Connect with us

Politics

In Missouri v. Biden, Judge Checks Government Power Because Corporate Media Won’t

Published

on

The Censorship-Industrial Complex sees Americans and Americans’ speech as squarely within its purview when it comes to fighting supposed mis- or disinformation, Tuesday’s opinion in Missouri v. Biden revealed. And that should terrify everyone. That it doesn’t is a scandal nearly as mammoth as the gross violations of the First Amendment detailed in the court’s 150-plus-page opinion.

Americans dedicated to our constitutional republic celebrated Independence Day with some icing on the cake when news broke that a federal court had enjoined large swaths of the Biden administration from coordinating with social media companies to censor speech. Presiding Judge Terry Doughty’s lengthy opinion proved a veritable treasure trove of details of the behind-the-scenes efforts by our government to silence dissenting voices. And his extensive exposition of First Amendment law and his accompanying analysis of the preliminary facts uncovered through limited discovery provided a solid basis for his ruling that the plaintiffs would likely prevail on their free speech claims that were premised on “the White House and numerous federal agencies, pressure[ing] and encourag[ing] social-media companies to suppress free speech.”

Anyone who bothered to wade through the entirety of the opinion should be left shocked and outraged by what our federal overseers did: They targeted Americans and their speech and demanded censorship based on the content and viewpoints expressed — ones that contradicted the official government position.

Sure, the speech censored was overwhelmingly conservative — a fact the court highlighted — but that should not matter. After all, as Judge Doughty stressed,

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Politics

Ex-FBI Counsel Behind Russiagate, Biden Laptop Censorship Now Part Of Left-Wing Election Network

Published

on

The former FBI general counsel who pushed Twitter to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story is now working with a left-wing election influencers’ group. 

James Baker, also prominent for his role in pushing the FBI’s political persecution of former President Donald Trump for the “Russiagate” hoax, is listed as a member of the National Task Force on Election Crises. The group is a subsidiary of the left-wing Protect Democracy Project, a litigation group formed to oppose Trump’s policies, according to InfluenceWatch.

The task force pushes early and mail-in voting, claims to help prevent “cyber or other attacks by foreign adversaries or domestic disrupters,” promotes “pre-canvassing of absentee ballots,” seeks to discourage legal election challenges, and advocates for censorship of certain online speech about elections.  

Working for the Regime

Baker’s key areas of expertise, according to the group’s website, are “legal and legislative issues,” “political violence and intimidation,” “foreign and cyber interference,” and “election subversion.”

Baker certainly knows about “legal issues.” While serving as the FBI’s lead counsel, he met with Michael Sussmann — who he later admitted was a “friend” — and who provided “intel” supposedly proving connections between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, a Russian company. Sussmann claimed he was acting on his own behalf, though he was later found to have been working for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

Baker should also know about “political violence and intimidation,” considering that he prompted the FBI to investigate Trump using Sussmann’s faulty information. He also told Congress Sussmann’s lie

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

BlueCross BlueShield Forced To Pay $700,000 To Fired Employee Over Vax Mandate

Published

on

A former employee of BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee (BCBST) was awarded a nearly $700,000 settlement Friday after she was fired for refusing the Covid-19 vaccine. 

Tanja Benton, the plaintiff, submitted a religious exemption when BCBST forced a vaccine mandate on its employees in August 2021. A Tennessee federal jury found “by a preponderance of evidence that her [plaintiff] refusal to receive the Covid vaccination was based upon sincerely held religious belief.” 

The Plaintiff had submitted her religious exemption to BCBST in September 2021 and was fired in November of that year.

“Specifically, Plaintiff firmly believes, based upon personal research, that all COVID-19 vaccines are derived from aborted fetus cell lines,” Benton’s lawsuit reads. “Because of her sincerely held religious beliefs concerning abortion, Plaintiff cannot in good conscience consume the vaccine, which would not only defile her body but also anger and dishonor God.”

Benton’s lawsuit also cited the nature of her job as a biostatistical research scientist with BCBST as solitary; she infrequently met with clients and was able to successfully work remotely.

“Plaintiff’s job rarely involved direct interaction with clients,” the lawsuit reads. “In fact, approximately one percent (25 hours) of her total annual working hours (2,080 hours) involved client interaction.” 

Benton was an employee of BCBST for 16-plus years before her termination. Before the vaccine mandate, Benton had worked remotely for over a year and a half amid pandemic lockdown orders.

“Plaintiff conducted all client meetings by remote means,” the lawsuit reads. “No client expressed any concerns or problems about remote interactions, nor did any client express a desire for Plaintiff to have

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Politics

How Red States Can Hold ‘Zuckbucks’ Group Legally Accountable For 2020 Election Meddling

Published

on

Joe Biden’s unprecedented “basement” presidential campaign in 2020 and the chaotic election that followed represented a stunning repudiation of U.S. election norms as they have evolved over the last 250 years. The chaos involved a flurry of legally questionable and last-minute suspensions of existing election rules and an avalanche of unsupervised mail-in ballots in states that were not accustomed to their use. The election also brought the formerly obscure practice of “ballot harvesting” to the forefront of popular consciousness.

Amidst the chaos, one of the biggest questions remaining is how the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL) — a sleepy, Chicago-based election and civic “engagement” nonprofit, armed with a staggering sum of more than $300 million from tech billionaire Mark Zuckerberg — became one of the key 2020 election players. CTCL’s officers, promoters, and donors were among the “well-funded cabal of powerful people” who, as Time Magazine admitted in 2021, worked “behind the scenes” to “fortify” the 2020 election against Donald Trump.

Many Republican election watchers have long been scratching their heads, wondering if there is something that ties CTCL to something more nefarious than taking advantage of a legal gray area to help local election offices with “COVID-19 Response” during the 2020 election. 

Our research revealed that, while election safety during Covid may have been the stated reason for CTCL’s program, this was not its purpose

CTCL’s $332 million-plus election funding effort (also known as “Zuckbucks”) influenced election offices in critical Democrat areas in 2020 through large, “strings

CLICK HERE to read the rest of this ARTICLE. This post was originally published on another website.

Continue Reading

Trending