And…they got a 1 week (thru the 22nd) stay at SCOTUS.

🚨NEW- Missouri v. Biden:

The government has filed at the SCOTUS, asking them to allow continued censorship. Alito placed a stay on the injunction until 9/22.

I don’t expect the SCOTUS will find the Biden admin arguments very persuasive. Will thread as soon as I can.… https://t.co/j3gpj85Rvv

— Tracy Beanz (@tracybeanz) September 14, 2023

It's CRITICALLY IMPORTANT to national security they be allowed to censor any wrongthink on the interwebs this week.

Decent (left leaning) summary (former scotus blog editor):

Quote:

---

The court of appeals narrowed the number of government agencies to which Doughtry's order applies limiting it to the White House, the Surgeon General, the CDC, and the FBI and continued to limit (although also on a narrower basis than Doughtry's order) their communications with social media companies.

The Biden administration came to the Supreme Court on Thursday, asking the justices to step in and put Doughtry's order, as modified by the 5th Circuit's ruling, on hold until it can file a petition for review. The order would have "startling" implications, Prelogar cautioned, by putting "unprecedented limits on the ability of the President's closest aides to use the bully pulpit to address matters of public concern, on the FBI's ability to address threats to the Nation's security, and on the CDC's ability to relay public-health information at platforms' request."

Prelogar added that the lower court's ruling affects not only government officials but also social media companies, because under the 5th Circuit's ruling they too can be held liable for violating the First Amendment for example, simply by accepting a recommendation from the government to moderate content.

Prelogar pushed back against the 5th Circuit's conclusion that the government had coerced or threatened social media platforms to get them to remove content. Instead, she characterized the relationship as a "back-and-forth in which the government and platforms often shared goals and worked together, sometimes disagreed, and occasionally became frustrated with one another, as all parties articulated and pursued their own goals and interests during an unprecedented pandemic."

---

Failing to note any part of the July 4th opinion/injunction's reasoning, or the 5th circuit, while citing Prelogar neutrally as such is sort of pathetic, imho.

Citing one advocate as correct is just editorializing for that advocate. It would be the same as some texas rag (texas tribune or whatever) writing an article that says Buzbee's brief is neutral and completely ignores Hardin's position as "extreme"

nortex97 said:

---

And…they got a 1 week (thru the 22nd) stay at SCOTUS.

🚨NEW- Missouri v. Biden:

The government has filed at the SCOTUS, asking them to allow continued censorship. Alito placed a stay on the injunction until 9/22.

I don’t expect the SCOTUS will find the Biden admin arguments very persuasive. Will thread as soon as I can.… https://t.co/j3gpj85Rvv

— Tracy Beanz (@tracybeanz) September 14, 2023

It's CRITICALLY IMPORTANT to national security they be allowed to censor any wrongthink on the interwebs this week.

---

Eh. It's Alito. I think the conservative wing of the SC wants to get this before them so they can curb stomp all of the federal government.

I think he handles all the 5th circuit appeals and a stay of one week with only 5 days to provide the brief (due on the 20th) implies they likely…won't take it up. But maybe that's my friday nortex optimism speaking. I will be dour by Monday, surely.

Lawsplainer: when a federal appellate court issues a decision, a party can ask the same three judges who decided the case to reconsider all or part of their decision. Alternatively, a party could ask the entire court EN BANC to rehear the case. In this case, the plaintiffs asked… https://t.co/2rMu9JW8sX

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) September 25, 2023

Good news.

Trying to work around losing in court regarding unconstitutional censorship, the Biden regime is setting up 3rd parties with taxpayer funding to do their handiwork.

With courts skeptical, Biden outsources misinfo policing to researchers, reelection campaign | Just The News https://t.co/lWapF8Oi3l

— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) September 26, 2023

Quote:

---

Stung by court decisions limiting its ability to pressure and coerce social media companies to remove purported misinformation and facing an uncertain response at the Supreme Court, the Biden administration is finding workarounds.

The State Department and National Science Foundation together awarded more than a dozen grants for misinformation-related programs with start dates this month or next, totaling about $4.4 million.
The Department of Defense awarded a no-bid $2.5 million contract last week to an artificial intelligence company that scours social media, the "dark web" and audio transmissions, whose software will be used by a DOD component that neighbors the National Security Agency.

Parallel to his agencies' efforts, the Biden reelection campaign is creating an army to identify and correct purported misinformation about the octogenarian president expected to come from rivals including Donald Trump that will almost certainly include his family overseas business dealings.

Its leaders include deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty, whose profane marching orders to social media companies as White House director of digital strategy were exposed by Republican attorneys general's litigation against the social media pressure campaign.

Anti-censorship group Reclaim the Net flagged the State and NSF grants. One surprising recipient is Cornell University postdoctoral fellow Darryl Seligman, who received an NSF astronomy and astrophysics fellowship worth $330,000.

While focused on revealing "new insights into how the planet formation process varies throughout the galaxy," Seligman will develop "educational materials to help identify misinformation in media, using the case study of artificial origins of interstellar objects to motivate more pressing matters such as climate change and the global pandemic," the award says.

---

I thought it was against the law also for the government to coerce or tell a private company to do something on its behest?

What I mean is, exactly what they are trying to do...

Government tells company Z to message X, Facebook, etc to take down a certain post. Company Z then sends messages to said companies to take these messages down. X, Facebook, etc then take down the messages.

They are also trying to be clever about it, by parking it as also 'scientific disinformation' they are battling/researching/helping to avoid folks believing, instead of political wrong think, to keep as much of their censorship partnerships/channels open as possible after the pending court losses are finalized.

It's all about the least American way to handle 'governance' by our executive branch as you could possibly imagine/concoct.

🚨BIG BREAKING: CISA, the "nerve center" of the fed-led censorship regime, has now been prohibited from engaging in speech policing in a bombshell new opinion from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. This corrects a major deficiency in its original ruling https://t.co/LbdaQCSzeT pic.twitter.com/VSEF4wDdcn

— Benjamin Weingarten (@bhweingarten) October 3, 2023

For those of you who may be new to this, CISA, the Surgeon General, the White House, the FBI and the CDC are BARRED from communicating with social media platforms for the purposes of censorship of any kind. The original 5th opinion omitted CISA - the states appealed and this is… https://t.co/W8eLvgeKqs

— Tracy Beanz (@tracybeanz) October 3, 2023

Tremendous news.

CISA was used to censor election integrity issues after the 2020 election, pronouncing 2020 the most secure election evah!

But CISA had to change their tune once Judge Totenberg (federal jusge in GA) released the Halderman Report (sealed by the court) for CISA to review. That Report was sealed precisley because it was so devastaing to the security and integrity of Dominion Voting Systems and the fear was publication of that report would lead to many many simple hackings in future elections. It was that bad.

So in late 2021 or early 2022, CISA gets the report and they panic, sending out an alert on ways of "fixing" the Dominion system. Only Halderman came out and stated that not only would those patches not work but they would likely crash the software. In GA, Raffensperger has already said he will not allow the "patches" on any Domion machines until after the 2024 election. He said that without even attempting to do a test run with the patches recommended by CISA. So what's the interpretation of all of that?

CISA is FOS and Raffensperger knows it? Or Raffensperger doesn't care whether Dominion is secure for use in future elections as long he and Kemp keep "winning'?

For some reason this mess reminded of an old song...
"The Missouri Dawg Song" aka
"Democrats Gotta Quit Kickin My Dog Around"

Not a direct development of this case but the disinformation out there that the government/big media complex is providing is very contra the (dishonest) stated intent of the government coordination of censorship at the heart of this argument:

The NYT has fired precisely nobody for this. Which tells you pretty much everything you need to know about the NYT. https://t.co/72B0iMgM00

— Noah Pollak (@NoahPollak) October 19, 2023

Meanwhile, the 'blogfather' (Glen Reynolds) has been tremendously de-monetized by google (and longtime partner Amazon aka Bezos). Interesting to say the least.

Quote:

---

Wednesday night, explaining the new ads at Instapundit, Professor Glenn Reynolds revealed the censorship he has experienced:

Sorry, the problem is that InstaPundit has been demonetized by Google, for unspecified "dangerous" content. Between the overall trend of ad revenue decline which hits everyone and the trend of cutting advertising to right-leaning sites, and now this, ad revenue is down about 90% from its high, I'd estimate, and it may get worse. (The Amazon revenue, which we've been phasing out anyway, is similar). At some point I'll probably have to go to some sort of subscription model maybe one that lets you buy out of the ads or a purely donation-supported model.

In the meantime, if you'd like to support the blog you can donate via Stripe or subscribe to my Substack. It's all much appreciated.

Wow. The weird thing is that back in the day the first decade of the 21st century, when blogging was invented the people running Silicon Valley were, if not conservative, certainly libertarian in their general attitude. Companies like Google, Amazon and PayPal were run by people with the plainly capitalist goal of getting rich, and so were inclined to support advocacy of free enterprise, deregulation, lower taxes, etc.
"Demonetizing" is censorship, period, and it didn't start happening the orchestrated attempt to shut down independent online publishing until Obama's second term. There was a left-wing blogosphere (the "moonbats," as we called them) and a right-wing blogosphere (the "wingnuts," as the Left called us), and the existence of two oppositional blogospheres was a fact of life everyone in the game understood.

What happened? It was several factors. Obama's popularity made leftist politics the "cool kids" thing, and the callow youth had an intolerant attitude toward opposition. Almost as soon as Obama was elected, they began denouncing all criticism as "racist," and embraced a no-holds-barred approach toward perceived enemies. Well do I remember my experience in 2011 being swarmed by an angry "Occupy" mob that was trying to storm a conference in D.C. where one of the Koch brothers was in attendance. Because the Kochs had supported the Tea Party movement (and free-market advocacy generally), this made them EVIL in the eyes of that brain-dead zombie horde of "Occupy" protesters.

That general idea exercising the "heckler's veto" on anyone who disagrees with them has been used by the Left to organize advertising boycotts of talk radio, Fox News, etc., and so when social media platforms started shutting down conservatives (I was banned from Twitter in 2016), it was merely an extension of the same mob mentality that mobilized the "Occupy" zombies. By the time Twitter (and Facebook and YouTube) began their wholesale "deplatforming" of conservatives during the Trump years, the independent blogosphere was already largely a thing of the past. People decided that venting their spleens on Twitter was sufficient, and so there was no need for the hassles of maintaining a regular blog.

---

Never, ever vote for a Democrat.

This is direct. I expect this now to be a landmark decision, probably 6-3. BUT, the 5th circuit injunction is now stayed. We shall see….

🚨BREAKING: Missouri v. Biden is heading to the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit that revealed the Biden admin worked with social media companies to censor free speech online has been granted a writ of certiorari. pic.twitter.com/vIqKzchV0e

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) October 20, 2023

Related to the Biden administration and democrats censorship, Elon's admission on today's episode of JRE that twitter 1.0 was basically the government/propaganda straight up, is remarkable given this litigation, and the SCOTUS stay of the bar on censorship coordination through the election next year.

🇵🇸🇮🇱🚨‼️ Twitter was a “Pravda” a state publication.

pic.twitter.com/mDXfwwbJab

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) October 31, 2023

Never, ever vote for a democrat.

The federal government, disinformation “experts” at universities, Big Tech, and others worked together through the Election Integrity Partnership to monitor & censor Americans’ speech.

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) November 6, 2023

Very frustrating SCOTUS is allowing this to happen again in the 24 cycle.

This is so interesting the judge asked about 1984. I'm listening to it again currently and the parallels from the Party and Big Brother to the dems is frightening. This is stuff you thought was so wild there's no way anything like this could ever happen and yet here we are.

I'm re-reading 1984 right now and, unfortunately, often a line or paragraph just slaps me upside the head because it could be written about us at the present moment.

Really hoping sanity prevails before it's too late.

ts5641 said:

---

This is so interesting the judge asked about 1984. I'm listening to it again currently and the parallels from the Party and Big Brother to the dems is frightening. This is stuff you thought was so wild there's no way anything like this could ever happen and yet here we are.

---

Disagree. It was always possible, we just believed our Constitutional protections were strong enough for such efforts to not get very far for a long time before We the People would swing the pendulum back against them.

But to have a functioning Constitutional system, the people running that multibranch system have to do their duties, with the courts being the neutral and not a politically driven referee.

Know when it was effectively over? July 5, 2016. When the Director of the FBI, who has no charging authority within the DOJ, laid out a litany of crimes committed by Hillary Clinton and friends and then used the phrase, "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges against her. And this was just a few days after Comey's boss, AG Lynch had a highly unethical and possibly disbarrable meeting with a political crony who also happened to be under DOJ investigation and Hillary's husband.

Taking into account a person's political affiliation as a valid metric of what a reasonable prosecutor may do changed the calculus and hence we have all of the Trump cases, from the Mueller hoax on to today..

An interesting rebellion from within the censorship industrial complex against Biden lies.

All the President's Misinformation: Employees' rebuke of Biden exposes peril of feds' speech police | Just The News https://t.co/OVA5VDsjcz

— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) November 17, 2023

Not sure why it's not showing. Here is the link to Just the news article. Excerpt:

Quote:

---

More than 100 employees of the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development, which have a close relationship, reportedly signed an internal memo accusing President Biden of "spreading misinformation" about Hamas' Oct. 7 terrorist attack against Israeli civilians and accusing Israel of "war crimes."

The decision by dozens of staff to turn the MDM cannons inward on "the big guy" shows the peril of the administration's apparent strategy to render disfavored narratives on elections, COVID-19, Ukraine, Hunter Biden's laptop and climate change as not only factually wrong but illegitimate.

"The question is whether, under the administration's own standards, President Biden should now be banned or blacklisted" by social media "to protect what his administration has called our 'cognitive infrastructure,'" George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley, a recurring critic of the feds' MDM efforts, rhetorically asked in an essay for The Messenger.

Biden's hoisting by his own petard could also prove useful in ongoing litigation against what critics call the "Censorship-Industrial Complex," which encompass the Census Bureau, the departments of State and Homeland Security and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, such groups as the Virality Project and the Election Integrity Partnership, and many purported disinformation researchers and fact-checkers.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

This is so interesting the judge asked about 1984. I'm listening to it again currently and the parallels from the Party and Big Brother to the dems is frightening. This is stuff you thought was so wild there's no way anything like this could ever happen and yet here we are.

---

Disagree. It was always possible, we just believed our Constitutional protections were strong enough for such efforts to not get very far for a long time before We the People would swing the pendulum back against them.

But to have a functioning Constitutional system, the people running that multibranch system have to do their duties, with the courts being the neutral and not a politically driven referee.

Know when it was effectively over? July 5, 2016. When the Director of the FBI, who has no charging authority within the DOJ, laid out a litany of crimes committed by Hillary Clinton and friends and then used the phrase, "no reasonable prosecutor" would file charges against her. And this was just a few days after Comey's boss, AG Lynch had a highly unethical and possibly disbarrable meeting with a political crony who also happened to be under DOJ investigation and Hillary's husband.

Taking into account a person's political affiliation as a valid metric of what a reasonable prosecutor may do changed the calculus and hence we have all of the Trump cases, from the Mueller hoax on to today..

---

Maybe the right phrase is "sane prosecutor" because a large percentage of people who cross Hillary become quite suicidal

Nortex - I like that definition of the "Censorship-Industrial Complex".

It's so, so bad.

Quote:

---

A "censorship" tool once housed under the State Department is the major focus of a new lawsuit accusing the United States government of suppressing conservative voices.

The State Department and top officials, including Secretary of State Antony Blinken, engaged in "one of the most egregious government operations to censor the American press in the history of the nation" due to the government's Global Engagement Center funding NewsGuard, which purports to rate the "misinformation" levels of news outlets, as well as its funding of the Global Disinformation Index, a British group revealed through a Washington Examiner investigation to be covertly blacklisting conservative media, according to a complaint filed Tuesday by the New Civil Liberties Alliance on behalf of the Daily Wire, the Federalist, and the state of Texas. Disinfo Cloud, an unclassified and defunct GEC-housed platform, was an "alter ego" of the U.S. government to "fund censorship technology," the lawsuit alleged.

---

"Newsguard"…more at the link (Washington Examiner update).

There's been some news I have missed, but some of the censorship complex also should reference donors to sites like media matters etc.

This is interesting, but not surprising: Democrat party megadonors pay for Media Matters to run hit pieces on people and companies they don’t like. The Elon Musk lawsuit, in addition to bankrupting them, should provide some interesting discovery. https://t.co/8uxqYiXft5

— Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) January 5, 2024

Democrats are a censorship machine, publicly and privately;

Quote:

---

In a shocking federal lawsuit, a Media Matters employee obsessively refreshed a fringe video on @rumblevideo over 70 times until he found a Netflix ad that could be used as fodder for a public pressure campaign.

Despite being the sole viewer of that Netflix ad next to the fringe video, Media Matters falsely insinuated in an article that Netflix ads frequently accompanied fringe content on Rumble, coercing advertisers to abandon the platform.

On @X, Media Matters accessed accounts active for 30 days, bypassing ad filters for new users, and selectively followed accounts with fringe content and those owned by X's major corporate advertisers.

After repeatedly scrolling and refreshing their timeline - 13 more times than an average user - they generated screenshots of fringe content next to X's top advertisers.

Media Matters' defamation was so fabricated that IBM, Comcast, and Oracle had their ads appear next to fringe content for just one accountan employee of Media Mattersout of over 550 million active users on @X.

Media Matters conveniently left out these details in their reporting, sidestepping the fact that their reporters manipulated the platform to create fringe content next to major corporate advertisers.

Why are Democratic megadonors like @GillFoundation, @Josh_Bekenstein, and @BuffettScholars financially supporting these clearly deceptive, malicious tactics aimed at stifling free speech on the internet?

---

Dems petition SCOTUS to allow big tech censorship collusion.

State Department pursues indoctrination in schools via Berlin Embassy;

Long arm of censorship: State Department-German collaboration promotes misinformation cops in schools | Just The News https://t.co/wbQOkCgbOH

— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) January 19, 2024

Quote:

---

The U.S. Embassy in Berlin funded similar activities as the agency's Global Engagement Center (GEC), each using "inoculation theory" to metaphorically vaccinate the public against disinformation and promote private groups that police so-called "wrong-think."

That's according to a sprawling investigation by the conservative Media Research Center, which posted select portions of materials it obtained through Freedom of Information Act and state public records requests, as well as from overlooked public sources.

Republican lawmakers are investigating the department for GEC's funding of the U.K.-based Global Disinformation Index, which in 2022 released a report on what it considered the 10 riskiest online news outlets for disinformation. All of those on the list were conservative or libertarian leaning, which critics say was an attempt to blacklist them and cut off advertising dollars.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing the State Department for allegedly interfering with Texas law through its efforts with GDI and the U.S.-based fact-checking group NewsGuard.

Secretary Antony Blinken also told staff abroad to promote the GEC-funded game "Cat Park," which teaches children to treat populism as disinformation, in local schools.
The embassy's public affairs section, meanwhile, sponsored seminars for European Union-funded organizations whose curricula promote anti-misinformation video games and instruct children to promote "social justice."

---

Free speech is of course completely gone/absent from Europe, already. "Disinformation and misinformation" are their top priority, per the Davos meeting this week, for the next 2 years. These euphemisms just reference their intent to control and censor speech more and more tightly, especially political speech.

Quote:

---

"STUNNING AND SOBERING"

"Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, dear Klaus," she said.

"Your annual Global Risk Report makes for a stunning and sobering read.

"For the global business community, the top concern for the next two years is not conflict or climate it is disinformation and misinformation, followed closely by polarisation within our societies."

She went on to say that "these risks are serious," because they "limit our ability to tackle the big global challenges we are facing" including climate change, shifts in demography, evolving technology, competition and supply chains, and "spiralling regional conflicts."

---

People should not be allowed to share/discuss 'wrong think' about open borders and 'global warming.'

Our state department, and all Democrats clearly embrace this.

Important update/CISA disclosures in a lawsuit around lies/coordination of censorship regarding 2020 election fraud;

/2 By September 2020, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency (CISA) was aware that the evidence established that in-person voting did not increase the spread of COVID-19.

CISA was also aware that mass “vote-by-mail” schemes posed “major challenges,” including “the process… pic.twitter.com/An0nuZVb4T

— America First Legal (@America1stLegal) January 22, 2024

/18 Deloitte’s reports provided CISA with confirmation that its social media monitoring and censorship apparatus was working.

In Missouri v. Biden, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that “the platforms’ censorship decisions were made under policies… pic.twitter.com/LndtN04QZN

— America First Legal (@America1stLegal) January 22, 2024

/20 According to congressional investigators, CISA targeted entire “narratives” for censorship. pic.twitter.com/uNPdmH9l9Q

— America First Legal (@America1stLegal) January 22, 2024

/21 More critical explanation from @MikeBenzCyber on how these “tickets” were implemented: https://t.co/TtuPcWwWvW

— America First Legal (@America1stLegal) January 22, 2024

Very long thread, will be curious if these disclosures impact the litigation in front of SCOTUS this spring. Full report here.

Quote:

---

CISA Interfered in the 2020 Presidential Election
The evidence is that:
[ol]

CISA knew that in-person voting did not increase the spread of COVID.

CISA knew mail-in voting was less secure.

CISA nevertheless supported policy changes to encourage unprecedented widespread mail-in voting.

CISA formed the EIP to censor narratives relating to mail-in voting.

CISA broadly monitored social media to detect unapproved "narratives" relating to mail-in voting and to confirm that platforms were adequately censoring them.

[/ol]CISA, and its media allies, interfered with and undermined the integrity of the 2020 Presidential election.
This evidence has been obtained through AFL's ongoing lawsuit against CISA to expose the activities of CISA's Mis-, Dis-, and Mal-information (MDM) team leading up to the 2020 election. AFL has previously exposed CISA's partnerships with private sector tech companies to "pre-bunk," "fact-check," and remove speech and flag accounts, CISA's use of the self-deleting messaging app "Signal" for "official" business, and CISA's October 2020 false characterization of the Hunter Biden laptop story as a "QAnon Conspiracy Theory" linked to the 2016 "Pizzagate conspiracy."
AFL will keep fighting to expose the truth about 2020 election interference by CISA and other Deep State actors to protect our citizens' rights and fortify our election integrity.

---

Put me in the camp that it is blatantly unconstitutional and morally wrong both for our government to censor (and coordinate private censorship) discussion/speech about politics/elections, in addition to most other speech. The Reznick Amicus filing in Missouri makes much of this case as well.

Swamp (former FBI of course) reaches to Chris Steele types of folks over in the UK to meddle in 2024 election speech/censorship;

Quote:

---

Brian Murphy, a former FBI agent who once led the intelligence wing of the Department of Homeland Security, reflected last summer on the failures of the Disinformation Governance Board the panel formed to actively police misinformation. The board, which was proposed in April 2022 after he left DHS, was quickly shelved by the Biden administration in a few short months in the face of criticism that it would be an Orwellian state-sponsored "Ministry of Truth."

In a July podcast, Murphy said the threat of state-sponsored disinformation meant the executive branch has an "ethical responsibility" to rein in the social media companies. American citizens, he said, must give up "some of your freedoms that you need and deserve so that you get security back."

The legal problems and public backlash to the Disinformation Governance Board also demonstrated to him that "the government has a major role to play, but they cannot be out in front."

Murphy, who made headlines late in the Trump administration for improperly building dossiers on journalists, has spent the last few years trying to help the government find ways to suppress and censor speech it doesn't like without being so "out in front" that it runs afoul of the Constitution. He has proposed that law enforcement and intelligence agencies formalize the process of sharing tips with private sector actors a "hybrid constellation" including the press, academia, researchers, nonpartisan organizations, and social media companies to dismantle "misinformation" campaigns before they take hold.

More recently, Murphy has worked to make his vision of countering misinformation a reality by joining a United Kingdom-based tech firm, Logically.AI, whose eponymous product identifies and removes content from social media. Since joining the firm, Murphy has met with military and other government officials in the U.S., many of whom have gone on to contract or pilot Logically's platform.

---

Quote:

---

Dinenage, the member of Parliament who spearheaded the CDU anti-misinformation push with Logically during the pandemic, also leapt into action. In the immediate aftermath of the scandal, she sent nearly identical letters to Rumble, TikTok, and Meta to demand that the platforms follow YouTube's lead in demonetizing Brand. Dinenage couched her official request to censor Brand as a part of a public interest inquiry, to protect the "welfare of victims of inappropriate and potentially illegal behavior."

Logically's editorial team went a step further. In its report on the Brand allegations published on Logically Facts, it claimed that social media accounts "trotting out the 'innocent until proven guilty' refrain" for the comedian were among those perpetuating "common myths about sexual assault." The site published a follow-up video reiterating the claim that those seeking the presumption of innocence for Brand, a principle dating back to the Magna Carta, were spreading a dangerous "myth."

The unusual advocacy campaign against Brand represented a typical approach for a company that has long touted itself as a hammer against spreaders of misinformation. The opportunity to remove Brand from the media ecosystem meant throwing as much at him as possible, despite any clear misinformation or disinformation angle in the sexual assault allegations. Rather, he was a leading critic of government censorship and pandemic policy, so the scandal represented a weakness to be exploited.

Such heavy-handed tactics may be on the horizon for American voters. The firm is now a member of the U.S. Election Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center, the group managed by the Center for Internet Security that helps facilitate misinformation reports on behalf of election officials across the country. Logically has been in talks with Oregon and other states, as well as DHS, to expand its social media surveillance role for the presidential election later this year.

Previous targets of the company, though, are issuing a warning.

"It appears that Logically's lucrative and frankly sinister business effectively produced multi-million pound misinformation for the government that may have played a role in the censorship of citizens' lawful speech," said Carlo of Big Brother Watch.

"Politicians and senior officials happily pay these grifters millions of pounds to wield the red pen, telling themselves that they're 'protecting' democracy rather than undermining it," said Young of the Daily Sceptic. "It's a boondoggle and it should be against the law."

---

It seems like that if a government agency feels that "misinformation" needs to be corrected that they, in the spirit of free speech, should step right up to the public and say what, why, when, where, etc.
They should not get to censor other people's right to free speech unless a judge has ruled that there is a good reason (like inciting riot) and even then, a record of the censored speech should be kept that can be reviewed.

Edit: Because of the danger of some communiques, and the speed of the internet; it might be that rulings concerning a general type of communication (how to make a bomb, for example) would be kept active.

Yes, but that is not how Democrats work/think/feel/operate:

https://t.co/rcpg9E5oKI pic.twitter.com/wn9bRpihcV

— string (@propjoesays) February 6, 2024

LOL, copied the wrong tweet, but whatever, will leave that here;

I hope the Marxists in DC enjoy this censorship spree they’ve been on b/c I have a feeling the Supreme Court is going to smack their asses down by July of this year

Murthy v. Biden

NRA v. Vullo

O’Handley v. Weber https://t.co/zN1Z2cv7Vq

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 6, 2024

Stunning, really. All of this is getting far too little attention.

The Biden-Hussein regime is fascist.

Agreed. But wait, every single day there's more! The Amazon files about book censorship due to…political wrong think;

Never-before-released internal emails subpoenaed by @JudiciaryGOP reveal that the Biden White House pressured Amazon to censor books that expressed views the White House did not approve of.

“Is the [Biden] Admin asking us to remove books”? pic.twitter.com/ZsAN9BZAcX

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) February 5, 2024

Quote:

---

That last sentence is chilling. As if there's nothing wrong with what was occurring, an Amazon worker asks, "Is the Admin asking us to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both)?"

As Jordan shows in the chain of emails, Amazon did hold off for a short period, but it wasn't long before they relented to White House demands, censoring search results for books deemed to be "disinformation" regarding COVID-19.

---

After the White House spent a week berating Amazon, what did the online bookstore do?

Starting March 9—the same day as its meeting with the White House—Amazon enabled “Do Not Promote” for books that expressed the view that vaccines were not effective. pic.twitter.com/8YEXjAL8BD

— Rep. Jim Jordan (@Jim_Jordan) February 5, 2024

Quote:

---

It's hard to describe how insanely improper (and possibly illegal) this is. The Biden administration used the power of its office to pressure a private company to censor books at they found politically inconvenient.

Contrast that with the absolute freak-out from Democrats when schools in Florida banned literal gay porn from being in classrooms. All the hand-wringing, including from the White House itself, was just for show. They don't really care about the First Amendment. They just want to expose children to gross content while getting books they don't like, which actually do fall under the broad rubric of freedom of speech, censored and removed.

Various court rulings in the aftermath of the original Twitter Files have put the Biden administration's censorship regime on ice, mostly thanks to the State of Missouri and its attorney general. Still, it's important to know how deep this went. It is downright Orwellian for the executive branch to pressure retailers to censor search results and sales of books.

---

Never, ever vote for a Democrat. We desperately need to get rid of the 24 year olds running things in the "Biden" White House and restore order/constitutional principles to the functioning of our government.

Good update here as RFK Jr. won a case but the injunction is stayed pending SCOTUS hearing Murthy v. Missouri (Note oral argument is March 18).

We are so thrilled about this and glad the judge mentioned all 12 of us and we know we can have a victory too with our lawsuit connected with this one. With Bobby in DC courts. . It’s a start. And a good one https://t.co/rjBJsaxsRh

— Erin Elizabeth Health Nut News 🙌 (@unhealthytruth) February 16, 2024

Quote:

---

She added:
"In a thorough decision, Judge Doughty reasoned that the plaintiffs do have 'standing' or the right to sue and be heard; that the defendants have engaged in coercion or significant encouragement to censorship and joint action with social media platforms; and that the court is required to issue the preliminary injunction.

"Further, because it is well-established that violations of free speech rights constitute irreparable injury, the Court acted even before an ultimate decision from the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri. Judge Doughty wrote: 'This Court … finds the balance of equities and the public interest strongly favors the issue of a preliminary injunction.'

"No doubt the Supreme Court will take account of this ruling as it hears oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri on March 18."

Wednesday's ruling stems from a class-action lawsuit filed in March 2023 by Kennedy, now CHD chairman on leave, CHD and private citizen Connie Sampognaro against President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other top administration officials and federal agencies.

The suit was filed on behalf of the more than 80% of Americans who access news through social media.
Judge Doughty consolidated Kennedy v. Biden and Murthy v. Biden in July 2023. Both cases were being argued in his court and had the same defendants and many common legal and factual issues.

Although the cases were consolidated, Doughty ruled that the District Court continues to have jurisdiction over Kennedy and CHD's separate motion for a preliminary injunction, underscoring the fact that a delayed ruling would delay Kennedy from vindicating his claims.

---

More here. I know there's been a lot of news the past two days but surprised this didn't make any of my lists.