

I just finished reading "The Most Terrifying Conclusion From the Twitter Files That Everyone's Ignoring," by J.D. Rucker.  He makes these observations, with which I agree.

Government and their proxies have been censoring American citizens by ordering Big Tech companies to do it for them. This is a clear betrayal of the spirit of the 1st Amendment at the very least and is likely worthy of legal action. . . .

But while conservative media is busy discussing the ramifications of censorship and the near certainty that both the last two elections as well as the Covid "vaccine" rollout were dramatically impacted by illegal actions taken by members of our government, there's actually a far more troubling takeaway from all of this. For the various misinformation operations to have gone unreported by anyone in or out of government and media, that means an unfathomable number of people have been aware at the least. Many have been directly involved and we're just getting confirmation of it now.

Halfway through Rucker's article I did a search for the word "Twitter" at the websites of the NYT, Washington Post, MSNBC and NPR.  There is almost zero coverage of the Twitter Files at any of these outlets, with the exception of one article by the NYT. It's as if the Twitter Files were never released. This non-coverage is predictable based on the "news" covered by these outlets over the past several years, during which they have been selectively embellishing and stuffing stories mostly in unison, to push their Woke agenda and to elect democrats. These outlets want to claim that nothing interesting is going on because the Twitter Files revelations reflect so poorly on the "journalism" being produced by these media corporations. They want to act as though nothing is happening, but Rucker's article accurately describes that these things have been going on--there is enough here to convince any legitimate journalist with even low-level curiosity to write hundreds of articles:

  1. The FBI set up a command center in San Francisco in fall 2020 that forwarded censorship requests from bureau headquarters to social media platforms.

  2. The FBI succeeded frequently with social media firms when it forwarded censorship requests, including content posted by Americans.

  3. Federal agencies also partnered with contractors to ensure certain content was policed and censorship, creating a degree of separation.

  4. Homeland Security officials took part in weekly meetings with Twitter executives as the 2020 election approached.

  5. Homeland Security knew Twitter had second thoughts about censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story.

    6. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingTwitter Files Result in Conspiracy of Silence by Legacy Media Outlets