One of the most pervasive hallmarks of the political left is their chronic distortion of language. George Orwell highlighted this in great detail when he wrote 1984. The term he created for this type of behavior is Newspeak.
Progressives and other leftists have been warping language for well more than a century. It is the only way they have any hope st winning arguments or convincing those that are uninformed or unknowledgeable.
One of the most common tactics used by leftists is to take a term that has a negative connotation and apply it to those who absolutely do not deserved to be tagged with that label. The most current example of this is the all too casual way leftists on social media throw around the accusations of someone being a conspiracy theorist.
All an individual has to do to be tagged on social media as a conspiracy theorist is to make a statement that conflicts with standard leftist orthodoxy. Liberals and other leftists live in a universe that is divorced from reality, a universe that is ruled by feeling and emotions rather than the truth, facts, science, or other forms of absolute truth.
Social media giants such as FaceBook and Twitter employ an army of so called fact checkers who all too often label factual posts as false or containing misinformation. If you share posts that are flagged by these phony fact checkers too often you risk being banned or having the audience your posts reach severely restricted. I have been banned from Twitter for spreading conspiracies and I am pretty sure FaceBook has severely throttled back my account.
To be labeled a conspiracy theorist by a leftist on social media all you have to do is tell the truth about the 2020 presidential election being stolen from President Trump, mask mandates being ineffectual, lockdowns doing tremendous harm and no good, the possibility of the Wuhan Virus escaping from a lab, global warming and man caused climate change being a bunch of bunk, and so much more.
It is amazing how frequently us so called conspiracy theorist are later proved to be purveyors of the truth when all of the facts and evidence are carefully examined and weighed.
Free speech is under harsh attack in America courtesy of wokeism. Such warnings about free speech are nothing new–but in the past much of the danger has been imagined. For instance I was in college when The Clash released Combat Rock. On the opening track, “Know Your Rights,” Joe Strummer sings of those rights, “all three of them.” The third right is “free speech,” with a caveat. That right could be used if “you’re not dumb enough to actually try it.” Assuming that Strummer was addressing his core audience, American and British youths of the early 1980s, what he said was at best a gross exaggeration.
Not so in 2021.
I received the inspiration for this post by listenening to Ben Shapiro’s December 24 podcast, Goodbye, 2020.
Shapiro is among the many commentators who predict a purge–my word, not his–of dissident voices, meaning conservative ones, on social media such as Twitter, beginning with Donald Trump as soon as he’s not president.
Absurdly, people like Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, still claim that social media is a neutral conduit of information. Twitter for a while prevented the posting and distribution of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story on the microblogging platform claiming that the laptop details were hacked and illegally obtained. Wrong on both counts. Twitter had no problem with Tweets linking to the New York Times story about Trump’s income tax returns–those returns may have been obtained by hacking. Regardless how those returns were accessed the person who did so broke the law.
What to do?
“Well first of all we’re going to have to rely on people, believe or not, who are moderate liberals,” Shapiro said in that podcast, “who are sick of watching the Overton window shut.”
And that means conservative have to defend those liberals who cross the cancel culture.
An incident on Twitter comes to mind. Three years ago in this space I reviewed the documentary XTC-This Is Pop, which was about the spectacular rock back that emerged in England in the late 1970s. That post got a lot of retweets, including one from the XTC Fans Twitter page, run by the now-dissolved group’s former leader, Andy Partridge. A committed liberal, Partridge’s Tweets, although often sarcastic, were entertaining and usually well-thought out, whether it was about music, religion, or politics.
In 2019 some people with too much time on their hands accused Partridge of anti-Semitism after a series of Tweets–not well-thought out this time–about American Middle East policy that devolved into an online shouting match about Israel and religion. Partridge, a strident atheist, went a little too far, I admit, but taken into context with his overall sardonic attitude, those Tweets weren’t a big deal to me. I planned to write a blog post on Marathon Pundit defending him, but then Partridge cancelled himself on Twitter by deleting the XTC Fans account and I moved on to other things.
One of those Twitter accounts Partridge engaged with was “Jon Devin Nunes’ Prostate.”
You know, some people take Twitter too seriously.
Back to Partridge. No one knows why he deleted his account–perhaps he decided that he was spending too much time on social media. He certainly broke a Twitter rule of mine: Never feed online trolls.
I believe if Partridge wasn’t an older white male a Twitter mob would not have bothered to object to those controversial Tweets. For instance the media, with a few exceptions, have not called to task Georgia US Senate candidate Raphael Warnock for his anti-Israel comments.
There will be other efforts to silence dissidents on social media. Mostly against conservatives. But against liberals too.
Conservatism must embrace free speech. And that means relying on for allies, not just the moderate liberals that Shapiro spoke of, but also center-line liberals too in order to fight this crucial battle. And keep in mind no political ideology is always correct.
As for the fundamentalist far-left, the tiny tail wagging the cultural dog these days, I believe they’ve already isolated themselves, as Isaac Asimov said of the 1960s radicals, into a “no-man’s land of the spirit.” Think of the bleating sheep in George Orwell’s Animal Farm.
But right now in the culture wars the far-left is winning.
I’ve never liked Twitter even though I’ve used it. I was a late adopter, and with good reason. It’s the crystal meth of social media — addictive and destructive, yet simultaneously unsatisfying. When I’m off it I’m happier than when I’m on it. That it’s also being run by crappy SJW types who break their promises, to users, shareholders, and the government, of free speech is just the final reason. Why should I provide free content to people I don’t like, who hate me? I’m currently working on a book on social media, and I keep coming back to the point that Twitter is far and away the most socially destructive of the various platforms. So I decided to suspend them, as they are suspending others. At least I’m giving my reasons, which is more than they’ve done usually.
Apparently Twitter has decided that even though their written accusations against me are patently false it’s much too embarrassing to grant my appeals quickly only to have their apologies and claims of “mistakes” be illustrated as false.
For what is now the 6th time in under 20 days you have locked me out claiming that I was spreading intimate images when I was in fact each time tweeting out a link to a post on Benford’s statistical law which demonstrates the impossibility of Joe Biden’s magic ballots.
Moreover Every time I have appealed you have upheld said appeal apologized and claimed my lockout was an error. YET EVERY SINGLE TIME AFTER THESE “apologies” I HAVE RETWEETED THE VERY SAME LINK TO THE VERY SAME PIECE AND WAS LOCKED OUT WITH THE VERY SAME FALSE ACCUSATION AGAINST ME.
To say this is despicable and dishonorable is to not only repeat myself from previous appeals but to say something that is so apparent that it almost doesn’t need saying. That you still do this demonstrate why other alternatives like Parler are doing so well.
Bottom line you’re accusation is false and I’m not only not going to delete the tweet but after this appeal is won I will test to see if your upcoming “apology” and assertion of a “mistake” is worth any more than it was the last five times you sent them.
At least my next lockout for that same link will be lucky number 7
they have clearly concluded that there is no percentage in handling my appeal in a timely manor.
So I am now on day three of my lockout awaiting the results of my appeal and counting. For Twitter it’s the best of possible worlds in the sense that they keep me silent while pretending that they are carefully considering the nuances of my appeal but they keep the Benford’s law post from spreading, at least on their platform, while always dangling the carrot that if I just delete the tweet in question I’ll be welcomed back.
Now if I was 14 or 21 or maybe even in my 30’s that might has some oomph, alas dear twitter I’m nearer to my 70th birthday than I am to my 45th and thus lived many decades without twitter, and while it is a convenience I can continue to function without it.
While the in the short term such a plan will achieve goals in the long term discouraging your product (that’s folks like me) from being on your platform while encouraging them to go to other places such as Gab (Parler wants a cell phone number that I don’t have) might not be appealing to one’s customer base (advertisers) which is likely to have as bad an effect on shareholders as encouraging your voter base to not reproduce with the same predictable results.
The problem exemplified by the case of Lena Dunham is that the “r strategy” (parents having fewer children, with the idea of more “quality” in their offspring) pursued past a certain point, involves an increased risk of eventual reproductive failure. This is what I mean by taking into account secondary and tertiary consequences, thinking forward to the third generation down the line. Suppose this hypothetical:
John and Jane have two children.
If both of their children have two children of their own, John and Jane will have four grandchildren.
If all four grandchildren each have two children, then John and Jane will have eight great-grandchildren.
Now a slightly different hypothetical:
John and Jane have three children.
If each of their children have three children of their own, John and Jane will have nine grandchildren.
If all nine grandchildren each have three children, then John and Jane will have 27 great-grandchildren.
In other words, increasing average family size from 2 to 3 — which is not much, really, in terms of r/K theory — produces a third generation of descendants more than three times larger. This fact is obvious from simple arithmetic, yet its social consequences are profound.
Now if your business model is to attract users so that you can sell exposure to them to advertisers the exile of those who actually reproduce might be a bad idea if you wish to have your company last like a Ford or a McDonalds for generations after you are founded.
But if you are merely using a publicly traded company as a means to an end either social acceptance or to advance a narrative a /la Tina Brown then it all makes perfect sense…to all but the shareholders who were looking for profit rather than status that is.
Those guys are into Parler and Gab
Closing thought, one must also consider that depending on who the shareholders are they might not CARE about profit as long as conservatives are silenced consider:
That’s the real point here. Economics isn’t what’s driving this ideology and status is. Jack and the big investors who back him don’t care about the money, they’re never going to be hurting or needing. It’s all about the stuff money can’t buy and by leaning on conservatives you remain acceptable to the “right” people.
Seriously did you think Tina Brown got all those people to lose all that money over the years because they thought she was brilliant or was putting out to get it? Nobody’s that brilliant and there are plenty of woman who would put out for less. It was all about getting the bona fides and entree to the right parties, and the right people and believe me those “right” people who hate our guts will use that for the fullest effect.
Jack and twitter aren’t going to change because of economic pressure or anything else. He’s virtue signaling and that signal is being seen by the people that he wants to see it.
If the primary goal isn’t profit it’s all good to them.
I was listening to Rush Limbaugh to Ted Cruz Questioning Jack on Vote Fraud Censorship so I thought it was a good time to give a 4th test to see if twitter is still locking folks who put out that Benfords law tweet
So I tweeted out the following:
So I tried tweeting it out again, guess what happened:
One guess what the email from Twitter accused me of:
Cue my shocked face.
Thanks to the horrible Trump Economy I’m working extra hours 4 pm to 2 AM so my lockout will run out when I get home from work and I will appeal at that time and will expect it to be auto approved like the last one was
Unexpectedly of course
Update: put in my appeal at 2:40 AM when I got home from work, this time the auto win didn’t happen (I quoted Lewis Carroll’s long sad tail to them with them cast as Fury) I’m wondering if they are holding back because I was so public about it particularly during the hearings. We shall see.
As I noted yesterday twitter has once again upheld my appeal of their 3rd lockdown of me over the Benford’s law post that they’ve been auto locking people over for a week but I noticed something interesting about my latest appeal and reversal.
Take a look at the time stamps on getting my appeal and it being approved.
Here is the stamp of my appeal being reieved
and here is the time stamp of their apology
I submit and suggest that this is now the process at twitter concerning this link
Falsely flag the Benford law’s post to repress it and lock out those who send it out & accuse them falsely of distributing “intimate images without consent” Not only does it discourage the tweet or retweet of the material but it allows them to mark said material unavailable during this time.
When the lock down period is over offer to let them back in if they delete the tweet (thus acknowledging “guilt” and making their account for violating rules giving them a cause to later ban such a person)
if they refuse and appeal set up an auto system to say they made an “error” Sort of like an auto correct.
Return to #1 if you tweet it again
This process involves a series of falsehoods & dishonorable actions by the crew at twitter.
Falsely flagging said link as some type of intimate image without consent
Falsely (and automatically) accusing users in writing of spreading intimate images without consent.
Falsely flagging people who delete said tweets as having broken said rules
Falsely claiming to review appeals
Falsely claiming (in writing) that they have reviewed said appeal and that all of this has been an “error”.
And Falsely apologizing for said “error” with the full intention of repeating it if you dare send out that tweet again.
Now if I expected better from these folks I might be disappointed, after all there is a reason why so many have left this platform or have gone elsewhere, and some have asked why I don’t to the same. Why do I bother to keep fighting this fight here?
My answer is for the same reason I haven’t moved out of Massachusetts. Someone has to make the fight and while with all of this on automatic it doesn’t even amount to the pinprick in the Elephant’s hide I am able to illustrate to the avg person their perfidy and point out that there is no reason to suppose that they will not turn this on them if they so choose.
The 2nd thing I did was send out some DM to the people I bet with on the election and to Fault Lines Radio (who usually contacts me via twitter to invite me on_ to warn them that I might end up being blocked again:
Here is the DM I sent to fault lines radio show:
Quick FYI just got out of the twitter gulag for posting a link to #benfordslaw piece that they claimed was porn posted without the consent of the person involved. after the lockout I refused to delete the tweet and appeals, won the appeal and checking if the lockout is still automatic for it. If I am locked out or suspended best way to get me is a comment on my site datechguyblog.com use the term ” (not showing this for obvious reasons)” & I’ll know it’s you guys. wish me luck
And then I sent out the following tweets:
Now I should point out something here that I didn’t realize until a few minutes ago. When I look at test 1 while logged onto my own account I can see my tweet.
BUT when I look at test one when not logged in (which is how I’m accessing these tweets now what shows up in place of the tweet is “This tweet is unavailable”.
Oddly if I click on that “unavailable tweet” in that different browser the tweet shows up and I can access the piece
But I digress…
So after test one it was time for test 2
so I did
Everything was seemingly working and I was literally in the process of typing out that twitter had passed test two when suddenly….
Mind you this was less that one hour after I my account was unlocked and I had been informed by twitter that I had been locked out in error.
As normal there was an email notice from Twitter. One guess what the email said I had done…
…if your guess was they said I had distributed:
privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent
Then you are correct.
So in summery for the 2nd time in under two days twitter has not only locked my account but slandered me by claiming I’m pushing out Porn.
I’m again appealing this lockout. Here is what I wrote them this time
Not only have you once again slandered me with a palatable lie claiming that I shared “privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent” but you did so less than one hour after you UNLOCKED said account acknowledging that this same accusation over tweeting out the same link which goes to a piece on Benford’s mathematical law was false and stated I was locked out in error and apologized for doing so.
Furthermore you did so after I tweeted twitter safety saying I was about to retweet the tweet that you apologized for locking me out over to confirm that things were restored. That doesn’t cover you guys with glory.
If you are so afraid of people seeing circumstantial evidence of Joe Biden’s election 2020 magic ballots have the strength of character to admit that’s why you’re locking my account rather than making base and slanderous accusations against me distributing porn.
Last time it took about a day. Let’s see how long it takes this time for them to admit they are wrong.
I further intended to keep performing this test when reinstated and going through this process until twitter removes the lock on that piece or bans me.
I suspect that will be sometime after the court cases on election 2020 are resolved…unexpectedly of course.
Closing thought. If they are persisting in this kind of thing, that suggests they know they are not secure in their position and are doing all they can from keeping regular people from seeing rational arguments demonstrating the existence of Joe Biden’s Magic Ballots
If you were one of those folks on twitter who followed me you would have noticed that I had a habit of not blocking trolls, or idiots, or people who swore at me, practically the only way to get blocked by me was to be an obvious bot (identical tweets to many people usually with either no icon or a picture of a pretty girl often named something like joe3882472100) or to tweet images of pornography. Even those who insulted the church instead of being blocked would go on my Perpetual Twitter Novena list so I could pray for them.
The reason for this is simple. If the left was making a stupid or weak argument in my opinion the best thing is for people to see it and then to laugh at them. For example. A few hours before I was locked out I had the following exchange with such a person:
the response to this was a rather foolish one on our leftist friends part
You see once someone states you have put out “demonstrable lies” the logical thing is to say: OK Demonstrate them. He didn’t take it very well.
Now if I had just blocked such a fellow I would not have been able to illustrate to those who follow me and him that said statement about “demonstrable lies” was blowing smoke. Instead I was able to illustrate to my followers and his that he was full of it.
And that brings us once again to twitter locking me out.
You see if people are saying something stupid, or outrageous it’s simple enough to counter such folk because such arguments are generally over the top and given the number of people on twitter there is no shortage of bright people on the other side who could do so.
BUT if people are saying things or making observations that are factual and or credible, something that the average person can understand or even something that might make you think, like the link I sent out that got me locked, then you risk a discussion that can be lost.
Now if you are a person who wants facts and truth that’s not necessarily a bad thing. After all if my opinion is wrong or “demonstratively false” I’d like to know it because I believe in truth and fact.
BUT if you are a person trying to advance a false or a weak proposition such as:
Donald Trump had a historic performance among non-white voters and outperformed his previous vote share even in blue cities EXCEPT in four cities in four swing state where Joe Biden not only outperformed Trump but out preformed Barack Obama enough to swing said states.”
Then the last thing you want is anyone advancing factual or credible arguments against it, particularly arguments that are easy for people to understand.
Or to put it simply, if our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook thought that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as the sun rises in the east they would point at such posts and simply laugh or provide evidence that could easily or credibly counter assertions to the contrary.
If our leftist friends on Twitter and Facebook think that Joe Biden’s #election2020 #magicballots in #detroit #philadelphia #atlanta & #milwaukee were legitimate as sure as Jeffery Epstein killed himself then they will go all out to prevent evidence or arguments which support that fact.
The question isn’t if President Trump’s team has evidence of vote fraud. He does and plenty. The question is can he provide the courts with enough such evidence that will cause the courts to prescribe remedies to counter Joe Biden’s #Magicballots . You don’t know and neither do I. This is likely going to go to the Supreme Court.
But the Hollywood / media / academic / big tech left are fighting a different fight. The standard of evidence convince the avg person is MUCH lower than the standard to convince a court and right now the circumstantial evidence is more that sufficient to convince any citizen whose religion is not politics that the fix is in.
That’s the dirty little (Not So) secret here. They’re not censoring stuff because we’re making incredible arguments or points, they’re censoring us because we’re making credible arguments and points that the average person can understand.
In other words they’re still scared because they know it’s not legit.
I’ve had my fill of Facebook and Twitter blocking friends of mine from posting there and having their accounts suspended. These two social media giants unapologetically back liberal political figures while using their might to crush conservative leaders–as well as rank-and-file supporters of the right side of the political spectrum.
The most recent victim of Twitter bumptiousness is Da Tech Guy himself, simply because he questioned the veracity of the presidential recounts in swing states. It happened today.
Meanwhile there is another social media site, Parler, where free speech is encouraged. I’m @marathonpundit there. Please follow me. While I haven’t deleted my Facebook and Twitter accounts–I’ll be spending much less time there. Besides, I don’t want someone to steal my handles there.
On his show radio show Friday night Mark Levin announced his social media transition. Today on the platform he announced, “Hurry and follow me at Parler. I’m trying to encourage as many of you as possible to immediately join me there as I may not stay at Facebook or Twitter if they continue censoring me. And one day I’ll have left their platforms. Parler is a wonderful alternative and is growing, and we need you there ASAP. It believes in truly open speech. Thank you!”
In his well-deserved grilling by the US Senate last month, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey couldn’t come up with a solid answer on why he continually blocks President Trump’s Tweets about controversial COVID-19 treatments and election fraud. Meanwhile, a post from the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, questioning whether the Holocaust occurred, remains on the microblogging platform. When asked about if any other world leader, besides Trump, has had Tweets blocked, Dorsey couldn’t come up with any examples.
The next question to ask is: why is it a crime to raise doubts about the Holocaust? Why should anyone who writes about such doubts be imprisoned while insulting the Prophet (pbuh) is allowed?
Twitter is a Trump-hating and a conservative-hating site. I can’t think of a single incident of a liberal–famous or not–having their posts deleted or their accounts blocked. Just last week, for instance, reputed comedian Kathy Griffin reposted on Twitter her notorious photo where she holds the bloody head of President Trump. Don’t forget, threats of violence against the president violates federal law. What would happen to my Twitter account if I posted a similar shot with Joe Biden?
It’s not just “the guy in his pajamas” Tweeting at home who gets bullied. The New York Post, America’s oldest daily newspaper and its fourth-most read, saw its Twitter account suspended for 13 days because of stories it wrote and Tweeted regarding email revelations alleging graft gleaned from Hunter Biden’s laptop. The Twitter “gods” deemed these reports unsubstantiated–even though the Biden-Harris campaign never denied the Post’s stories. Another reason given by Twitter for the Post’s suspension was its claim that the paper was publishing “hacked” information. But Hunter’s laptop was obtained legally.
Contrast that behavior with Twitter’s non-response to the New York Times’ stories on President Trump’s federal income tax returns. Those returns were possibly retrieved by hacking–and that tax information was almost certainly illegally obtained by somebody.
Facebook isn’t quite as bad as Twitter in regards to censorship but it has a shameful free speech record too. Many of my friends have ended up in “Facebook jail” for pushing the envelope a bit as they challenge the leftist dogma. I’ve never hear about liberals being tossed into “Facebook jail.” And yes, I have liberal friends.
Twitter makes money on ads, mainly thru “Promoted Posts” that appear on its feed. If I am not on Twitter, I don’t see them. Just as when my television is switched off I don’t see commercials there.
Facebook is downright creepy in its ad strategy. If I click “like” on a story for a sports team, shortly afterwards I’ll see ads on my Facebook page promoting hats and shirts for that team. A few hours after I arrived in Alaska this summer for a vacation this T-shirt ad on my FB page. “I may be in Anchorage but my heart is with the Chicago White Sox.” Does Facebook know when I use the men’s room? It gets worse. A couple of years ago–just five minutes after leaving the wake for a friend of mine–I was requested to write a review on Facebook for the funeral home that hosted the wake.
Facebook takes the predilections and overall activities of its users and essentially sells them to advertisers. In fact they are selling you to advertisers. Yep, you.
But if I’m not there, or not there very much, Facebook and Twitter will suffer. If millions of conservatives follow the same action they’s suffer a lot more.
Let’s think of social media hatred of conservatives this way. Imagine you are a member of an ethnic group that is disliked by the proprietors of the only two restaurants in town. You still eat at these places because sometimes you are hungry and you just don’t have the energy to prepare your down dinner. That is, until you find out that the cooks always spit into your sandwiches.
That’s what Facebook and Twitter is doing to conservatives. Spitting on them.
Over 70 million Americans voted for Donald Trump. Let’s see if Facebook and Twitter can endure angering such a large segment of America.
I was raised by parents who kept a close eye on what my brothers and sisters and I watched on television. As we only had two TV sets, that was a very easy task for them as my folks didn’t socialize outside our home much. Until the early 1970s it was especially easy for them as television fare for the medium’s first 25 years was mostly G-rated fare. Otis Campbell’s drunkeness on the Andy Griffith Show was as bad as it got in the 1960s, although interestingly, the character was rarely shown consuming alcohol.
So in 1972 when Bea Arthur’s eponymous character in Maude, in a two-episode storyline became pregnant–she pondered an abortion and then went through with it–my parents made sure that our televisions were tuned to a different station those nights.
Abortion was not only very controversial in 1972, it was illegal in most states, although Arthur’s character lived in New York, where it was not. At that time I didn’t even know what abortion was.
Nearly five decades later, Big Tech and Big Media are trying to control what I see on my computer and portable devices. And because broadcast and cable news often takes its lead from what they view as “elite” media, their decisions effect what I see on my TV.
Our “betters” in the media, working for CNN, MSNBC, as well as onetime somewhat fair but left-leaning print outlets such as the New York Times, the Atlantic, the New Yorker, and Vanity Fair, are attempting to limit what information we consume. And in control of the metaphoric off switch is Big Tech, led by Twitter and Facebook.
Stories that are harmful to the reputation to President Donald Trump blare across the media, such as reports on Trump’s tax returns. The New York Times did not publish those returns, but it reported on them. The Old Gray Lady won’t say how it got them, but assuming reports on the returns are accurate, who ever gained access to them and gave them to the Times broke the law. The stories on Trump’s tax returns, where it was reported that he paid as little as $750 in federal taxes, were reported pretty much everywhere by the media, and posted, reposted, Tweeted, and re-Tweeted on Facebook and Twitter.
“Kids, kids, come to the living room! You need to see this news story on TV!”
Contrast Trump’s taxes to reports from the New York Post about the emails it accessed from a laptop that once belonged to Joe Biden’s troublesome son, Hunter. Because Hunter dropped of the computer at a repair shop and never bothered to pick it up, that computer became property of the shop’s owner. Emails found on that computer confirm accusations that Hunter used that Biden name to for influence peddling. Illegal? Maybe not. Sleazy? For sure. And the shop owner did not break the law.
And the media, with the exception of Fox News and other conservative news sources such as Breitbart, ignored or minimized coverage of Hunter Biden’s emails. Last week a Democratic Party shill masquerading as an ABC journalist, former Bill Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos, didn’t ask Biden about the New York Post revelations. Yeah, I get it, the format was a town hall, but ABC chose the participants and it knew what questions they would ask. Contrast Biden’s friendly treatment to the grilling Trump received from Savannah Guthrie at the NBC town hall the same night. Guthrie is married to Michael Feldman, the traveling chief of staff for Al Gore in the 2000 election. Guthrie brought up Trump’s tax returns, among other things.
That’s bad but what is worse is that Twitter and Facebook for a while blocked the posting and sharing of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden email revelations. And it wasn’t yokels like me who suffered the indignity. Trump’s press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, saw her Twitter account briefly suspended for Tweeting the Post’s Hunter story. The twisted explanation from Big Tech is that the Hunter Biden’s emails were hacked–they weren’t–and that the story was unverified. Remember, the NY Times never actually published Trump’s federal tax returns, which may have been hacked. But the Post did show images of some of Hunter’s emails. Even the New York Post’s Twitter account was suspended for a short time on the day it published the Hunter story.
“Kids…turn off that TV and go to your room!”
Of course these media and tech big shots are our “betters.” Jeffrey Toobin, a CNN analyst and New Yorker writer, a product of Harvard University, is one of them. But yesterday Toobin was suspended by CNN and the New Yorker after exposing himself and more–click here for the X-rated details–during a Zoom call simulating election night scenarios. Toobin is a scumbag. He had an extramarital affair with Casey Greenfield, the daughter of journalist Jeff Greenfield. Okay, I know, Trump has been unfaithful while married too. But Greenfield bore his child, which Toobin only acknowledged after a DNA test, and only then began paying child support. And while pregnant Toobin offered to pay for her abortion.
American media can do much better than Toobin and his fellow “betters.” I will write another entry on the sad state of the media after the election.
But right now we’re headed to Chinese government-style control of the media by the left.
A free press and free association are two things that French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville saw as two key safeguards in his landmark 19th-century work, Democracy in America.
But Big Tech and Big Media, as well as the increasingly far-left Democratic Party, are trying to minimize both.
We live in a perilous time.
UPDATE 7:30pm EDT: Correction, the New York Post Twitter account was “not suspended for a short time” as I wrote earlier. There are no new Twitter entries from @nypost since October 14. If the account has been suspended it clearly has been locked out. This is censorship.
The @nypost, the oldest and one of the largest news outlets in America, has been frozen out of Twitter for 6 days.
The whole point of Jacksonianism is “You leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone. You play fair with me and I’ll play fair with you. But if you fuck with me, I’ll kill you.”
Steven Den Bestie
The big story of the day is not as some are suggesting the Hunter Biden story at the NY Post which provides proof of the wrongdoing of the VP’s son and his knowledge of said wrongdoing, or even the fact that Democrat hack George (I’m an unbiased journalist, sure I am) Stephanopoulos didn’t even ask him about said story at the ABC town hall.
Anyone who has followed the career of Joe Biden or of Georgie the fixer would not be all that surprised by it.
The big story is and remains the decision of Twitter and Facebook to cross the Rubicon.
You see once you chosen sides publicly there is no going back. You can’t “uncensor” these people and have either conservative in general, who they have been picking on for years or the Trump administration in particular, who never trusted them believe that all is now well and once the election is over they will let bygones be bygones.
That’s not how President Trump works. He is a Jacksonian with a long memory.
I told you they’re all in on their censorship. Twitter is now deprecating links to official dot gov websites.
We’ve seen some backing off but I find that hilarious because they have apparently not figured out that the retribution they will get from the reelected Trump administration will not be any less then if they kept it up.
I’m not completely shocked at this move as I believe ans suspect that this was all authorized by people in middle management who presumed the support of their superiors because their tribal political opinions without realizing the line they crossed or the consequences thereof to the bottom line in the long run that the big boys understand
But like Robert E Lee being forced by Maj. Gen. Robert Rodes into battle on ground he did not choose at Gettysburg Jack, Zuck and company find themselves in a fight on ground that doesn’t favor them forcing them to either run or commit their entire resources to try and salvage a victory.
Neither option is going to end well. If they choose to stay and fight (which I think they still might despite trying to bluff their way out I believe their version of Picket’s Charge will fail with a lot less success than the original and then Trump, unlike Meade, will not fail to follow them up and finish them off.
Their attempts to equivocate and bluff are the equivalent of trying to run in the face of the enemy and again, Trump unlike Meade will not waste any time hitting them in motion and destroying them.
I’ll enjoy that sight: Remember Stacy McCain
Postscript. It’s worth noting that no matter what the result of the election, that any suits against these social media giants face (and they will invariably come over these actions) will ultimately be decided a Supreme Court that will include Amy Coney Barrett.