Connect with us

Economy

The ‘Perfect Marriage’ between Biden and Big Tech

Published

on

joe biden and hunter biden

“No experiment can be more interesting than that we are now trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth. Our first object should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues to truth. The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press. It is, therefore, the first shut up by those who fear the investigation of their actions.”

Thomas Jefferson

Over the past year we have seen an increase in censorship that resembles more of a totalitarian state than that of a free America. It is this censorship that every free society fears losing.

Twitter, Facebook and Google, the most prominent platforms for global information sharing, which have virtually changed the way we live our lives, haven’t shied away one bit from selectively and consistently censoring conservatives with impunity.

The media’s presumptive President elect Joe Biden and his aides have not made their feelings a secret. It’s a terribly frightening prospect considering what already has been done to our nation over the past year and the failure of those on Capitol Hill or in the administration to hold these entities accountable for flagrant violations of our First Amendment rights.

Over the election cycle we’ve witnessed a trampling of our First Amendment – not by the government – but by the “tech giants,” which have amassed a power far greater than we or our forefathers could’ve ever foreseen. It’s a new revolution of the technocrats that are working in conjunction with their political party elites to retain power and the authority they need to continue to grow.

It makes sense because a Biden Administration is all about globalization. It’s not about what’s best for America. Just look at our history and ask yourself if global economic expansion at the expense of Americans has been good for our nation. Compare the messages delivered on a global scale by former President Obama to that of President Donald Trump.

Under a possible Biden Administration, however, the technology giants, coupled with the evolution of the pseudo liberal socialist Democrats are a powerhouse. It’s a perfect marriage, at least for now.

Prior to the election these technology giants did everything they could to protect former Vice President Biden’s son, Hunter Biden. The Silicon Valley giants, like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey deemed it dangerous information to share with the American public. Dorsey’s directive was to shutdown the investigative series of stories published by The New York Post. Those stories, which were vetted and based on facts, revealed a litany of concerning facts about Hunter Biden’s business dealings with China, Ukraine and his addiction to narcotics, prostitutes and possible money laundering by members of his family. It also exposed the dangerous national security concerns regarding a Biden presidency.

Hunter Biden’s private laptop – nor its contents – were blown off by most of main stream media. Why? Because it didn’t matter to these elitists, they were already in the bag for Joe Biden and they hated President Trump. In effect, they hate the more than 70 million Americans who voted for him and trust me they didn’t care what Biden or his family have done. The end game was removing President Trump at any cost.

These media organizations, like The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Daily Beast and other main stream cable and news outlets had no issues running, propagating and pushing daily lies for four years against President Donald Trump and his family. It was all they did for the last four years and their focus on him was so surreal it was sickening to those of us that were witnessing it from behind the walls of Washington D.C.s bureaucracy.

When they lied about President Trump and his family there was no censorship by the ‘tech giants’ of those lies. Instead the flood gates of disinformation swept through the Internet Universe like a poison serum infecting millions of Americans with bogus claims that were far more damning than any disinformation campaign conducted by Russia’s GRU in 2016.

Just look at a recent set of Tweets by Bill Russo, a deputy communications director on Biden’s campaign press team. He didn’t shy from stating his concerns about open speech on Facebook that he deems a danger to our democracy. Mind you, he can’t argue freedom in his tweet because it is directly antithetical to his argument that their must be some form of censorship.

Russo said Facebook’s inability to really censor ( particularly conservatives) “is shredding the fabric of our democracy.”

He gave some extreme examples of a podcast by Steve Bannon but he never took into account all the actions by the left, nor any statements or actions taken by foreign enemy state actors ( like Iran) or others that have spread information on these multi-media platforms that are disagreeable.

Russo tweeted:

“If you thought disinformation on Facebook was a problem during our election, just wait until you see how it is shredding the fabric of our democracy in the days after.” Russo objected to the fact that, unlike Twitter, Facebook did not move against statements that he and the campaign viewed as “misleading.” He concluded. “We pleaded with Facebook for over a year to be serious about these problems. They have not. Our democracy is on the line. We need answers.”

https://twitter.com/BillR/status/1326006319887822853?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1326006323633393665%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fbiden-bill-russo-facebook-misinformation-social-media-attack-2020-11

Jonathan Turley, a prominent legal scholar and professor at George Washington University, described himself as an Internet Originalist in an Opinion Editorial on Tuesday. He warned about the lengths a Biden Administration would take in targeting free speech and what that can mean to the future of a free nation.

The alternative is “internet originalism” — no censorship. If social media companies returned to their original roles, there would be no slippery slope of political bias or opportunism; they would assume the same status as telephone companies. We do not need companies to protect us from harmful or “misleading” thoughts. The solution to bad speech is more speech, not approved speech.

If Pelosi demanded that Verizon or Sprint interrupt calls to stop people saying false or misleading things, the public would be outraged. Twitter serves the same communicative function between consenting parties; it simply allows thousands of people to participate in such digital exchanges. Those people do not sign up to exchange thoughts only to have Dorsey or some other internet overlord monitor their conversations and “protect” them from errant or harmful thoughts.

If there is anything worth fighting for in our nation it is the truth and the freedom to express ones thoughts and ideals. It is a right of every free person and it is the strongest element of the foundation that makes our nation so exemplary and without it we will crumble.

Whatever happens in this election, we as Americans cannot allow our government or the tech giants to take away our freedom. If we do, we will have no one to blame but ourselves for what is coming.

You can follow Sara A Carter on Twitter @SaraCarterDC

Continue Reading

Economy

NYC bill trying to repeal ‘sanctuary city’ laws put in place by liberal Mayor Bill de Blasio

Published

on

new york city

New York lawmakers are introducing a bill this week to undo “sanctuary city” laws approved from 2014-2018 under then-Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat. Council members Robert Holden (D-Queens) and Joe Borelli (R-Staten Island) told The New York Post they’ll introduce the bill Thursday.

Among the laws to be reversed include the prohibiting of the NYPD, and Correction and Probation departments from cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents unless the cases involve suspected terrorists or serious public safety risks. It would also reverse rules prohibiting city agencies from partnering with ICE to enforce federal immigration laws.

“Sanctuary city laws put all New Yorkers, both immigrants and longtime residents, in danger by preventing the NYPD and DOC from working with ICE,” said Holden, a moderate Dem. “We do not need to import criminals, and only 23 years since 9/11, we have forgotten the deadly consequences of poor interagency communication. We must repeal these laws immediately.”

“Like most things in New York, sanctuary city policy is a social experiment gone off the rails,” said Borelli. “All the problems with these local laws came out during the public-hearing process, but the Council just stepped harder on the gas pedal.”

In February, Mayor Eric Adams called for the rules to be loosened so migrants “suspected” of “serious” crimes could also be turned over to ICE — as they once were under sanctuary city policies implemented as early as 1989 under ex-mayors Ed Koch and Michael Bloomberg.

Among public reasons for the push is the murder of Georgia nursing student Laken Riley.  If it wasn’t for the sanctuary city policies, Riley is among other deaths that could have been prevented if the policies were not in place, Holden and other critics have said.

The 22-year-old was found dead Feb. 22 on the University of Georgia’s campus, six months after her alleged killer Jose Antonio Ibarra, 26, was arrested in Queens and charged with endangering a child.

The Post explains of the case:

The NYPD had no choice but to cut the Venezuelan-born Ibarra loose — instead of turning him over to federal immigration officials — because he didn’t have any major crime convictions.

Council Speaker Adrienne Adams shot down the mayor’s idea just one day later, saying she and the rest of the Council’s progressive Democratic majority wouldn’t be considering any rule changes. The bill introduced this week is also likely to face objections from the Council’s left-wing Democratic majority.

Continue Reading

Trending