As predictably as Darth Vader returning for “The Empire Strikes Back”, the Department of Justice has already appealed this week’s Missouri v. Biden ruling that government must stop “coordinating” with social media companies to block the legal speech of Americans. (Crazy how quickly government gets stuff done when they want to!)
Yes, the Swamp wants to censor what you say so badly they will spend EVEN MORE (taxpayer) money defending this indefensible case of government-led censorship. Missouri v. Biden provides example after example of willful violations of the Constitution-guaranteed free speech rights of Americans who disagreed with the prevailing government narrative. And somehow the biggest cheerleaders for this policy are the very “reporters” who should be against all forms of government censorship. (They can never imagine being on the “wrong” side of the establishment — for good reason.)
Hold on just a second here, it’s not only conservatives who are documenting that this is a liberal conspiracy to silence their views! The judge in the case makes this plain as day, as I posted yesterday:
Those issues fell along political lines either because they were INHERENTLY political (Hunter’s laptop, the 2020 election, opposition to Biden’s policies or other government officials in power) or because they were MADE political by the politicians and the media. (Examples include opposition to covid vaccines — but only after Biden was elected, opposition to masking and lockdowns, opposition to the lab leak theory) And wouldn’t you know it, the government got its way on EVERY SINGLE LISTED ISSUE!
Pretty much any objective look at the situation demands we admit that people were indeed silenced for their completely legal political opinions. This should be the BASELINE for any discussion going forward.
But the New York Times simply can’t WAIT to make the case that this was a BAD DECISION made by a BAD JUDGE. Look at how the paper frames the situation:
See? You know this is a BAD JUDGE because he was appointed by BAD ORANGE MAN! Also, he has expressed little skepticism about DEBUNKED vaccine claims! This IDIOT even accepted as fact the claim that Covid-19 vaccines don’t prevent transmission of covid!
Wait, what?
Seriously, the New York Times just declared that thinking covid vaccines don’t prevent transmission is a reason that this judge is whacko and obviously made a bad ruling. In July, 2023, The New York Times is at the very least INSINUATING that the vaccines stop transmission.
This despite multiple “experts” out there walking back claims that you don’t get covid if you get vaccinated. And that was like two years ago. Perhaps the New York Times simply hasn’t heard of this and tomorrow they will run a front-page story apologizing for getting it all wrong?
Yeah, I don’t think so, either.
But giving the New York Times a run for its “bad take” crown, John Bolton — also known as Donald Trump’s worst mistake — recently slithered out of whatever hole he crawls into when the sun rises to write an article for The Hill:
Bolton argues:
The potential of significant Chinese facilities in Cuba is a red-flag threat to America. After the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, Washington relied on an “implicit understanding” (in Henry Kissinger’s words) with Moscow to reduce threats emanating from Cuba. Under this understanding, the USSR agreed not to place new offensive weapons or delivery systems in Cuba, and the U.S. agreed not to invade Cuba. Although severely tested by Soviet efforts to build a submarine base at Cienfuegos in 1970, the understanding has held. Moreover, in 2002, Russia closed its Lourdes intelligence base, greatly restricting its Cuban collection capabilities.
Between China and America, however, no such modus operandi has ever existed. Beijing made no commitment comparable to Moscow. Moreover, “military training” could well camouflage offensive weapons, delivery systems or other threatening capabilities.
Last time you heard from John Bolton, it was probably when he said that not sending US troops to Ukraine was a big mistake, or maybe that he planned coups. Now he once again understands that a country doesn’t really want a hostile power in a nearby foreign land. We didn’t like it during the Cuban Missile Crisis, we don’t like now during the Cuban China Crisis, and we wouldn’t like it if we were Russia and saw Ukraine buddying up to the United States.
John Bolton never met a war he didn’t want to start and expand. It’s far past time that he went away. Surely multiple decades of screwing up foreign policy is enough?
But there’s good news today as well! The second half of Michael Shellenberger, Russell Brand, and Matt Taibbi’s discussion about censorship is now up! If you missed the first half, catch up here! And keep Screaming about this issue — we are making progress!
I find it risible that the Biden administration had the gall to appeal a ruling ordering it to stop interfering with the First Amendment.
Just saw this in Robert Malone’s Substack: https://open.substack.com/pub/rwmalonemd/p/judge-doughty-rules-to-deny-bidens