sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
Interesting. Our account is operating fine. I will see what happens today. Apparently idiots are still in charge at twitter. They seem to swing between extremes.
-
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website. -
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Reports of censorship during pandemic
- Thread starter Emily
- Start date
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
Just wow.....
Over 50 Biden Administration Employees, 12 US Agencies Involved in Social Media Censorship Push: Documents
By Zachary Stieber
September 1, 2022 Updated: September 1, 2022
snip
‘Censorship Enterprise’
Plaintiffs said the massive pressure campaign amounted to a “Censorship Enterprise” because it involved so many officials and agencies.
Government lawyers only identified 45 officials at five agencies—the Department of Homeland Security, CISA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Murthy’s office—who communicated with social media companies on misinformation, although documents they produced showed others were involved, including officials at the Census Bureau and the Departments of Treasury and State.
Responses from the Big Tech companies also revealed more officials involved with the effort.
Meta has disclosed that at least 32 federal officials, including top officials at the White House and the Food and Drug Administration, were in communication with it about content moderation. Many of the officials weren’t identified in the response by the government.
more...
https://www.theepochtimes.com/over-...tml?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge
----------------------------------------------------
There is a distribution list on a CDC email attachment calling everyone "partners and collegues". Just because someone at the CDC decided to send out a mass communication does not mean any of those people agreed, or is, a "partner". But still...... the intent of enlisting all of those entities is amazing.
Over 50 Biden Administration Employees, 12 US Agencies Involved in Social Media Censorship Push: Documents
By Zachary Stieber
September 1, 2022 Updated: September 1, 2022
snip
‘Censorship Enterprise’
Plaintiffs said the massive pressure campaign amounted to a “Censorship Enterprise” because it involved so many officials and agencies.
Government lawyers only identified 45 officials at five agencies—the Department of Homeland Security, CISA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and Murthy’s office—who communicated with social media companies on misinformation, although documents they produced showed others were involved, including officials at the Census Bureau and the Departments of Treasury and State.
Responses from the Big Tech companies also revealed more officials involved with the effort.
Meta has disclosed that at least 32 federal officials, including top officials at the White House and the Food and Drug Administration, were in communication with it about content moderation. Many of the officials weren’t identified in the response by the government.
more...
https://www.theepochtimes.com/over-...tml?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge
----------------------------------------------------
There is a distribution list on a CDC email attachment calling everyone "partners and collegues". Just because someone at the CDC decided to send out a mass communication does not mean any of those people agreed, or is, a "partner". But still...... the intent of enlisting all of those entities is amazing.
Mary Wilson
Well-known member
but then I have to consider the source location of this article
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
One of their sources is a collection of emails between government entities and Meta.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22273648-meta-and-hhs-messages
Also, Zuckerberg admitted in an interview he was misled by the government on at least one issue and regrets censoring due to that.
https://nypost.com/2022/08/26/zuckerberg-blames-fbi-for-censoring-the-posts-hunter-biden-scoop/
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22273648-meta-and-hhs-messages
Also, Zuckerberg admitted in an interview he was misled by the government on at least one issue and regrets censoring due to that.
https://nypost.com/2022/08/26/zuckerberg-blames-fbi-for-censoring-the-posts-hunter-biden-scoop/
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
711 pages from the First Amendment lawsuit, hundreds are the emails obtained so far.
https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Joint-Statement-on-Discovery-Disputes-Combined.pdf
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
STATE OF MISSOURI ex rel. ERIC S.
SCHMITT, Attorney General,
STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. JEFFREY
M. LANDRY, Attorney General, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his official
capacity as President of the United States, et
al.,
Defendants
Case 3:22-cv-01213-TAD-KDM Document 71 Filed 08/31/22 Page 3 of 67 PageID #: 2340
Under the First Amendment, the federal Government should have no role in policing
private speech or picking winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas. But that is what federal
officials are doing, on a massive scale – a scale whose full scope and impact is yet to be determined.
Secretary Mayorkas of DHS commented that the federal Government’s efforts to police
private speech on social media are occurring “across the federal enterprise.” Doc. 45, ¶ 233. It
turns out that this statement is true, on a scale beyond what Plaintiffs could ever have anticipated.
The limited discovery produced so far provides a tantalizing snapshot into a massive, sprawling
federal “Censorship Enterprise,” which includes dozens of federal officials across at least eleven
federal agencies and components identified so far, who communicate with social-media platforms
about misinformation, disinformation, and the suppression of private speech on social media—all
with the intent and effect of pressuring social-media platforms to censor and suppress private
speech that federal officials disfavor. The discovery provided so far demonstrates that this
Censorship Enterprise is extremely broad, including officials in the White House, HHS, DHS,
CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General; and evidently other agencies as
well, such as the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury
Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. And it rises to the highest levels of
the U.S. Government, including numerous White House officials. More discovery is needed to
uncover the full scope of this “Censorship Enterprise,” and thus allow Plaintiffs the opportunity to
achieve fully effective injunctive relief. Defendants have objected to producing some of the most
relevant and probative information in their possession—i.e., the identities, and nature and content
of communications, of White House officials and officials at other federal agencies who are not
yet Defendants in this case because they were unknown when Plaintiffs served their discovery six
weeks ago. Defendants have objected to producing discovery that would reveal both the height
Case 3:22-cv-01213-TAD-KDM Document 71 Filed 08/31/22 Page 3 of 67 PageID #: 2340
and the breadth of the federal “Censorship Enterprise.” The Court should overrule these objections
and order Defendants to provide this highly relevant, responsive, and probative information...
https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Joint-Statement-on-Discovery-Disputes-Combined.pdf
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MONROE DIVISION
STATE OF MISSOURI ex rel. ERIC S.
SCHMITT, Attorney General,
STATE OF LOUISIANA ex rel. JEFFREY
M. LANDRY, Attorney General, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his official
capacity as President of the United States, et
al.,
Defendants
Case 3:22-cv-01213-TAD-KDM Document 71 Filed 08/31/22 Page 3 of 67 PageID #: 2340
Under the First Amendment, the federal Government should have no role in policing
private speech or picking winners and losers in the marketplace of ideas. But that is what federal
officials are doing, on a massive scale – a scale whose full scope and impact is yet to be determined.
Secretary Mayorkas of DHS commented that the federal Government’s efforts to police
private speech on social media are occurring “across the federal enterprise.” Doc. 45, ¶ 233. It
turns out that this statement is true, on a scale beyond what Plaintiffs could ever have anticipated.
The limited discovery produced so far provides a tantalizing snapshot into a massive, sprawling
federal “Censorship Enterprise,” which includes dozens of federal officials across at least eleven
federal agencies and components identified so far, who communicate with social-media platforms
about misinformation, disinformation, and the suppression of private speech on social media—all
with the intent and effect of pressuring social-media platforms to censor and suppress private
speech that federal officials disfavor. The discovery provided so far demonstrates that this
Censorship Enterprise is extremely broad, including officials in the White House, HHS, DHS,
CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General; and evidently other agencies as
well, such as the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury
Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. And it rises to the highest levels of
the U.S. Government, including numerous White House officials. More discovery is needed to
uncover the full scope of this “Censorship Enterprise,” and thus allow Plaintiffs the opportunity to
achieve fully effective injunctive relief. Defendants have objected to producing some of the most
relevant and probative information in their possession—i.e., the identities, and nature and content
of communications, of White House officials and officials at other federal agencies who are not
yet Defendants in this case because they were unknown when Plaintiffs served their discovery six
weeks ago. Defendants have objected to producing discovery that would reveal both the height
Case 3:22-cv-01213-TAD-KDM Document 71 Filed 08/31/22 Page 3 of 67 PageID #: 2340
and the breadth of the federal “Censorship Enterprise.” The Court should overrule these objections
and order Defendants to provide this highly relevant, responsive, and probative information...
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Missouri and Louisiana Attorneys General Ask Court to Compel Department of Justice to Produce Communications Between Top Officials and Social Media Companies
Sep 1, 2022, 09:22 AM by AG Schmitt
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Yesterday, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry filed a Joint Statement on Discovery Disputes, asking the Louisiana District Court to compel the Department of Justice to turn over communications between high-ranking Biden Administration officials from the White House, Department of State, FBI and others and major social media companies. The Department of Justice has already turned over communications between a number of federal officials and social media companies but has refused to provide communications between top-ranking officials and social media companies.
“Missouri and Louisiana filed a landmark lawsuit back in May that seeks to expose how top Biden Administration officials allegedly colluded with social media companies to censor freedom of speech on a number of topics, including COVID-19. We won in court in July, and the Court required the Biden Administration to turn over communications between federal officials and social media companies,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “We have already received a number of documents that clearly prove that the federal government has an incestuous relationship with social media companies and clearly coordinate to censor freedom of speech, but we’re not done. The Department of Justice is cowering behind executive privilege and has refused to turn over communications between the highest-ranking Biden Administration officials and social media companies. That’s why, yesterday, we asked the Court to compel the Department of Justice to produce those records. We’re just getting started – stay tuned.”
The communications already provided by the Department of Justice to the plaintiff states show, as the joint statement points out, a vast “Censorship Enterprise” across a multitude of federal agencies. In response to Missouri and Louisiana’s interrogatories, defendants identified 45 federal officials at DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General (all of which are contained in either DHS or HHS) that communicate with social media platforms about “misinformation” and censorship. The joint statement points out, “But in those responses, Defendants did not provide information about any federal officials at other federal agencies of whom they are aware who engage in such communications with social-media platforms about misinformation and censorship, though Plaintiffs had specifically asked for this highly relevant information. Defendants’ document production, however, reveals that such officials at other federal agencies exist—for example, their emails include extensive copying of officials at the Census Bureau, and they also include communications involving the Departments of Treasury and State.”
Beyond the Department of Justice’s production, “Meta, for example, has disclosed that at least 32 federal officials—including senior officials at the FDA, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, and the White House—have communicated with Meta about content moderation on its platforms, many of whom were not disclosed in response to Plaintiffs’ interrogatories to Defendants. YouTube disclosed eleven federal officials engaged in such communications, including officials at the Census Bureau and the White House, many of whom were also not disclosed by Defendants.”
The joint statement continues, “The discovery provided so far demonstrates that this Censorship Enterprise is extremely broad, including officials in the White House, HHS, DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General; and evidently other agencies as well, such as the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. And it rises to the highest levels of the U.S. Government, including numerous White House officials. Defendants have objected to producing some of the most relevant and probative information in their possession.”
This “Censorship Enterprise” is proven by the Department of Justice’s productions thus far, but the full extent of federal officials’ collusion with social media companies on censorship is unknown until the Department of Justice produces further communications requested by Missouri and Louisiana.
A senior Facebook official sent an email to the Surgeon General stating, “I know our teams met today to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.” This email chain follows the SG’s “misinformation health advisory” in July 2021: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/hhs-fb-email-1.pdf?sfvrsn=53bc4454_2
The same senior official sent a later email to HHS and noted, "Thanks again for taking the time to meet earlier today." Then, the official continued to discuss how Facebook is taking even more steps to censor freedom of speech: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/hhs-fb-exhibit.pdf?sfvrsn=55bd83df_2
Twitter scheduled a meeting to debrief top White House officials on “vaccine misinformation.”: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/twitter-vaccine-meeting-wh.pdf?sfvrsn=6599e359_2b
There are several instances where Facebook wouldn’t proceed with censoring freedom of speech on their platform until they had input, or a “debunking” from the CDC. Twitter followed the same course in at least one email.
The CDC also proposed a monthly pre-debunking meeting with Facebook to help them censor free speech (https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/cdc-fb-monthly-debunk.pdf?sfvrsn=3508a21f_2) as well as regular “Be on the Lookout” calls with major social media outlets: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/cdc-bolo-meeting.pdf?sfvrsn=9a060658_2
A White House official was even concerned about parody Fauci accounts and coordinated with FB to take them down: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/fake-fauci.pdf?sfvrsn=a9d8f2bf_2
The joint petition can be found here: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/doc-71---joint-statement-on-discovery-disputes.pdf?sfvrsn=3b968800_2
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2022/0...ween-top-officials-and-social-media-companies
Sep 1, 2022, 09:22 AM by AG Schmitt
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Yesterday, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry filed a Joint Statement on Discovery Disputes, asking the Louisiana District Court to compel the Department of Justice to turn over communications between high-ranking Biden Administration officials from the White House, Department of State, FBI and others and major social media companies. The Department of Justice has already turned over communications between a number of federal officials and social media companies but has refused to provide communications between top-ranking officials and social media companies.
“Missouri and Louisiana filed a landmark lawsuit back in May that seeks to expose how top Biden Administration officials allegedly colluded with social media companies to censor freedom of speech on a number of topics, including COVID-19. We won in court in July, and the Court required the Biden Administration to turn over communications between federal officials and social media companies,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “We have already received a number of documents that clearly prove that the federal government has an incestuous relationship with social media companies and clearly coordinate to censor freedom of speech, but we’re not done. The Department of Justice is cowering behind executive privilege and has refused to turn over communications between the highest-ranking Biden Administration officials and social media companies. That’s why, yesterday, we asked the Court to compel the Department of Justice to produce those records. We’re just getting started – stay tuned.”
The communications already provided by the Department of Justice to the plaintiff states show, as the joint statement points out, a vast “Censorship Enterprise” across a multitude of federal agencies. In response to Missouri and Louisiana’s interrogatories, defendants identified 45 federal officials at DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General (all of which are contained in either DHS or HHS) that communicate with social media platforms about “misinformation” and censorship. The joint statement points out, “But in those responses, Defendants did not provide information about any federal officials at other federal agencies of whom they are aware who engage in such communications with social-media platforms about misinformation and censorship, though Plaintiffs had specifically asked for this highly relevant information. Defendants’ document production, however, reveals that such officials at other federal agencies exist—for example, their emails include extensive copying of officials at the Census Bureau, and they also include communications involving the Departments of Treasury and State.”
Beyond the Department of Justice’s production, “Meta, for example, has disclosed that at least 32 federal officials—including senior officials at the FDA, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, and the White House—have communicated with Meta about content moderation on its platforms, many of whom were not disclosed in response to Plaintiffs’ interrogatories to Defendants. YouTube disclosed eleven federal officials engaged in such communications, including officials at the Census Bureau and the White House, many of whom were also not disclosed by Defendants.”
The joint statement continues, “The discovery provided so far demonstrates that this Censorship Enterprise is extremely broad, including officials in the White House, HHS, DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, and the Office of the Surgeon General; and evidently other agencies as well, such as the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. And it rises to the highest levels of the U.S. Government, including numerous White House officials. Defendants have objected to producing some of the most relevant and probative information in their possession.”
This “Censorship Enterprise” is proven by the Department of Justice’s productions thus far, but the full extent of federal officials’ collusion with social media companies on censorship is unknown until the Department of Justice produces further communications requested by Missouri and Louisiana.
A senior Facebook official sent an email to the Surgeon General stating, “I know our teams met today to better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.” This email chain follows the SG’s “misinformation health advisory” in July 2021: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/hhs-fb-email-1.pdf?sfvrsn=53bc4454_2
The same senior official sent a later email to HHS and noted, "Thanks again for taking the time to meet earlier today." Then, the official continued to discuss how Facebook is taking even more steps to censor freedom of speech: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/hhs-fb-exhibit.pdf?sfvrsn=55bd83df_2
Twitter scheduled a meeting to debrief top White House officials on “vaccine misinformation.”: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/twitter-vaccine-meeting-wh.pdf?sfvrsn=6599e359_2b
There are several instances where Facebook wouldn’t proceed with censoring freedom of speech on their platform until they had input, or a “debunking” from the CDC. Twitter followed the same course in at least one email.
- Example 1: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/fb-cdc-child-vaccine.pdf?sfvrsn=2f8960de_2
- Example 2: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/fb-cdc-omicron.pdf?sfvrsn=78eb53ec_2
- Twitter example: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/twitter--cdc-action.pdf?sfvrsn=12c0dc46_2
The CDC also proposed a monthly pre-debunking meeting with Facebook to help them censor free speech (https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/cdc-fb-monthly-debunk.pdf?sfvrsn=3508a21f_2) as well as regular “Be on the Lookout” calls with major social media outlets: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/cdc-bolo-meeting.pdf?sfvrsn=9a060658_2
A White House official was even concerned about parody Fauci accounts and coordinated with FB to take them down: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/fake-fauci.pdf?sfvrsn=a9d8f2bf_2
The joint petition can be found here: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/doc-71---joint-statement-on-discovery-disputes.pdf?sfvrsn=3b968800_2
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2022/0...ween-top-officials-and-social-media-companies
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
We carry verifiable data from many different sources. I review dozens of sources daily including liberal, conservative, and government sources. I extract data from all types of biased sources every single day - including the government media of China. I search for the truth and this takes me to many varied sources.
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Court Orders Federal Government to Produce Records from Top White House, HHS Officials in Missouri AG’s Lawsuit
Sep 6, 2022, 15:18 PM by AG Schmitt
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced today that, in his lawsuit against top-ranking Biden Administration officials for allegedly colluding to suppress freedom of speech, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana granted Missouri and Louisiana’s request to compel the federal government to produce records from top-ranking White House and Health and Human Services (HHS) officials. This ruling specifically allows the attorneys general to collect the communications between key White House and Department of Health and Senior Services officials, like Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and Twitter, Meta, and others.
“Up until this point, the Department of Justice has refused to cooperate with our requests for discovery from top officials in the Biden Administration under the guise of ‘executive privilege.’ Today, the Court entered an order that requires that the federal government turn over the records we’ve long requested,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “The American people deserve answers on how the federal government has colluded with social media companies to censor free speech on these major platforms. We will continue to fight to uncover more of this vast censorship enterprise.”
The original lawsuit was filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry on May 5, 2022. Missouri and Louisiana filed a Motion for Expedited Preliminary Injunction-Related Discovery on June 17, 2022, and that motion was granted on July 12, 2022, clearing the way for Missouri and Louisiana to gather discovery and documents from Biden Administration officials and social media companies.
The attorneys general filed a Joint Statement on Discovery Disputes, asking the federal District Court to compel the Department of Justice to turn over communications between high-ranking Biden Administration officials from the White House, HHS, and others and major social media companies. That request was granted today, specifically for the communications of Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre with social-media platforms.
The full ruling can be read here: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/doc-72---order-re-discovery-disputes.pdf?sfvrsn=af653b4f_2
###
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2022/0...-house-hhs-officials-in-missouri-ag-s-lawsuit
Sep 6, 2022, 15:18 PM by AG Schmitt
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. – Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt announced today that, in his lawsuit against top-ranking Biden Administration officials for allegedly colluding to suppress freedom of speech, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana granted Missouri and Louisiana’s request to compel the federal government to produce records from top-ranking White House and Health and Human Services (HHS) officials. This ruling specifically allows the attorneys general to collect the communications between key White House and Department of Health and Senior Services officials, like Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and Twitter, Meta, and others.
“Up until this point, the Department of Justice has refused to cooperate with our requests for discovery from top officials in the Biden Administration under the guise of ‘executive privilege.’ Today, the Court entered an order that requires that the federal government turn over the records we’ve long requested,” said Attorney General Schmitt. “The American people deserve answers on how the federal government has colluded with social media companies to censor free speech on these major platforms. We will continue to fight to uncover more of this vast censorship enterprise.”
The original lawsuit was filed by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry on May 5, 2022. Missouri and Louisiana filed a Motion for Expedited Preliminary Injunction-Related Discovery on June 17, 2022, and that motion was granted on July 12, 2022, clearing the way for Missouri and Louisiana to gather discovery and documents from Biden Administration officials and social media companies.
The attorneys general filed a Joint Statement on Discovery Disputes, asking the federal District Court to compel the Department of Justice to turn over communications between high-ranking Biden Administration officials from the White House, HHS, and others and major social media companies. That request was granted today, specifically for the communications of Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre with social-media platforms.
The full ruling can be read here: https://ago.mo.gov/docs/default-source/press-releases/free-speech-pitch-thread-docs/doc-72---order-re-discovery-disputes.pdf?sfvrsn=af653b4f_2
###
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2022/0...-house-hhs-officials-in-missouri-ag-s-lawsuit
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://aaronkheriaty.substack.com/...federal?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Our Lawsuit Uncovers Army of Federal Bureaucrats Coercing Social-Media Companies to Censor Speech
Recent evidence uncovered in our Missouri v. Biden suit suggests the most egregious, coordinated, massive violation of First Amendment free speech rights by the federal government in U.S. history.
Aaron Kheriaty, MD
Sep 1
Our Lawsuit Uncovers Army of Federal Bureaucrats Coercing Social-Media Companies to Censor Speech
Recent evidence uncovered in our Missouri v. Biden suit suggests the most egregious, coordinated, massive violation of First Amendment free speech rights by the federal government in U.S. history.
Aaron Kheriaty, MD
Sep 1
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...stated-Twitter-suing-violation-Amendment.html
'The lil bird and I are now the best of friends': Journalist Alex Berenson returns to Twitter as social media giant admits he shouldn't have been banned for questioning COVID vaccines
Published: 22:23 EDT, 8 July 2022 | Updated: 11:30 EDT, 9 July 2022
________________________________________________________________________
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/61630076/alex-berenson-v-twitter-inc/
'The lil bird and I are now the best of friends': Journalist Alex Berenson returns to Twitter as social media giant admits he shouldn't have been banned for questioning COVID vaccines
- Alex Berenson has been reinstated to twitter following an almost 11-month ban
- Berenson, 49, filed a federal lawsuit challenging his ban for 'violating his First Amendment right'
- He was banned in August for questioning the effectiveness of COVID vaccines
- Suit argues that his tweet was a statement of fact, true then as well as now
- Former New York Times reporter had been a noted mask and lockdown skeptic
- Now back on the platform, Berenson wrote: 'All in the past, though! The lil bird and I are now the best of friends'
Published: 22:23 EDT, 8 July 2022 | Updated: 11:30 EDT, 9 July 2022
________________________________________________________________________
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/61630076/alex-berenson-v-twitter-inc/
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/...itter-young-men-are-dying-from-covid-vaccine/
Florida Surgeon General Silenced by Twitter – Young Men are Dying from COVID Vaccine
Blog/Corruption
Posted Oct 11, 2022 by Martin Armstrong
Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo posted a warning on Twitter only to have the platform silence him. It is his responsibility to inform the public of potential health hazards. There should be a crackdown of Twitter for stifling free speech. The surgeon general’s tweet was reinstated after the weekend amid backlash. Hopefully, their desperate attempt to silence the truth backfired and brought more awareness to the problem...
Florida Surgeon General Silenced by Twitter – Young Men are Dying from COVID Vaccine
Blog/Corruption
Posted Oct 11, 2022 by Martin Armstrong
Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo posted a warning on Twitter only to have the platform silence him. It is his responsibility to inform the public of potential health hazards. There should be a crackdown of Twitter for stifling free speech. The surgeon general’s tweet was reinstated after the weekend amid backlash. Hopefully, their desperate attempt to silence the truth backfired and brought more awareness to the problem...
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://sharylattkisson.com/2022/09...ovid-and-donald-trump-at-sharylattkisson-com/
(CENSORED) Google censors factually accurate info about Covid...
Dated: September 18, 2022 by Sharyl Attkisson
(CENSORED) Google censors factually accurate info about Covid...
Dated: September 18, 2022 by Sharyl Attkisson
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
This article is very informative and sobering about the chances of Twitter being able to stop censoring doctors, scientists, journalists, etc, who deviate from the EU narrative. All large platforms, search engines and other services are being affected if they have a presence in the EU.
https://brownstone.org/articles/how-the-eu-is-forcing-twitter-to-censor-and-musk-cant-stop-it/
How the EU is Forcing Twitter to Censor (and Musk Can’t Stop It)
By Robert Kogon October 7, 2022 Technology
Twitter is obviously at the center of what is commonly known as “Big Tech censorship.” It has been busily using the censorship tools at its disposal – from removing or quarantining tweets to surreptitiously “deboosting” them (shadow-banning) to outright account suspension – for at least two years now. And those who have managed to remain on the platform will have noticed a sharp upturn in its censorship activities starting last summer.
For most of this time, the main focus of Twitter censorship has, of course, been supposed “Covid-19 disinformation.” By now, almost all the most influential advocates of early treatment or critics of Covid-19 vaccines on Twitter have had their accounts suspended, and most have not made it back.
The list of the permanently suspended includes such prominent voices as Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, Daniel Horowitz, Nick Hudson, Anthony Hinton, Jessica Rose, Naomi Wolf, and, most recently, Peter McCullough.
And myriad smaller accounts have met the same fate for committing such thought crimes as suggesting that the myocarditis risk of both mRNA vaccines (Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer) outstrips any benefit or pointing to mRNA instability and its unknown consequences for safety and efficacy.
But why in the world would Twitter censor such content? The expression “Big Tech censorship” implies that Twitter et al. are censoring of their own accord, which invariably elicits the retort that, well, they are private companies, so they can do what they want. But why would they want to?
The notion that it is because the denizens of Silicon Valley are “leftists” or “liberals” is clearly not very helpful. They may well be. But whether mRNA vaccines are safe and effective, as advertised, is a factual matter, not an ideological one. And, in any case, the purpose of private for-profit corporations is, needless to say, to make a profit. The motto of the shareholder is not “Workers of the World Unite!” but “Pecunia non olet:” money doesn’t stink. Shareholders expect management to create value, not destroy it.
But what Twitter is doing by censoring is precisely subverting its own business model, thus undermining profitability and putting downward pressure on share price. Free speech is obviously the lifeblood of every social media. Censored speech – like the tweets of a Robert Malone or a Peter McCullough or, for that matter, a Donald Trump – translates into lost traffic for the platform. And traffic is, of course, the key to monetizing unrestricted online content.
We could call this the “Twitter conundrum.”...
https://brownstone.org/articles/how-the-eu-is-forcing-twitter-to-censor-and-musk-cant-stop-it/
How the EU is Forcing Twitter to Censor (and Musk Can’t Stop It)
By Robert Kogon October 7, 2022 Technology
Twitter is obviously at the center of what is commonly known as “Big Tech censorship.” It has been busily using the censorship tools at its disposal – from removing or quarantining tweets to surreptitiously “deboosting” them (shadow-banning) to outright account suspension – for at least two years now. And those who have managed to remain on the platform will have noticed a sharp upturn in its censorship activities starting last summer.
For most of this time, the main focus of Twitter censorship has, of course, been supposed “Covid-19 disinformation.” By now, almost all the most influential advocates of early treatment or critics of Covid-19 vaccines on Twitter have had their accounts suspended, and most have not made it back.
The list of the permanently suspended includes such prominent voices as Robert Malone, Steve Kirsch, Daniel Horowitz, Nick Hudson, Anthony Hinton, Jessica Rose, Naomi Wolf, and, most recently, Peter McCullough.
And myriad smaller accounts have met the same fate for committing such thought crimes as suggesting that the myocarditis risk of both mRNA vaccines (Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer) outstrips any benefit or pointing to mRNA instability and its unknown consequences for safety and efficacy.
But why in the world would Twitter censor such content? The expression “Big Tech censorship” implies that Twitter et al. are censoring of their own accord, which invariably elicits the retort that, well, they are private companies, so they can do what they want. But why would they want to?
The notion that it is because the denizens of Silicon Valley are “leftists” or “liberals” is clearly not very helpful. They may well be. But whether mRNA vaccines are safe and effective, as advertised, is a factual matter, not an ideological one. And, in any case, the purpose of private for-profit corporations is, needless to say, to make a profit. The motto of the shareholder is not “Workers of the World Unite!” but “Pecunia non olet:” money doesn’t stink. Shareholders expect management to create value, not destroy it.
But what Twitter is doing by censoring is precisely subverting its own business model, thus undermining profitability and putting downward pressure on share price. Free speech is obviously the lifeblood of every social media. Censored speech – like the tweets of a Robert Malone or a Peter McCullough or, for that matter, a Donald Trump – translates into lost traffic for the platform. And traffic is, of course, the key to monetizing unrestricted online content.
We could call this the “Twitter conundrum.”...
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Mike Solana
@micsolana
·5h
... that fact check...
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·4h
Replying to
@micsolana
The community notes feature is awesome.
Our goal is to make Twitter the most accurate source of information on Earth, without regard to political affiliation.
@micsolana
·5h
... that fact check...
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·4h
Replying to
@micsolana
The community notes feature is awesome.
Our goal is to make Twitter the most accurate source of information on Earth, without regard to political affiliation.
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Spike Cohen@RealSpikeCohen
·
26m
White House: seniors are getting the biggest SS increase in 10 years.
Context-checkers: That's because inflation is the highest it's been in decades.
White House: *deletes tweet*
Welcome to @elonmusk's Twitter.
Elon Musk@elonmusk
11m
Replying to
@RealSpikeCohen
The system is working
·
26m
White House: seniors are getting the biggest SS increase in 10 years.
Context-checkers: That's because inflation is the highest it's been in decades.
White House: *deletes tweet*
Welcome to @elonmusk's Twitter.
Elon Musk@elonmusk
11m
Replying to
@RealSpikeCohen
The system is working
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
Good points. Even if there are EU restrictions on some free speech, Musk can still balance moderation around US national issues.
There might be a way in the future to create channels that EU originating IP's can't join. (They could still read them with VPN's.) That's what people do with other oppressive governments.) Then doctors and scientists who disagree with government narratives about pandemic control could post there. They'd probably be happy to pay a few dollars a month for protection from EU censorship on the platform.
There might be a way in the future to create channels that EU originating IP's can't join. (They could still read them with VPN's.) That's what people do with other oppressive governments.) Then doctors and scientists who disagree with government narratives about pandemic control could post there. They'd probably be happy to pay a few dollars a month for protection from EU censorship on the platform.
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
White House may have violated law by deleting fact-checked tweet: watchdog
By Victor Nava
November 4, 2022 8:45pm Updated
A watchdog group is calling for a federal investigation into a tweet that the White House deleted this week, arguing that the Biden administration may have violated the Presidential Records Act.
Protect the Public’s Trust, a nonpartisan organization, argued there are “serious questions” over whether presidential record-keeping protocols were properly followed before the White House on Wednesday deleted the widely mocked tweet taking credit for a boost in retirees’ Social Security checks.
The Nov. 1 tweet is “almost certainly a record that belongs to the public and subject to the Act’s destruction protocol,” the group wrote in a letter sent to the heads of the National Archives and Records Administration and the Office of Government Ethics on Friday.
...
According to the Presidential Records Act, a commander-in-chief can only dispose of White House records “once the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal have been obtained in writing.”
Protect the Public’s Trust argues that the White House’s explanation for deleting the tweet, claiming that it was “not complete” and missing “context,” leaves “serious questions whether it was deleted to save the Administration embarrassment or avoid criticism and whether the proper protocols were followed.”
...
https://nypost.com/2022/11/04/white...-law-by-deleting-fact-checked-tweet-watchdog/
By Victor Nava
November 4, 2022 8:45pm Updated
A watchdog group is calling for a federal investigation into a tweet that the White House deleted this week, arguing that the Biden administration may have violated the Presidential Records Act.
Protect the Public’s Trust, a nonpartisan organization, argued there are “serious questions” over whether presidential record-keeping protocols were properly followed before the White House on Wednesday deleted the widely mocked tweet taking credit for a boost in retirees’ Social Security checks.
The Nov. 1 tweet is “almost certainly a record that belongs to the public and subject to the Act’s destruction protocol,” the group wrote in a letter sent to the heads of the National Archives and Records Administration and the Office of Government Ethics on Friday.
...
According to the Presidential Records Act, a commander-in-chief can only dispose of White House records “once the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal have been obtained in writing.”
Protect the Public’s Trust argues that the White House’s explanation for deleting the tweet, claiming that it was “not complete” and missing “context,” leaves “serious questions whether it was deleted to save the Administration embarrassment or avoid criticism and whether the proper protocols were followed.”
...
https://nypost.com/2022/11/04/white...-law-by-deleting-fact-checked-tweet-watchdog/
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Open Access
Published: 01 November 2022
Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics
Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ety Elisha, Brian Martin, Natti Ronel & Josh Guetzkow
Abstract
The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.
...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-022-09479-4#Sec23
Published: 01 November 2022
Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics
Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ety Elisha, Brian Martin, Natti Ronel & Josh Guetzkow
Abstract
The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.
...
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-022-09479-4#Sec23