I'd like to think that if Trump is re-elected, the FBI will have reason to fear, but I don't think that.
I think Trump likes brand names.
On Monday, Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told reporters that federal agencies such as the FBI and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) restarted discussions with Big Tech platforms. According to NextGov/FCW, this coordination will focus on "removing disinformation on their sites as the November presidential election nears." Warner claimed these talks resumed in March, around the same time oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri -- which centers on the feds' censorship efforts -- were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court.
When pressed on the validity of Warner's remarks, an FBI representative confirmed to The Federalist that the agency has resumed communications with social media companies ahead of the 2024 election.
"The FBI remains committed to combatting foreign malign influence operations, including in connection with our elections. That effort includes sharing specific foreign threat information with state and local election officials and private sector companies when appropriate and rigorously consistent with the law," the representative claimed. "In coordination with the Department of Justice, the FBI recently implemented procedures to facilitate sharing information about foreign malign influence with social media companies in a way that reinforces that private companies are free to decide on their own whether and how to take action on that information."
CISA External Affairs Specialist Tess Hyre declined The Federalist's request for comment on whether the agency has resumed discussions with social media companies to combat what it claims to be "disinformation," but she said that CISA Director Jen Easterly will be participating in an "Election Security" hearing in "the coming weeks."
Neither the FBI nor CISA responded when pressed on when they restarted communications with social media companies on efforts to remove posts containing so-called "disinformation" from their platforms. The FBI and CISA did not identify the specific companies they're working with on such efforts. Neither agency provided an answer when questioned on how they determine what constitutes "disinformation" or what other federal agencies they are collaborating with in these efforts to have "disinformation" removed from social media platforms.
Biden is the most grotesque censor since at least Woodrow Wilson, and probably in all of American history.
Rep. Jim Jordan's (R-Ohio) Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government released an 800-page report that reads like Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged."
Take a look:
In March 2021, an Amazon employee emailed others within the company about the reason for the Amazon bookstore's new content moderation policy change: "[T]he impetus for this request is criticism from the Biden Administration about sensitive books we're giving prominent placement to."
In March 2021, just one day prior to a scheduled call with the White House, an Amazon employee explained how changes to Amazon's bookstore policies were being applied "due to criticism from the Biden people."
In July 2021, when Facebook executive Nick Clegg asked a Facebook employee why the company censored the man-made theory of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the employee responded: "Because we were under pressure from the [Biden] administration and others to do more. . . . We shouldn't have done it."
YouTube "shared with the Biden White House a new 'policy proposal' to censor more content criticizing the safety and efficacy of vaccines, asking for 'any feedback' the White House could provide before the policy had been finalized." Someone at the Biden White House got back to YouTube with, "at first blush, seems like a great step."
Advertisement
One Facebook executive's email revealed that the company was brainstorming "additional policy levers we can pull to be more aggressive against . . . misinformation. This is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the [Biden] administration."
Facebook's internal communications also revealed that "The Surgeon General wants us to remove true information about [COVID vaccine] side effects," and, of course, Facebook eventually complied. Mark Zuckerberg tried to resist at least at one point, emailing that "when we compromise our standards due to an administration in either direction, we'll often regret it."
But the White House applied more pressure, and Zuckerberg caved.
There's a word for using government power to silence debate: censorship. And it's as American as serfdom, haggis, seppuku.
Speaking of us losing our right to free speech before an election, Google censored that Trump ad targeting black voters, claiming the ad was a "policy violation."
Then they reversed this decision.
They claim it was all a perfectly innocent mistake and totes not politically motivated.
An advertisement for the Donald Trump reelection campaign that was aimed at Black voters in Middle Georgia was removed by Google last week and then reinstated, the company confirmed to The Telegraph.
...
The Middle Georgia ad created a firestorm of comments on social media, even drawing a communication from the former president's son, Donald Trump Jr., who claimed "Google is censoring this pro-Trump ad to protect (President Joe) Biden." Trump Jr. even asked his followers on X, formerly known as Twitter, to help him make the ad go viral.
Google is censoring this pro-Trump ad to protect Biden. Let's make it go viral. pic.twitter.com/1qDH5QzkbJ
-- Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr)
May 4, 2024
Google says it made a mistake. "This enforcement decision was made in error," a Google spokesman told The Telegraph, and "it was appealed by the advertiser and quickly overturned upon further review. This ad is currently running."
Here's that ad:
Google is still censoring this ad. How do I know that? Simple. I've spent the last twenty minutes searching Google for the ad. It's suppressed. You can't find it.
What I did find by searching for "Trump ad black voters" was a whole bunch of Google-promoted articles from February and March complaining about prior Trump ads as "racist" and "bigoted" (even though they were appealing to black voters).
So that shit, Google put at the top of the results. The ad I was actually looking for? The one that just went viral?
Google just couldn't find it.
Whoops!
Whoopsie!